EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Published on Friday, April 23, 2010 by The Oregonian
Bill Clinton's Contrition Contribution
In 1992, I was in 10th grade. Hence, I didn't care about much more than the girls I could never get, the Philadelphia 76ers' playoff chances and the shortcomings of my own unimpressive basketball career (in that order) – and I certainly didn't care about politics. So when my teacher assigned me to represent a Southerner I'd never heard of in a mock presidential debate, I was, um, not psyched.
My attitude changed, though, when I started researching – wait, what was his name again? Oh, right – Bill Clinton. To my surprise, what I found was inspiring. The lip-biting saxophonist seemed like a forthright guy with some heartfelt "feel your pain" outrage at the unfairness of the moment's Gordon Gekko zeitgeist. An early campaign speech I discovered particularly captivated me – the one in which Clinton said, "I expect the jetsetters and featherbedders of corporate America to know that if you sell your companies and your workers and your country down the river, you'll be called on the carpet."
Call me crazy or gullible – at 16, I was probably both – but I bought it. If not for Clinton's campaign (and that irrepressibly optimistic Fleetwood Mac jingle), I might have followed star-crossed hoop dreams already doomed by my god-awful jump shot. Instead, I chose a political path, genuinely believing in that place called hope.
This naive faith, of course, is why I would later come to detest Bill Clinton.
Upon assuming office, he championed the very corporatist policies he railed on – lobbyist-written free-trade pacts and financial deregulation, to name a few. To me, a fervent supporter turned spurned groupie, Clinton eventually looked like an opportunist who knew he was selling out – and yet sold out anyway.
Because of his reversals, I ended up in my adult years being critical of Clinton – so consistently critical, in fact, that I'm shocked to find myself about to spend the next few paragraphs praising him. No, not for his (admittedly impressive) humanitarian work, but for his recent contrition.
Whereas former presidents typically devote their retirements to history-revising legacy preservation, Clinton is laudably doing the opposite – and the nation will, hopefully, benefit.
It began with his congressional testimony last month. Discussing his administration's trade policy, Clinton admitted that it "has not worked" to alleviate poverty, as promised.
"It was a mistake," he said of his agribusiness-backed initiatives forcing impoverished countries to eliminate tariffs. "It was a mistake that I was a party to ... I had to live every day with the consequences of the loss of capacity to produce a rice crop in Haiti to feed those people because of what I did."
Clinton didn't stop there. In a subsequent ABC News interview, he said that when it came to 1990s-era financial deregulation that so harmed today's economy, "I think (my advisers) were wrong, and I think I was wrong."
Some will undoubtedly say "too little, too late." But with Clinton having nothing to gain from these admissions – and, really, lots to lose – the 10th-grade idealist in me says "better late than never."
Better he acknowledge the failure of misguided trade and deregulatory initiatives, rather than pretend they succeeded. Better he apologize for the betrayals that deflated his supporters, rather than feign indifference. Why? Because the penitence may now spur change.
Clinton's compunction could, for instance, convince President Obama to shelve new free-trade proposals and avoid undermining Congress' current financial regulatory legislation. It may compel Obama to fire the same Clinton economic aides who now work in his administration. And it might even prompt a nation of exceptionalists to admit its errors and actually reform itself.
After all, if Clinton can learn from mistakes, then America should be able to do the same.
My attitude changed, though, when I started researching – wait, what was his name again? Oh, right – Bill Clinton. To my surprise, what I found was inspiring. The lip-biting saxophonist seemed like a forthright guy with some heartfelt "feel your pain" outrage at the unfairness of the moment's Gordon Gekko zeitgeist. An early campaign speech I discovered particularly captivated me – the one in which Clinton said, "I expect the jetsetters and featherbedders of corporate America to know that if you sell your companies and your workers and your country down the river, you'll be called on the carpet."
Call me crazy or gullible – at 16, I was probably both – but I bought it. If not for Clinton's campaign (and that irrepressibly optimistic Fleetwood Mac jingle), I might have followed star-crossed hoop dreams already doomed by my god-awful jump shot. Instead, I chose a political path, genuinely believing in that place called hope.
This naive faith, of course, is why I would later come to detest Bill Clinton.
Upon assuming office, he championed the very corporatist policies he railed on – lobbyist-written free-trade pacts and financial deregulation, to name a few. To me, a fervent supporter turned spurned groupie, Clinton eventually looked like an opportunist who knew he was selling out – and yet sold out anyway.
