I can't figure out your basis for this thinking but what the heck ever!

yesterday you know on behalf of his wife campaign
pretty disgusting for a former pres ripping the current President from his same party

"Awful legacy of the last 8 years"

yeah and he meant the Republican obstructionist is going to end because of Hillary, How?
I remember he 90's the rightwing went after the Clintons with fervor, pushing anything as a scandal and then Clinton gives them a real one, (the Blue Dress)

So how is Hillary going to magically stop this, it was said on purpose
to believe otherwise is either naive or willfully ignorant

It's a matter of stupid. Think about it.

you have nothing, but thanks for playing

at Obama
you know it was meant
and I hope you are right about Hillary, I hope she is better than her Husband and can build on Obama's legacy

I posted that vid earlier

(old Simpsons guy shaking cane at sky)

bill's admired, rich, been president, and might become the first first gentleman or whatever the term would be.

i don't think he needs to feel superior to another democrat to be quite happy.

The economic good times during his administration were a continuation of trickle down economics which did nothing for most of the middle class and resulted in a continuation of income inequality.

NAFTA sent jobs overseas and accelerated the decline of the middle class.

His Crime Bill accelerated the era of mass incarceration of African Americans and other minorities.

His financial deregulation, along with twice reappointing Ayn Rand disciple and Reagan appointee Alan Greenspan as Fed Chairman, fueled the growth of Wall Street profits and helped lead to the 2008 financial meltdown.

Enforcement of anti-trust laws to prevent anti-competitive large corporate mergers was basically nonexistent.

His Welfare Reform Bill pulled the safety net out from under millions of people, mostly children, and increased child poverty.

His Presidency was effectively the takeover of what was left of FDR's Democratic Party by the DLC.

Then there were the moral failings and petty corruption, like the Monica Lewinsky scandal, selling nights in the Lincoln bedroom, the wave of pardons as he exited the Presidency, etc.

Post Presidency, Bill has taken greed and graft to an unprecedented level for a former President. Tens of millions for speeches, the fundraising cesspool called the Clinton Foundation, over $16 million compensation in 5 years for serving as the public face of a sham for profit education company owned by Wall Street, etc.

Most Democratic voters were so desperate for a Democrat in the White House after Republicans had controlled the White House for 20 of the 24 previous years that they were willing to close their eyes, to a certain extent, on Bill Clinton while he was in White House. And only with the passage of time did the full damage he did as President become apparent.

http://www.commoncause.org/research-reports/National_050905_Fallout_From_The_Telecommunications_Act_2.pdf


Excerpt:

"This study tells the story of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its aftermath. In many ways,
the Telecom Act failed to serve the public and did not deliver on its promise of more competition,
more diversity, lower prices, more jobs and a booming economy.

Instead, the public got more media concentration, less diversity, and higher prices.
Over 10 years, the legislation was supposed to save consumers $550 billion, including $333 billion in
lower long-distance rates, $32 billion in lower local phone rates, and $78 billion in lower cable bills.

But cable rates have surged by about 50 percent, and local phone rates went up more than 20 percent. Industries supporting the new legislation predicted it would add 1.5 million jobs and boost the economy by $2 trillion. By 2003, however, telecommunications’ companies’ market value had
fallen by about $2 trillion, and they had shed half a million jobs.

And study after study has documented that profit-driven media conglomerates are investing less in news and information, and that local news in particular is failing to provide viewers with the information they need to participate in their democracy
(more at link)

I just posted the stuff that was on the top of my head and the lack of anti-trust I cited is somewhat related, but the Telecommunications Act definitely deserves its own spot in the legacy of the Clinton Administration.

One other thing that I left out of the post was the negative change in the composition of Congress for the Democratic Party during the Clinton administration. In the session before Bill Clinton's election (1989-1991), the Democrats held a 55-45 advantage in the Senate and a 260-175 advantage in the House. In the last Congress of Clintons' second term (1999-2001), Republicans had a 55-45 advantage in the Senate and a 223-211-1 advantage in the House. The Hillarycare disaster in Bill's first 2 years contributed to the Republican takeover of the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years, Newt Gingrich as House Speaker and the Republican "Contract With America". Once Bill got a Republican Congress, he was able to push through financial deregulation, the Crime Bill, the Telecommunications Bill and other business friendly legislation. NAFTA was passed in Bill's first 2 years while Democrats had large majorities in both houses of Congress.

of that history. I remembered he got lots of help from Republicans then.

