Which is a more accurate description of the chickens coming home to roost today?

[El Pinko]

Which is a more accurate description of the chickens coming home to roost today?


Did this guy even represent a speed bump in the onslaught of Reaganomics?

[unpossibles]

1. mixed feelings

I do think Clinton continued or at least failed to truly stop Voodoo Reaganomics, and that he was more fiscally responsible than Reagan or the Bushes, but... I'm going with answer #1.

[El Pinko]

3. There is no doubt that he was better.

Best republican president we ever had.

And it could be argued that the political realities of the time would not allow him to be any more progressive than he was.

But I personally do not think so.

With republicans, they inevitably run as being "Fiscally conservative, but moderate in other areas" and then govern like drunken nazi sailors.

With Clinton, he ran as a moderate and governed to the center-right. Would it have killed him to try for PAID family leave? Single Payer instead of Corporate National Health Care? to say no to NAFTA? Bring back the pre-Reagan higher tax rates on the rich? Hell, maybe it would have. Maybe THEY would have.

[MilesColtrane]

5. Even though a veto of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act could have been overturned...

...Clinton could have at least helped his legacy out by not signing it.

As it stands, Clinton rightfully shares a large share of blame, along with the 106th Congress, for the current financial collapse.

[yardwork]

6. Same here. Same reasoning, same choice.

Clinton's legacy is being swept up in the Reagan-Bush legacy, and it ain't good. Let this be a warning to Democrats who imitate Republicans.

[sarcasmo]

2. Ronnie Raygun's vision coming home to roost.

[lonestarnot]

4. The takers have taken about all there is to take.