Skip to main content

View Diary: [UPDATE] NYT drops Starr bombshell, it disappears, then reappears! (145 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I loved Bill.......you say. (none)
    Clinton came into office on a public wave of concern about healthcare.  When he got into office he drained his political capitol with gays in the military.  An issue I'd never heard a gay person mention and that made him impotent militarily.  He handed healthcare to Hillary who was already a highly divisive figure.  She took it behind closed doors, refused to even consider single-payer and came up with a proposal EVERYBODY (including the healthcare activists I was working with at the time) hated except the managed-care corporations.

    He then proceeded to eliminate the welfare entitlement, something no Republican president could have gotten away with.

    When Repubs I know were talking about what a liberal/lefty Clinton was I would point out to them that he appointed the honcho from Goldman Sachs as Treasury Secretary and when it came to the real money issues, like NAFTA, him and Newt were like best friends.  

    Since we all know he's a political genius I assume this was all as planned.  I hope the hell they don't thrust Hillary upon us next.

    "yes dear...conspiracy theories really do come true." (tuck, tuck)

    by tribalecho on Thu Jun 02, 2005 at 08:46:40 PM PDT

    •  Couple of comments (4.00)
      I do believe Clinton was a moderate-Dem/Rockefeller Republican. Sadly, so is much of the country.

      That being said, let's get something straight: gays and the military was not Clinton's first choice out of the gate. It was a trap set for him by Bob Dole to trip him up out of the gate. Go read the history. He did the best he could, I believe, on a rough political landscape forced on him by an amoral bastard like Dole.

      Second, yes he turned over health care to Hillary. Who gives a fuck? The reason it lost had less to do with her (and the media whore/noise machine demonization of her) as it did the unprecedented corporate-funded smear campaign run against the Clinton plan (see Harry and Louise). It was unlike anything that has ever happened nside the Beltway. And you are going to blame Clinton for that? And if he took a step-by-step process on coverage, he would have been attacked by progressives like yourself for not being bold enough.

      Third, the reason he tried to do health care first was that when he reformed welfare, there would be a saftey net in place. There WAS a political strategy behind it, whether or not you agreed with it.

      Finally, it all comes down to whether America was worse or better off after Clinton was President. I think the answer is obvious.

      A review of the Clinton years and his successes and failures requires a much more astute knowledge of history and hard-ball politics.

      I did not receive $ from Ketchum, U.S. Department of Ed or HHS to write this---though I wish I had.

      by Volvo Liberal on Thu Jun 02, 2005 at 09:38:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site