So what did Bill do that was beneficial to the People rather than business? (struggling to recall)

My recollection is that Bill stumbled around for his first 2 years and was largely seen as incompetent by the 1994 midterm elections, with the secretive Hillarycare effort as symbolizing that. And they pushed through a tax increase by one vote (with no Republicans voting for it) that doomed some Democratic members of Congress who did vote for it. There was one story I recall of the Republicans singing "Bye bye Margie" to the House member who cast the tie breaking vote, and she was defeated in the 1994 election. That was Margie Margolies-Mezvinsky, now Chelsea Clinton's mother in law. I think the subsequent wipeout in the election convinced Bill he had to tack hard to the right to win reelection in 1996 and he went to work with the Republican Congress and his Wall Street financial team headed by Bob Rubin and Larry Summers.

Here is a very interesting (but long) transcript of a PBS Frontline interview with Clinton's first term Labor Secretary Robert Reich (who lost influence as Bill Clinton moved to the right and is now a supporter of Bernie's). It is consistent with what I had recalled and I think it tells what happened to Bill Clinton. Reich believes Clinton had the political capital to get universal healthcare done in his first 2 years, but botched it by making NAFTA a higher priority and by Hillary being put in charge of healthcare and working on it very secretively.

Reich also discusses how disturbed the cabinet members were with the welfare reform bill Clinton signed. It, like just about everything else Clinton did in his 3rd and 4th years, was based on poll tested ideas by Dick Morris. According to Reich, Hillary was the one who brought Dick Morris in after the 1994 mid term debacle.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/interviews/reich.html

interesting account.

I'd like to know exactly why Reich endorses Sanders.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/bernie-sanders-robert-reich-endorsement-219892

Reich has been friends with Bill and Hillary since they were all at Yale Law School. Reich has always been friendly to workers and labor unions and considered pretty progressive, though he did drink the free trade koolaid peddled throughout academia and supported NAFTA and maybe other trade bills. As you can tell from the Frontline interview of Reich, Bill and Hillary moved to the right of Reich in the 3rd and 4th years of Bill's first term at the urging of Dick Morris. It got Bill Clinton reelected in 1996 despite not having much of an agenda for his second term. I think the Clintons have only moved further right since then.

“It is the fundamental prerequisite: We have little hope of achieving positive change on any front unless the American people are once again in control," he continued.

Reich added that while he holds Hillary Clinton in high regard, he believes Sanders is the best bet for the country's future: “I have the deepest respect and admiration for Hillary Clinton, and if she wins the Democratic primary I’ll work my heart out to help her become president. But I believe Bernie Sanders is the agent of change this nation so desperately needs.”

Sounds to me that for an economist, he's going with his heart as well as his head.

He has known the Clintons for 45 years and knows they will regard it as an enormous personal betrayal, particularly given that Bill gave him a post in his Cabinet. Reich can talk about how he will support Hillary if she is the nominee, but he has earned a permanent spot on their enemies list. I guess Reich decided he had to be able to live with himself, and he probably doesn't have any political ambition at this point.

sounds about right to me.

He'll be on the blacklist all right. Not invited to the Inaugural Ball. OH well.

Thanks for reminding me

I was a big fan of Clinton when he was President (no more, that's for sure) and wasn't looking critically enough at what he did. So none of this stuff was in my memory banks. Thank you!

Good post!

president.

Pres. Obama will not be walking away from the White House with a Blue Stain following him around for the rest of his life!

Your post is unfortunate.

So they think tearing down Democrats will help them. They really are transparent.

I voted for him twice and regret donating $25 to his 2012 campaign, but he adopted Clinton ideology to run his Admin. So I'm "meh" on Obama.

Obama just did not have a sex scandal, like Bill did. Obama at least had the good sense to keep his pants on and not seduce WH female interns.

Obama is a much better president. And let's hope Hillary doesn't get a chance. Clinton's