Campy's Editorial Page

 "The Clinton Legacy" 

By:  Matthew Dominic McGowan

    I recently read an article in the Cincinnati Enquirer by Cincinnati lawyer Stan Chesley praising Bill Clinton as a great leader and visionary. As everyone from Cincinnati knows, Mr. Chesley has been a staunch supporter and fund-raiser for the former president and the democratic party. His ability to give an unbiased view of the Clinton Administration would have to be about the equivalent of Mike Brown's ability to give an unbiased viewpoint on what has been good about the last decade of Cincinnati Bengals football. It is non-existent. Instead of what would be a futile attempt on my behalf to list all of the wrong-doings of Bill Clinton during his eight years in office (that could take a lifetime) I will concentrate on the things Mr. Chesley is giving him credit for.

    Currently, the mantra for the majority of Clinton supporters has been the strong economy. It is true that the past decade has seen the economy grow like it never has before. However, I think that Mr. Chesley is too quick to give the credit to Clinton. Without a doubt, the single biggest boon to the economy over the past decade has been technology, and that is irrefutable. With the advent of the modern PC (as well as cellular communication and wireless internet), the need for skilled technical workers is immense. But for Bill Clinton, Al Gore, or anyone in government during the time to take credit for this is ridiculous. If anything, the loosening of governmental regulations and lowering of taxes on large companies during the Reagan/Bush years is what encouraged and allowed them to innovate. As new technologies were uncovered and perfected, we began to see new job opportunities pop up like never before, for the simple reason that this was in fact new technology and there weren't many people who knew about it. (I know this because my own job did not exist until the early part of the decade.)

    But the tech sector was not the only industry profiting from its own successes. As companies continued to grow they needed new offices. The construction industry among others started booming. All of these new and expanded companies needed new staff in every department, and more people to do everything from answer phones to fix elevators. As more people went to work, more people went out to eat and go shopping. The entire service and retail industry reaped windfalls. As more people from every walk of life began to work more and make more money, they spent more money buying more cars and more homes, more lawnmowers and things to keep their homes nice, all of which helped fuel the economy. Are you starting to see a trend here? This is a case of trickle-down economics at its very finest, and this too is irrefutable.

    Everyone was benefiting, especially Bill Clinton. The fact that this inevitable economic boom happened during his watch has helped him immensely. With the tax base becoming so large, the total tax dollars collected during this period finally outpaced government spending and we in fact now enjoy a budget surplus. But Bill Clinton is not responsible for this. Fiscal responsibility would actually require cutting the budget, not just slowing down the increases in the budget, but actually decreasing it. One thing Clinton could be accountable for is the current economic slow down, through larger tax burdens imposed on businesses (as well as ordinary citizens, whose money truly fuels the economy) and a higher number of government regulations on everything from the environment to world trade, both of which are currently threatening to completely stifle our unprecedented economic growth. (I guess Superman isn't the only one who can stop a speeding locomotive.)

    Speaking of the environment, Mr. Chesley went on to praise Clinton for his environmental record. But if we examine the former president's environmental policies, we can see that one needs to look no further than the California power crisis to get an idea of where such extremist policies can lead us. In California's example, we can see the crippling effects of harsh environmental laws, such as those which limit the number of electricity generating facilities that can exist in a given area. Other laws even prohibit existing facilities from running at full strength, prohibiting these utilities from providing service to all their customers. And for anyone who thinks this problem is limited to California, think again. We are feeling the effects of such polices here in Cincinnati right now. As heating prices continue to soar, the hardest hit are the lower-income segments of our society, those Clinton and his ilk purport to care most about. Thanks to similar federal environmental regulations and the lack of a true national energy policy (which could have prevented this crisis as well as the one in California) it can happen anywhere in the United States. I wonder if those who heap praise on Clinton now would blame him when a loved one is in a hospital operating room when the power goes out and something goes wrong? (God forbid.) Probably not, they would likely find a way to blame President Bush.

    Mr. Chesley also applauds Clinton for single-handedly preventing "overreaching Republicans" from advancing such "fuzzy-headed ideas" as privatizing national parks. Perhaps he thinks the fine example the government has set with its stewardship of Social Security and Medicare make it the ideal entity to responsibly and effectively run our nations parks. Or perhaps he is thinking, as many environmental extremists do, that privatization may result in drilling or mining operations in this area. Even if that were true, some might say that all that gasoline used in the endless parade of limousines from the Covington airport to Amberly Village every time President Clinton needs more money has got to come from somewhere. Maybe in the future, you can do Cincinnati and the environment a favor by just sending the money you might have used for gas, along with the rest of the bounty, directly to him in Arkansas....oops it's New York now. Sorry.

    He goes on to tell us of many other things the warm and noble President Clinton prevented the Evil Republicans in Congress from doing, such as cutting the budget. (He must be very proud.) What he fails to mention is that when Clinton courageously "allowed the government to close" in 1995, he also "allowed" many in our nation to go without much needed government benefits, most notably our country's Veterans. I myself was forced to drop out of college because I could not access the money I had earned for college through serving my country, while kids who took out student loans were allowed access to money that wasn't even theirs. (My story pales in comparison to Vets who had trouble getting money and medicines they needed to live.) Now I ask, would a true leader just "allow" these things to happen, or would he work for a common solution and compromise (as did congressional republicans)?