Because of his reversals, I ended up in my adult years being critical of Clinton – so consistently critical, in fact, that I'm shocked to find myself about to spend the next few paragraphs praising him. No, not for his (admittedly impressive) humanitarian work, but for his recent contrition.
Whereas former presidents typically devote their retirements to history-revising legacy preservation, Clinton is laudably doing the opposite – and the nation will, hopefully, benefit.
It began with his congressional testimony last month. Discussing his administration's trade policy, Clinton admitted that it "has not worked" to alleviate poverty, as promised.
"It was a mistake," he said of his agribusiness-backed initiatives forcing impoverished countries to eliminate tariffs. "It was a mistake that I was a party to ... I had to live every day with the consequences of the loss of capacity to produce a rice crop in Haiti to feed those people because of what I did."
Clinton didn't stop there. In a subsequent ABC News interview, he said that when it came to 1990s-era financial deregulation that so harmed today's economy, "I think (my advisers) were wrong, and I think I was wrong."
Some will undoubtedly say "too little, too late." But with Clinton having nothing to gain from these admissions – and, really, lots to lose – the 10th-grade idealist in me says "better late than never."
Better he acknowledge the failure of misguided trade and deregulatory initiatives, rather than pretend they succeeded. Better he apologize for the betrayals that deflated his supporters, rather than feign indifference. Why? Because the penitence may now spur change.
Clinton's compunction could, for instance, convince President Obama to shelve new free-trade proposals and avoid undermining Congress' current financial regulatory legislation. It may compel Obama to fire the same Clinton economic aides who now work in his administration. And it might even prompt a nation of exceptionalists to admit its errors and actually reform itself.
After all, if Clinton can learn from mistakes, then America should be able to do the same.
© 2010 Creators.com
Comments are closed
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
51 Comments so far
Show AllMaybe he could explain how he went from a negative net worth when he left the White House to an estimated $100 million net worth today, too.
That is a major "dot connector" in my eyes that he could perhaps explain.
Recently we have had no shortage of opportunity to hear Clinton and the Clintonistas (Summers, Rubin, etc.) rehashing the 90s, making excuses and contritions that will have no influence on altering the increasing corporate control of the US government that the Obama Regime continues to enable with the same gusto Reagan, Papa Bush, Clinton and Dubya did.
Larry Summers recent interviews confirm that bankster reform strategy will be a repeat of the Obamacare strategy...let the industry write the legislation, start the discussion at center-right and end up at the far right, enhancing the fortunes of corporations whose crimes drove the need for the legislation, put lipstick on the pig and declare victory, thereby assuring that US taxpayers will spend even more when the next meltdown occurs.
Succinctly stated raydelcamino.
Joe
You are in good company. A day or so after he was elected, Bill also kicked the Haitian-Americans and gay people in the face after wooing them for votes. Two vulnerable communities, betrayed in a heartbeat. He went on to give us NAFTA and caved in on welfare reform, both betrayals of the poor and working people everywhere. Our jobs disappeared, laying the basis for today's empty, jobless, casino economy. He tied it up with a ribbon by signing the Glass-Steagall Act repeal, allowing banks to do whatever they darn pleased.
His late and lame apologies notwithstanding, he continues in this vein by enabling the post-earthquake profiteering in Haiti and the exclusion of Aristide. He and his equally lovely wife have taken part in the ouster of legally elected Zelaya and trying to organize the world against Iran for committing the crime of having our oil under their sand. It may be unfair to link him with Hillary, but she has been our chief weapons salesperson in recent times.
He is a very slippery guy who doesn't feel our pain. The full effects of his moves, including the deficits, were not felt until the idiot came into office and added tax cuts and invasions.
A truthful explanation and confession, a book perhaps along the lines of "Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, might help make up for the past, a little. Maybe get him two days off his long sentence in purgatory.
Joe
As said before, even if we never have another Clinton or Bush in public office again, it will be too soon. I can still remember the sinking feeling when Clinton won the primaries, here was a slick talking fellow with the gift of gab, which overshadowed Brown's calls for reshaping and restructuring the direction this country was headed in, ah, but hardly anyone would listen to or take seriously a lefty with progressive ideas. And, so, here we are .........
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." - Unknown
We ALREADY have "another Clinton or Bush in office"...his name is Obama and he is institutionalizing the pro-corporate, anti-worker policies pioneered by Reagan, Papa Bush, Clinton and Dubya.
What will be the point of his apologizing after the damage is done? It will be like a bad doctor giving an empty "apology" after the patient was intentionally allowed to die.
