Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (41918)	4/9/1999 7:51:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

The Real Legacy, Part V: Clinton's global incompetence makes the world a much more dangerous place: April 9, 1999 Clinton Is Amassing A World of Trouble By PAUL A. GIGOT The only good news about Kosovo is that it is reminding Americans that the presidency is about more than shorter suburban commutes. It may even cause challengers to Al Gore in 2000 to ask, Is the world safer than it was eight years ago? That question should be a staple of every presidential election. But U.S. victories over communism and in the Gulf War meant that Bill Clinton inherited a world with fewer threats to America than anytime since before World War I. He's been spending down the principal ever since. Kosovo shows that the world has grown more dangerous than Mr. Clinton has been telling us. Which means that the media and maybe the voters will listen to the argument that his presidency has been squandering the strategic depth it took decades to build. Let's scan the globe for a six-year scorecard: The Balkans: Mr. Clinton inherited a mess he has made messier. His Dayton deal of 1995 rescued Slobodan Milosevic from military defeat and left him free to cleanse Kosovo. Now the president has invested U.S. and NATO prestige in a showdown that Milosevic is winning. His greatest contribution to NATO might not be expansion to Europe's East but demise in its South. Bottom line: Hope John McCain gives Mr. Clinton enough backbone to prevail. China: Any president would strain to handle China's inevitable rise as a great power. Mr. Clinton deserves credit for reversing his 1992 rhetoric and pushing economic reform via trade. But he's undermined his own policy by making it look like it was bought with campaign cash and nuclear secrets. More troubling is his inconsistency regarding Taiwan. Last year Mr. Clinton stunned China-watchers by dropping from U.S. policy the "fourth no" regarding Taiwan unification with the mainland: "No use of force." This year Madeleine Albright compounded the mistake by sending mixed signals about missile defense for that island democracy. Bottom line: An all-but-certain crisis for the next president. North Korea: Mr. Clinton tried to buy off this rogue state's nuclear-weapons program with food, oil and nuclear-power plants. The result has been missiles lobbed over Japan, missile exports to bad actors everywhere and a nuclear program nonetheless. Japan is now worried enough to be exploring its own missile defenses, a first step away from the U.S. security umbrella. Bottom line: All of Asia perceives a weaker, less reliable America. Russia: Being Mr. Gore's personal foreign-policy priority hasn't done much for this economy. The reformers closest to America are in disrepute, while former KGB chief Yevgeny Primakov angles to succeed Boris Yeltsin. Anti-American sentiment is on the rise, especially after Kosovo. Team Clinton's reliance on IMF advice has managed to discredit free markets without aiding reform. Bottom line: Russia's transition to democracy is in doubt. The Persian Gulf: Six years of ultimatums followed by pinprick bombings have left Saddam Hussein stronger than he was six years ago, and the coalition against him weaker. U.N. arms inspectors have been banished, Kurdish and democratic opponents rolled up. Bottom line: It's only a matter of time before Saddam escapes U.N. economic sanctions. Mr. Clinton has had successes--notably Ireland and the Mideast, though the latter stone has as usual rolled back down the mountain. In any event, both deals got more publicity than their contribution to U.S. security deserved. Peace in Palestine, if it ever arrives, won't compensate for instability in the Gulf. America won't fight a war over Ireland but it might have to over Taiwan. Other Clinton triumphs have been evanescent. Haiti has reverted to its normal state of nature. The Mexican financial bailout of 1995 turned out to be a moral hazard that helped produce the Asian financial crisis of the last two years. The genuine trade-policy triumphs of the early Clinton years (Nafta) have given way to a rise in protectionism, even amid prosperity. Mr. Clinton is now reluctant even to press for more free-trade negotiating authority. All of which offers an opening for Democrat Bill Bradley and the Republican challengers for president. If Mr. Gore is going to claim credit for economic growth, surely he's earned similar notice for this creeping world disorder. All the more so because he's accurately advertised himself as Bill Clinton's global co-pilot. In 1996, Bob Dole stopped talking about foreign policy when his poll-driven advisers told him the public didn't care. But maybe more Americans would care if their leaders told them why they should. The praise accorded Mr. McCain for his sensible critique on Kosovo should encourage others. Bill Clinton has benefitted from the decline in foreign policy salience that has shrunk the presidency into a governorship. Now Mr. Gore, in his early campaign, seems to be running for mayor. The way to defeat this can't be to dive even further into suburban tall grass, but instead to talk about the duties of a president that really matter--like war and peace. interactive.wsj.com

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (41918)	4/11/1999 1:14:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Gee, Schuh, and just after I was giving Bill crap about his analogies, you come on and... now, what was the point again, Daniel?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (41918)	4/12/1999 9:24:00 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Shemp, you continue to demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty over and over. You started and escalated the juvenile name calling around here. Regarding Bush, my first response addressed your still nonsensical assertion that other "Presidents" like Bush lied under oath while president. When pressed on this, you to this day cannot identify when Bush was even PUT UNDER OATH as President. You're a fool not worth debating with. As they say, why don't you get on with your hateful life.