Did Minorities do Better Financially when Clinton was Pres or under Dubya?
813667
In general, the economy was better under Clinton, so everyone did better, no matter their ethnicity.\n\nHowever, while I like Clinton, I think it's important for everyone to admit that the president and the congress has very limited effect on the economy.  The economy is cyclical, and the best the government can do is tweak those cycles a tiny bit.\n\nOf course, what the government does have control over is debt, and so I give Clinton great credit for balancing the budget.
1120564
Supply side economics has never worked, it has always resulted in a recession. This administration is no different. We would really be in the dump if it was not for the war. Clinton used consumer driven economics, he raised taxes on the very rich and reinvested it into infrastructure, which created good paying jobs, when these people started buying things it created more jobs and the whole thing snowballed to the largest expansion in the country's history. When he left office he left the budget in the black and was paying down on the national debt. It did not take Bush long to destroy all the advances that we had made and are now going in debt at a record clip.
901317
Well educated people of all races speak alike.For example do Colin Powell or Condalesa Rice speak differently than the Clintons.Not really.People speak the local dialect,where ever they are,Do white americans in NY speak the same as thier counterparts in Tex. or CA Not very likely.People from the ghetto  regardless of color speak the same.Similiarly the citizens from the more affluent suburbs speak better english.Again the wealthier people speak proper english regardless of color.It's nothing to do with race but environment and wealth.
117764
unless the bush can pull the proverbial rabitt out of his a** its clinton hands down, i believe even if he pulled that rabitt i still believe clinton did a better job..
1094432
I can't really say of all time, but of my life time George W Bush.  He is clearly racist and elitist and puts his own financial and political well being before the good of the nation as a whole in a way that is without precedent.
905851
does this not just prove that they are human and we all make mistakes from time to time! i think we all expect our government bodies to be whiter than white, take big bill clinton, he was well kicked into touch for liking a cigar or two,  tony blair, he likes chase the bone that george likes to throw for him! point is why are we surprised when we find this out, they are no different than us, and prone to debt, run ins with the law etc
823750
They did when they elected Bush.   Clinton, despite the Lewinsky scandal was a great president.  People made a big deal over the scandal, it didnt change the economy, it didnt send people to iraq, people made it such a big deal over nothing.
549584
In retrospect, Clinton was one of the better presidents the United States has had. Setting his personal life aside, he managed to bring our financial house in order after years of mismanagement by Reagan and Bush.\n\nClinton was responsible about the use of US military power globally. He got rid of Slobodan Milosevic, and actually did attempt to take down bin Laden.\n\nHis trade policies were based on flawed assumptions, and cost the US hundreds of thousands of jobs, but I can't see a Republican being better.\n\nBill Clinton had his flaws, but he is light years ahead of the guy in the White House now.
699625
I guess your right the conservative Repubicans have better control of the money. (Oh, I forgot about the war in Iraq).  Sorry,No
412715
Yes.  This was a campaign point for W in his first election - double taxation of dividends.  The company pays its taxes and distributes the left over, then the investor has to pay taxes on those earnings.  Bush wanted to get rid of that, but the Dems threw in the whole "tax breaks for the rich" and it didn't go through.
114671
Interesting question.  I think the answer is that he doesn't intend to "do" anything with them.  He has an exemplary record of hiring minorities and supporting useful programs for them.  The better question is what will minorities "do" to help themselves by bettering themselves, working hard to become educated and starting and running their own businesses in a fair way.
117861
Well, Clinton did a lot more wrong then George Bush has done.  You have to rememeber he was under criminal investigation from the start.  He was morally corrupt as well.  He brought the deficit down sure, but at the expence of a horrid economy which we are in the midst of rebuilding right now.  Taxes were higher, which meant people were making less money, all the while feeling all warm and fuzzy thinking things were great, all the while spending more and more... So the more people went bankrupt as a result.  People don't like Bush because his first election was decided by an electoral vote, just as every election since the country was founded has been decided.  Bush spied on 1100 or so suspected terrorists, who have been on the watch list for years... the country is angry.... Clinton did the same thing to millions of people through the CIA... for economic issues.. and it's under the carpet like a pile of dirt with that information.  Clinto lied under oath in a Federal Court.. only to have Monica bring the dress out... Bush has yet to even be brought to trial for a traffic violation.
451600
He had the luxury of basking in a very good economy, which ended in the dot com boom and bust.  The Wiki has a ton of info on this.  Towards the end, everyone knew the the bubble was going to burst and Clinton's term ended just in time.
1037346
Studies have show political affiliation is mostly emotional - maybe minorities are a little less eager to spend soldiers lives on an obviously poorly conceived political and economic adventure that so far has mostly benefited Halliburton and various defense industries.  The fact that minorities are over-represented among those dying may be a factor, as well as the old-white-guy look of the administration.  And look where Bush's power base is - mostly-white business owners and rural white fundamentalists...  \n\nThose last two may explain why the BushCons were too ignorant to see that the Shiites, Sunis, & Kurds wouldn't get along much better than the Serbs and various ethnic groups did in the Balkans.  Neither Rumsfeld, Cheney, or George W learned the most basic lesson of foreign policy in the past 40 years - forcing people to adopt your culture at gunpoint is expensive and has a huge maintenance tail...
1137102
There is only 1 - if you want a successful economy with a balanced budget, you use the PAY AS YOU GO system that Clinton did. BTW, Bush immediately stopped using this system as soon as he became president in 2000.
313313
Thats an emphatic hell no. When Clinton left office, I actually had a few dollars to spend, 401 accounts were soaring, and the people in this town weren't worried about their job security. Now I never have an extra dollar, 401K earnings are at a standstill, and I see stuff closing every day somewhere. Now it costs a mint to fill up my car. And heat my house. Everywhere I look the cost of living keeps spiraling, not rising, mind you, SPIRALING. But somehow, wages never increase. Instead of being able to fuss about your job and how the company treats you like dirt, now we have to take it because you're lucky to even have a job. And some jobs are being affected by federal budget cuts. No, its not better, it's worse.
322262
Historians will ultimately see Clinton as a slightly better than average president.  While almost no one on Main Street remembers anything about his presidency other than his affair, some of us do recall more about his eight years in office.  Among his accomplishments -- taking a huge federal deficit and turning it into a huge federal surplus (which Bush has again made into a huge federal deficit); presiding over the best post-World War II economy; putting 100,000 police on the streets through federal funding, aiding in the sharp drop in crime rates during his presidency; and above all in sharp contrast to some other president we know, presiding over a period in which America and its president were admired and respected.  Whenever I tell my conservative friends all this, all they want to talk about is Monica.  I suspect they need to adjust their priorities.  On the other hand, Clinton's affair was a shocking dereliction of duty and betrayal of trust (he should have been censured, not impeached) and his handling of health care was pretty ham-handed.  Rest assured, however, that regardless of what historians think of him, the crowd that answers these questions -- which is much more representative of mainstream American thought than I am -- will continue to smear him and talk about Monica.