The point, of course, is to say "Look at meeeeeeee! I'm credible! Give me air time! Give me speaking engagements! And give me POWER!"
Sirota is usually much smarter than this. What's up, Dave?
He's just a kid!
Cheers.
"Call me crazy or gullible"....David...you are NOT 16 and you are clearly TOO SMART to be crazy or gullible....so I would have to call you either stupid or an apologist (which is what Clinton is GREAT AT).
What I have noticed about the Democratic Presidents is they always try to look liberal while they pass draconian legislation or harm pro-people, leftist movements around the world....
Carter- building up a MASSIVE nuclear power industry (costing taxpayers dearly with their health and millions of dollars in clean-up costs and storage for toxic waste) without manditory safety guidelines (which was discovered upon the meltdown of 3 Mile Island), FUNDING DICTATORS LIKE SUHARTO, HELPED THE SHAW OF IRAN ESCAPE JUSTICE BEFORE THE PEOPLE HE TORTURED AND STOLE FROM, THE SUPPORT OF A PRO-US, OLIGARCHIC JUNTA IN EL SALVADOR WHICH RESULTED IN MURDERING ARCHBISHOP ROMERO.
Clinton- PASSED NAFTA, GATT TREATY, 1996 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT, 1995 ANTI-CRIME BILL, IMPOSED ECONOMIC SANCTIONS IN IRAQ KILLING 1/2 MILLION CHILDREN, INVADED and DROPPED BOMBS FOR 78 STRAIGHT DAYS IN YUGOSLAVIA IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY, DESTROYED HAITI W/ FREE TRADE ZONES AND WENT AFTER ARISTIDE, JAILED 1 MILLION POT-HEADS AND HELPED THE CURRENT BAILOUT OF BANKS/FINANCIAL INST. BY REVOKING GLASS-STEGALL ACT..among a few.
Obama- CONTINUED BUSH DOCTRINE OF PROTECTING TELECOM COMPANIES FROM PROSECUTION FOR ILLEGALLY SPYING ON AMERICANS AND FOR ALL WE KNOW WE ARE STILL BEING SPIED ON, KEEPING GUANTANAMO OPEN, CONTINUING ILLEGAL WARS ON AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ, BOMBING PAKISTAN ON A DAILY BASIS, ALLOWING AMERICANS TO BE ASSASSINATED OUTSIDE THE USA IF SOMEONE IN GOVT. CALLS THEM AN ENEMY COMBATANT OR TERRORIST (NO COURT HEARING OR PROOF NECESSARY), BAILED OUT AIG, ALL THE BIG-ASS BANKS, GENERAL MOTORS, PUSHED HALF-ASSED MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE TO POOR HOMEOWNERS, DOING NOTHING TO CREATE A MASSIVE JOB CREATION PROGRAM, PASSED HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM INSTEAD OF HEALTH C A R E REFROM, AND IS FUNDING THE NEW RESURGENCE OF NUCLEAR POWER AND DRILLING FOR OIL OFF OUR US COASTS AND GIVING RICH PEOPLE WHAT IS LEFT OF THE STORE!
The Democrats give everything away and pass PRO-REPUBLICAN legislation (it is a leftist version of Republican because they can't be TOO OBVIOUS about what they are doing) saying they just don't have enough votes to stop the EVER-POWERFUL MINORITY REPUBLICAN PARTY (the group that has too few votes to stop Democrat votes) so they MUST COMPROMISE.
The difference with the Republican Party....THEY CRAFT THE MEANEST PRO-CORPORATE, PRO-MILITARY, PRO-DEATH-TO-PLANET-EARTH policies and they get TOTAL support from their own members PLUS the conservative wing of the Democratic Party (who can you trust when you have that????) enough to pass their bills and SMASH children, women, workers, people of color, the animals/fish/trees/ecosystem. There is no winning here.
The Democrats ARE GREAT WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING APOLOGIES.....WHAT DO THEY CARE....THEY ARE LIVING LIKE REPUBLICANS AND IF THEY HAVE TO LICK THE BOOTS OF THE RIGHT WING SO BE IT....THEY HAVE NO PRIDE....THEY GAVE THAT UP IN THE 80'S WHEN THEY WORKED W/ REPUBLICANS TO CREATE THE SAVINGS AND LOANS SCAM!
