Clinton was beloved all over the world. When he visited Ireland, when I lived there, he drank coffee with the locals, put an arm around the little irish music shop owners. He was so down to earth, and Wow, the Irish even understood why a President of a country would have need of getting blow jobs. When he walked off the plane in Ireland, the people held welcome banners and cheered. He helped with the Northern Ireland peace process http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/dec2000/ire-d15.shtml and everywhere he went, he was loved by the Irish. On the other hand, when President Bush visited Ireland, they had to have security keep the people back from throwing cow shit in his face.
When Clinton was president, from what I witnessed living in another country besides USA, the economy was very good. Irish and English people bought 5 houses at a time. Since Bush has taken over, the whole world is now facing a crazy financial crisis. Youre right, in 8 years, if Clinton did something wrong, if Bush was the better man, he had long enough to fix it. But as i see it, Clinton was a peace-maker and Bush is a war-maker. And war costs alot of money, where peace is a great way to save money. This should answer the question easily on who cares more of the economy. Someone who spends (LIVES?) or someone who saves (LIVES?)

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/74634&comment_limit=0&condense_comments=false
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0625-01.htm
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/09/yes-bushs-econo.html

Here is the kind of welcome party that follows Bush anywhere he goes...


-- Modified on 10/5/2008 11:21:04 PM