    This brings us to Chesley's evaluation of Clinton's foreign policy. It makes me laugh that many of the people who blasted Presidents Reagan and Bush, Sr. for attempting to normalize trade with China are the same ones who are now praise Bill Clinton for doing the exact same thing. I guess human-rights issues are only important when you have an agenda to advance or wish to smear someone else's. But what doesn't make me laugh is when I think of Clinton's most serious foreign policy blunder. I was serving overseas at the time Clinton became involved in what was originally a humanitarian effort in Somalia. When the president tried to make it into more than that, we were treated to the images of a dead American soldier being dragged through the streets of Somalia, being kicked and spat on, and then we were forced to watch as the president did nothing in response. This was a very traumatic experience for many in the military, as well as those who cared about the men and women who were serving their country at the time. Other instances of terrorism would rear their ugly heads during the next eight years, and far too many of them were successful. Enemies, both foreign and domestic, saw their chance. One must wonder how many of these atrocities could have been prevented if President Clinton's "American leadership" and international "credibility" was as keen as Mr. Chesley seems to think it is. 

    Mr. Chesley also credits Clinton with the transfer of Slobodan Milosevic from power, although I'm sure the citizens in Serbia who finally took matters into their own hands and rose up against their former leader would beg to differ. In the same sentence he was able to blame former president Bush for Saddam Hussein's continued power in Iraq. I must remind Mr. Chesley, that it was during President Clinton's watch that U.N. arms inspectors have been repeatedly kicked out of Iraq, and the president did nothing to change that. In fact, the Clinton administration's complacency toward Hussein and his regime has helped the cause of those who would allow Iraq back into the world community while allowing them to continue to defy the terms of the agreement between Iraq and the rest of the world, part of which stated that their nuclear program would be dismantled. Stranger still is that many of the very people who support this fractured take on foreign policy end up being the same ones who are against a missile defense system for our country. (Who's side are they on, anyway?)

    Finally, how could we discuss the Bill Clinton legacy without discussing his scandals, which despite what his well-wishers such as Mr. Chesley may wish to think, is precisely what he will be remembered for. In his whole article, Mr. Chesley only makes one small reference to Clinton's "personal controversy" as he calls it, but the scandals were the only thing about this administration that remained constant. From sneaky Whitewater land deals to fundraising scandals involving foreign powers, from holding up LA Airport's tarmac for a haircut to Vincent Foster's mysterious death, this administration has had more "controversy" than any in history. But none show the true nature of this man's "legacy" so much as the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

    Despite what most people say when defending the former president (as if it is any kind of defense) this was not about Bill Clinton having an affair on his wife. This is about an extremely powerful man having an improper sexual relationship with an employee, then instructing this employee to commit perjury to protect him during a sexual harassment lawsuit pending against him (by another former employee), and then rewarding this employee by helping to advance her career. Believe me, if I had a similar situation where I was having sex with my employees and told them to lie about it in case they got subpoenaed in a pending court case against me, which just happened to be about me trying to force my employees to have sex with me, I would be in jail. (After all, a commoner like me could never afford such fine defense council as Stan Chesley or David Boies.) In fact, there are currently many Americans in jail for very similar crimes. One must wonder why Bill didn't pardon them before he left office, the same way he effectively did for himself when he stuck a deal with the independent council on his last day in office, removing any possibility he can be prosecuted for crimes he committed while president. These certainly are not the actions of a man who has nothing to hide. They are, however, the acts of a man with no shame.

    All this being said, the Clinton years were not all bad, and their are things for which the man deserves credit. I also agree with Mr. Chesley that President Clinton's leadership did in fact make a difference in our country. For example, before Clinton, I would have never known their were so many different meanings of the word "is." I never would have expected anyone to try to make me feel ashamed for being ashamed of our president. I certainly would have never expected a president to be so hungry for campaign money that he would accept money from communist China, but now I know better. But it seems to me that only someone who believes that gun manufacturers are ultimately responsible for street violence (as apparent by Mr. Chesley's pending lawsuits) could believe Clinton's leadership has actually made this country greater. Our country will be better off without him.

If you agree, then I encourage you to visit: http://www.nationalreview.com

Thank you, and God Bless America!

You want more???  Then check out this fine collection of "Clinton Quotables!"

"I experimented with marijuana a time or two. And I didn't like it, and didn't inhale, and never tried it again."
New York Times, March 31, 1992

 "I am going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."
Television interview, January 26, 1998

 "It depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. If the--if he--if "is" means is and never has been, that is not — that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement."
Grand jury testimony, August 17, 1998

"I want an America where family values live in our actions, not just in our speeches."
Presidential Nomination Acceptance Speech of then Governor Clinton, Democratic National Convention - July 1992

"I hate it when someone says something that's not true, and other people believe it."

"I am committed to curbing the influence of money in our political system."

"The road to tyranny, we must never forget, begins with the destruction of the truth."
Speech at the University of Connecticut, 10-15-95

"If a President of the United States ever lied to the American people he should resign."
 Bill Clinton running for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1974

"[There was] no question that an admission of making false statements to government officials and interfering with the FBI and the CIA is an impeachable offense."
On President Nixon, Arkansas Gazette, August 8, 1974

"I promise to have the most ethical administration in the history of the Republic." (quoted by the Washington Post on 01/23/93)

"African-Americans watch the same news at night that ordinary Americans do."
 President Clinton on Black Entertainment Television, November 2, 1994

"I could give you a tax cut, but how can I be certain you would spend it wisely?" 

 Buffalo, NY in 1999

And let's not forget Hillary!

"I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas."
Press interview on conflict of interest, March 17, 1992

"The great story...is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for President."
Today, NBC-TV, January 27, 1998

To view a collection of 2000 Election Internet Humor Click Here!!!

Previous Editorials

Disclaimer: Please note that the views expressed on the editorial and sports pages are solely the views of the webmaster, and may not reflect the views of the owners or anyone else at Campanello's Italian Restaurant....except, of course, the webmaster!