So...please David....come to your senses and stop acting stupid. You are doing nothing to bring sympathy to the Democratic Party....they are beyond redemption in my book!
ooops....didn't know all caps meant shouting...just emphasising the dirtyness (sp?) of the "good party" (right???) unbelievable that every voting cycle we, the decent people who want to share the worlds resources and not kill all species so we can satisfy our every bodily desire, must vote for one of two corporate-robber-barons to kill the future of our children and we think we are actually making progress or acting on behalf of any kind of sane democratic looking society. i feel sooo sick.
You don't have to vote for the corporate puppets.
Which includes every candidate or incumbant with a D or and R after their name on the ballot.
Don't forget Clinton's 1997 "ending welfare as we know it".
From that point onward the social safety net for individuals fizzled while corporate welfare increased exponentially.
opps...how could I have forgotten....yes, I think that was the time that Lockheed Martin got onto the Welfare to Work program gravy-train (as seen in the Bowling for Columbine movie...soo sad). thanks
Good comments,
freethinker68 and Visiting Professor.
Thanks.
The New York Times takes offense to anyone blaming the Clintons for the loss of our industrial base to China via Walmart where Hillary was on the board of directors.
With the help of Al Gore, they destroyed Ross Perot who was trying to warn us of the loss of our economy to Mexico and China. Why are all those countries so beholden to Clinton so that they would donate all those millions of dollars to the Glinton Casino. The sad thing about this Clinton Fiasco is that Obama has bought into it, and we will pay the price.
The illegal Immigrants are here for the benefit of the Republican Power, and they can depend on Obama to carry the flag for the cause. Our only recorse to to vote out all incumbents in November.
Over the years, I've carried on turrible in various comments venues about the transparent scam of the "public editor" or "ombudsman"; to wit, that the modern corporate media "ombudsman" or "Public Editor" is essentially a priest presiding over a journalistic sacrament of penance.
They present genteel admissions of wrongdoing, typically in a head-cocked, chin-stroking pose that seems to earnestly wonder aloud if the offensive material really is a breach of professional standards or ethics, or reveals a significant flaw in content, standards, and practices.
Yet, even if he or she gravely concludes that the material in question was not the reporter or publisher's finest hour, such tut-tutting and occasional acts of contrition from the offender is simply part of the overall scam.
It creates the appearance of a feedback loop, but it's just a conveyor belt to ease the conscience and consign Duly Noted media controversies to the Memory Hole.
IMO, this bogus "Public Editor" dynamic applies all the more to politicians who affect a self-critical perspective-- who, as time goes on, put on a "Public Editor" hat and ruminate on controversial points in their own careers. Their criminal-elite peers, and conventional corporate media, credit them with courage ("guts") and humility for confessing their doubts, mistakes, and "weaknesses" in the court of public opinion.
I don't presume to absolutely judge whether politicians truly struggle with such remnants or echoes of a personal conscience that survive long careers of ruthless Machiavellian power-mongering.
There are reports that monsters such as LBJ and Robert McNamara were permanently anguished by their actions in retrospect, once they were offstage and free to contemplate their legacy. So be it.
But belated admissions of wrong-thinking and wrong-doing from the likes of Teflon-hearted technocratic narcissists like Clinton are steps in the same tapdance ballet they performed while in power. Remember-- they're still the same amoral, unscrupulous campaigners they always were, now self-consciously spinning their formal and informal memoirs to "win" a coveted Great Man niche in history.
They're the other side of the coin to the petulant defiance shown by Clinton/Obama's opposite number, Tony Blair, who essentially asserts that he was "right" all along and would do the same things over again in comparable circumstances.
The coin is counterfeit. It sparkles like fool's gold, and has the same worth.
Bill Clinton is a very clever sociopath and a narcissist. And that's what these belated mea culpas represent. Who cares what he thinks now. What did he do when he had the power? That's all that counts.
Now if all the Clintonistas that Obama surrounded himself with and who are continuing their unblemished record of selling out to the highest bidder would show the same contrition, perhaps there would could begin to hope.
Emmanual, Summers and Rubin spew an endless haze of excuses and blame the victims.
Well said everyone. Since there were only 17 comments written when I thought to write, I read them all. There is nothing more to add really, except freethinker, you forgot to mention Obamas efforts to cover up the crimes of the previous administration.
Okay, so when Clinton is confronted by reporters he admits he made a few mistakes. That doesn't mean he's learned from his mistakes. And so what to the few admissions. What is he doing to reverse the damage he's done, and he continues to support the status quo policy with Israel and it's ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and inhumane treatment of the Gazans.
