A wee bit of hyperbole there, don't you think? I don't see any damage of lasting proportions, certainly nothing to compare with the misadventure in Vietnam, which left scars that still hurt, or the Reagan-era doctrine of unrelenting support for dictators who pretended halfheartedly to be on our side, a policy that left half the world with the entrenched view that Americans are the bad guys.
What real damage has Clinton done?
Evil? I don't see it. Stupid, occasionally. Tasteless, often. Power-mad and ego-obsessed, almost always, but what politician isn't?
I see him as just another politician, eminently forgettable. The most memorable facet of his administration, the market boom, was not his doing nor that of his predecessors, and belongs to the history of economic cycles, not the history of politics. The same can be said of the regression we're seeing now.
Possibly the most interesting aspect of the Clinton legacy is the Clinton obsession of those who opposed him. One wonders how long it will take them to outgrow it. Probably they will leave it behind when they realize that it is more effective to focus on issues than on personalities. I hope so. |
