Today's NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/01/opinion/01BART.html?pagewanted=print&position=

Like most conservatives, I thought Bill Clinton was a terrible president when he was in office. Especially after the Republicans won control of Congress in 1994, we all dreamed of the paradise that would be ours if we could just get a Republican in the White House. We could fix the budget and the tax system, rein in the bureaucracy, neuter the trade unions and trial lawyers, and do all those other things that could never be done because Democrats were always blocking the way. It was foolish to think like this, of course....

Conservatives should rethink the Clinton presidency. At least on economic policy, there is much to praise and little to criticize in terms of what was actually done (or not done) on his watch. Bringing the federal budget into surplus is obviously an achievement. After inheriting a deficit of 4.7 percent of gross domestic product in 1992, Mr. Clinton turned this into a surplus of 2.4 percent of G.D.P. in 2000 — a remarkable turnaround that can be appreciated by realizing that this year's deficit, as large as it is, will reach only 4.2 percent of G.D.P., according to the Congressional Budget Office....

More important, from a conservative point of view, Mr. Clinton achieved his surplus in large part by curtailing spending. Federal spending fell to 18.4 percent of G.D.P. in 2000 from 22.2 percent in 1992.... Mr. Clinton was also steadfast in his support for free trade. It is doubtful that anyone else could have persuaded Congress to approve the North American Free Trade Agreement. On monetary policy, he reappointed Alan Greenspan, a Republican....

By contrast, Mr. Clinton's Republican successor has caused the surplus to evaporate, raised total federal spending by 1.6 percent of G.D.P., established a new entitlement program for prescription drugs and adopted the most protectionist trade policy since Herbert Hoover. While President Bush has done other things that conservatives view more favorably, like cutting taxes, there is no getting around the reality that Mr. Clinton was better in many respects...

Spork said:Conservatives are definitely not happy with Bush and Congress' lack of ability to control their spending, to be sure.

However, I believe the author misses one thing:

Clinton was in power during "The Bubble" and he didn't have to deal with September 11th. Those two items are HUGE!

AND Clinton and his cronies voted for the RETROACTIVE tax, giving even MORE of OUR money to THEM to play with!

>plop<

But on ething needs to be mentioned as well, although this WAS in the bubble, it still made a surplus of what we had. The stereotype of the Democrat is "spend as much as you can when you have it", but he spent LESS in a time where we made MORE MONEY!!!

As for Bush, he just raised spending in areas that would benefit his supporters. Big buisness has made a lot of cash during Bush's term in office, so they are not about to let him get away.

sandybutt said:heck he even knew how to get bj's for free

That turned out to be one of the most expensive bj's in history.