I remember David Brower pointing out that Clinton was responsible for more environmental damage than Reagan and Bush I combined.
he hasn't change a bit, he always talked opposite to his doing, and he is now at the top of anti-productive hedge founds
edweg
Having worked in the Indian Govt.,it has been my experience that many senor officers rediscover their idealistic roots once they leave the Govt and exhaust all possibilities of re-employment.
It requires courage and conviction to fight for the public interest (what I used to describe as fighting for those people who do not know you personally and/or those who cannot pay you back for whatever good your actions did them )when you are in a position of power and influence.If,when in the saddle of power, you work for whoever is powerful ,then you are feted,wined and dined by powerful,rich ,influential,beautiful people who will also help you in many ways to hold on to your position,building up opinion in your favour among those who matter.On the other hand if you work for the public interest only,then there will be opposition from these people in many ways.Against this one will have to appeal directly to the people for support like FDR did.His own class abused him.But because he stood up for the public interest against private interests,he emerged a great leader.
While Pres.Clinton's admission is welcome ,he should have fought for those who did not know him and those who could not pay him back,when he was Pres.of the US when he had most to lose and when his countrymen had most to gain.
Sorry,it should be 'many senior officers'.Thanks.
If Jesus were to show up on this site he would have a hell of a time with this group.
Which Jesus???
OYE
oye el pensador April 24th, 2010 9:31 am:
-Son of Joseph.
If, instead of multiplying the loaves and fishes for distribution to the poor and hungry, Jesus had instead downsized this program to protect Caesar's coffers and turned over the proceeds to the centurions; and,
If the Sermon on the Mount had been limited to finger-wagging declamations including, "I did NOT have sex with that woman!" and "It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is," Jesus would indeed catch holy hell here.
Although given this hypothetical, no one would've remembered him in the first place.
If former President Bill Clinton teally meant it when he said that it was a mistake to force impoverished countries to eliminate tariffs. he wouldn't merely apologize, he'd do something about it. Like what? Like devoting a significant portion of his time, money and energy to building public support for a reversal of the legislation that allowed agribusiness USA to flood Haiti with cheap rice that put farmer's there out of business. Instead he says he feels their pain. Yeah, I'm sure Haitian farmers who had to move to Port-au-Prince because of said legislation, there to face the fury of last month's earthquake, will be comforted to know that Bill Clinton is sorry for what he did to them. Those that are still alive, that is.
OMFG
"with Clinton having nothing to gain from these admissions..."
An EX-president has everything to gain from being against everything he did in office. Even Jimmy Carter is a much better person OUT of office. (Is he in touch with Bert Lance??) Obama was wonderful before taking office, is now awful, but is not quite as bad as George W Bush.
I have previously sought to hear and appreciated David Sirota's views but will now consider them questionable.
Clintok is doing his patriotic duty to apply some brakes to the imperial steamroller so the wheel bearings don't overheat. His act of contrition is certainly not to stop the flattening of the earth, but to ensure the flattening can continue without major interruption. Clintok is the single most responsible individual for the flood of economic refugees from Mexico after his NAFTA enabled the USan petrokorn industry to criminally corner the Mexican tortilla market.
Good point in the last sentence. When M$M talks about the "problems" of immigration from Mexico, it never draws a connection between NAFTA, what NAFTA did to the Mexican agricultural economy, the housing boom, partially as a result of the cheap labor that the flight of Mexicans to the US brought, and the consequences after the economic collapse including the anti-immigrant fervor in Arizona.
I think ex-presidents have a unique glimpse into whatever they conjure up in their own minds as "the afterlife."
At a certain time in one's life one may or may not become aware of "diminishing capacity." General anesthesia is probably not as safe as it's made out to be.
How many times has Clinton been under general anesthesia for heart and related problems? Ditto Dick Cheney?
Some, recognizing their increasing fallibility, may feel contrition or at least express it, while others will adhere rigidly to their "heartfelt" orthodoxy, reciting old canards by rote.
There is something inherently corrupting about the OFFICE of the Presidency. Evolution never intended that any single human being could live with so many inherent contradictions. The Office demands increasing "powers" because there can never be enough. Serotonin addiction.
Out of office, one is put through a rehab program. There is a period of withdrawal. There may come a realization that the "high" of the Presidency will NEVER happen again. Sadness and fatalism may follow, if one is still sentient. Then, perhaps, a reconstruction of what remains of Ego, as with Nixon, who was carefully rehabilitated.
