Reader Mail - I just

Reader Mail - I just got this one:

Nice to see that you haven't eased up on Clinton even though he has been out of office for a couple of years now.

So what? We're still dealing with fallout from administrations going back to the early 1800s. Race relations in this country are affected by administration policies going back to the founding of this country. The situation in the Middle East that we face today is in some ways a direct result of Woodrow Wilson's policies.

If the policies of James Polk (who set in motion many of the dynamics that affect us with Mexico to this day) or Harry Truman (who left us, for fair reasons or foul, with our current situation in Korea) or Richard Nixon (whose foreign policy still affects us to this day) are all up for discussion, why is it that you expect to suspend discussion of Bill Clinton's record?

Perhaps because it's almost unalterably abysmal?

You remind me of those ever backward looking people in the Reagan administration who blamed everything on Carter, from the day they entered the oval office till the day they left.

What, the economy? The only part of that blaming that wasn't fair was that some of the problem predated Carter, going back to Lyndon Johnson. Other than that, though, Reagan was right.

And we're the "backward looking people" who could look far enough ahead to see a world without a Communist Bloc, without the imminent fear of superpower conflict, without the nuclear sword of Damocles hanging over mankind.

You're welcome.

When does George start taking some of the blame for the state of the Union?

What blame did you have in mind?

If things were in such an awful state when G dubya came on board doesn't he bear some of the blame for not fixing it?

It took Ronald Reagan - the greatest president of the second half of the twentieth century - three years to enact his policies - at that against a Congress that was, despite being totally controlled by Democrats, less obstructionist than the Senate that President Bush faced in the first two years of his administration. And Reagan didn't have a shooting war and 3,000 dead Americans to deal with.

Ah well but then that would mean conservatives would actually have to take responsibilities for their actions rather than blaming past administrations for our present state ( see their always rib tickling explanations of how the Clinton surplus actually led to the current recession and deficit).

Liberals never - never - back up such statements with specifics.

For what are we supposed to "take responsibility"? For creating the speculative bubble that buoyed the economy through Clinton's last term? That was a near-direct result of Clinton-era tax policies regarding stock options and corporate accounting.

Part of the difficulty Clinton faced in confronting terrorism was how to do so while respecting US and international law.

So that Sudanese aspirin factory was Tomahawked in accordance with international law?

Seriously - how did "US and international law" stand in the way of having Sudan capture Bin Laden? Or lead to the FUBAR that led to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed escaping from Quatar?

Specifics? I'll give you a hint; there are none. The "international law" plea is a smokescreen Clinton's apologists use to try to draw attention away from the fact that the Clinton Administration was a pack of blundering amateurs at foreign policy.

Of course since George cares not a whit for either of these he doesn't run into that obstacle.

That's why he's completely ignored the United Nations, and charged straight into Iraq with nary a nod to world opinion; why we began carpet-bombing Baghdad six months ago; why a CIA hit team landed in Abu Dhabi last August with Hussein's family's heads on sticks. Right?

As to the Democrat.com site being a hate link, how would you describe yours?

I describe my site as Minnesota's Only Legitimate News Source. I also describe myself as Marisa Tomei's soon-to-be husband.

Seriously, if you can find anything resembling Democrats.com's frothing hatred of all things with which one disagrees anywhere in this site, chime on in. With specifics, if I could trouble you to provide them.

Thanks for the email. Keep writing!

Posted by Mitch at March 2, 2003 01:33 PM