Since then, I learnt more about the economy, and about the DLC, and what Clinton let Greenspan do or did himself at home and his help for the global neoliberal 'revolution', and how the DLC philosophy of power kind of let the basis for the Bush victory be built by the Right, was much worse than what I perceived contemporarily.
As for the current issue, it's good Clinton is talking about the right things, but I feel he is talking hot air - and we don't need words (should the Democrats regain power). Specifically, I think action on global warming does primarily need government action (which Clinton wasn't bold enough for), not civil society. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Korea, Iraq, Israel, NAFTA, and a bunch of other policies were either guided or supported by Clinton. Bush has been in office for "only" 4.5 years, so every single problem of the world can't be laid at his feet.
It's easy to be an out-of-power politician because "anything is possible" from that viewpoint. But a message like that coming from somebody who has already held the Presidency is pretty lame.
A Powerful Statement!
I can agree Clinton was a better president than his performance and policy statements since.
This failure cost him the election of 1980, gave Ronald Reagan and young neocons the presidency from 1980 thru 1992, and ultimately young George Bush from '00-'08. Reagon con suis brought us and the world the havoc of Osama Bin Laden's mujadeen, Iraq's Saddam Hussein support against Iran, Pakistan's Islam atom bomb and the present state of world affairs.
When you need to take a stand, fight your own battle and do not let another nation do the fighting for you!
After thought of ex-leaders Ruud Lubbers, men who have been in power, is certainly lame.
Ruud Lubbers
~~~