Of all recent presidents, it would seem that only Jimmy Carter has redeemed himself, while his one-term presidency was a unique interregnum.
The Office of the Presidency has, probably, been obsolete since Truman dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, "a military target."
Actually, it may be functioning as a Troika anyway. If so, one may see Obama as far more the pragmatic functionary when compared to Clinton who loved and probably needed the adoration.
Cuban cigar, anyone?
Another time is soon to come, when those of us who recall the assassination of JFK as a central part of our political consciousness will be gone or irrelevant if we are not already.
Why do I have this persistent feeling of foreboding?
-30-
re: Carter. He's probably the best of a bad lot but I am still waiting for him to admit that he started the mess in Afghanistan in order to pull the Soviet Union into "their Viet Nam".
The sucking sound Perot warned of is loud and clear now as most wore ear plugs for most the past 16 years since NAFTA passed and now the economic tsunami sound has finally blown their ear plugs out.
I really don't believe we have had a representative president since JFK took a bullet for signing executive order 01111 returning issuing power of money back to the US Treasury... LBJ quickly ended that threat to the federal reserve and its international money interests. A scant few years later Nixon took us off the gold standard to fund their prolific spending on war and space based nonsense.
We don't have a living president that I admire anymore and most of the dead ones of the last 40 years I'm glad their gone as sad as it is to say. Clinton and Obama now look exactly like republican presidents who spent like drunken sailors on war machines except they spend their political power on banking interests and market manipulation fraudsters while throwing crumbs out to the citizenry to give the keynesian impression of interest in 'the peoples' welfare. Its funny how republicans criticize Carter for the stagflation of the 70's when it was Nixon who caused it single-handedly by going off the gold standard and funding a losing war that killed our military folks for no real good reason (the political residue of McCarthyism). Carter was just impotent for not ending the monetary farce which ended consumer electronics manufacturing in the US...the last TV's made by company's in the US ended in that decade.
It will all end as poorly as it was all conceived. I won't accept Clinton's apology till change that is in American workers favor occurs and I don't see that happening any time soon.
Dave,
"To me, a fervent supporter turned spurned groupie, Clinton eventually looked like an opportunist who knew he was selling out – and yet sold out anyway."
When you wrote the above, you got it right. Obama is the same kind of sell out, but better at it than Clinton was.
Bill Clinton ought to be serving a Life Term at a Maximum Security Prison. That he remains free speaks volumes about the lack of a criminal justice system in the USA.
Mr Sirota seems to suggest that Bill Clinton has nothing to gain when he is being contrite for the policies of his Presidency.
This is hogwash. He has EVERYTHING to gain. His apologies are very much like GW Bush apologizing for have gotten it wrong when he claimed Iraq had WMDS.
What was gained was the public perception that it was all merely "mistakes in Policy" rather then "Policy by design". This helps to perpetuate "business as usual" with each and every subsequent Presidency thus ensuring PAST Presidents are never truly called to task for their crimes and helping to ensure the further Corporatization of the United States of America.
The outcomes of Clintons Policies during his Presidency were known at the time. They were not "Misguided Policies". The intent of the policies were in fact the OUTCOME we have seen.
Clintons "contrite apologies" are intended to make him look like a man of principle who was merely ill-advised. He had no principles then and he has none today, other then those of that will benefit Bill Clinton.
In ten years time we will see this same "Contriteness" from Barack Obama I am sure. I hope even fewer fall for it.
Any true reformist candidate (Dennis Kucinich) who tries to run for office will be treated as an unelectable clown by the imperial gate keepers in corporate media. It truly amazes me how gullible the American public remains in the face of the corporate juggernaut that controls the election process.
Bill Clinton can apologize every day for the rest of his life if he thinks that will help his image, because that's all he's concerned about. His wife continues to implement the same regressive policies as he did in office, yet he has nothing critical to say.
Sad to say, but I don't think we'll see any real ground breaking change until the public has its back up against the wall and no longer has the luxury of illusion. Then things will get interesting.
Mr. Sirota, Slick Wille is just like the run of the mill catholic. Sin, go to confession, go out and sin again. (I guess thats a pretty good summary of all christian religions) That's why he's Obama's inside man for the govenership of Haiti. He's not called Slick for nothing.
This is like his apology for Monica. An apology is a waste of time and energy if it is not followed by trying to remedy the wrong. In 1998 he should have resigned. Now, he could ask for policy changes from Congressional Dems as well as those in the executive branch. Don't hold your breath!