Mosgood, ole Slick has plenty of brains. Unfortunately they're located south of the border.
A chief executive who chases skirts without regard for public opinion or the potential consequences IS a security risk. Kennedy had the same sickness. Are you not aware that the East German government hooked him up with a blonde bombshell, and that the Kennedy administration had her spirited out of the country when her connection to a communist government was discovered? That type of personal donutdello is a security agency's nightmare.
I'm sorry...but it WASN'T "...just about sex."
However, my main beef against Clinton was that he refused to learn from history. Specifically he refused to learn from the valuable lessons of the previous century, during which the U.S. became involved in three major wars dependent upon military forces that had been effectively neutered by idiotic disarmament and isolationist policies. Indeed, the nation's forces were so anemic in manpower and equipment as a result of those policies, that the first six months after Pearl Harbor proved to be nearly disastrous. Production capacity eventually pulled us out of that fiasco, but in this age of modern technology, such a miracle might not happen again.
Indeed, what sense did it make for the Clinton Administration to slash the military budget when U.S. forces are commited to defending vast stretches of the globe? The answer to that question is "none."
His attitude towards the military was shaped by the anti-war rhetoric of the 1960s. During the first two years of his administration, members of Clinton's staff displayed open hostility towards members of the military who were summoned to the White House for presidential briefings.
Clinton and his yippie staff never understood that the main task of the government is to provide security for the nation...not to redistribute wealth. Therefore, he and his staff couldn't see the necessity of accepting the offer of a middle eastern government to turn over Osama Ben Laden. One would think that after the first bombing of the World Trade Center that they would jump at the chance of capturing a major terrorist leader who openly threatened the government and people of the United States...but such was not the case. The man simply wasn't on their radar screen.
One could say, I suppose, that he had the good sense to keep his hands off of a rapidly booming economy. Yet, I doubt he would have shown such restraint if his policies had not caused his party to lose control of the House of Representitives in the congressional elections of 1994. His first two years prior to that event had all the hallmarks of being a touchie-feelie, solve all our problems with social programs, spendfest.
The economy would have grown during that period regardless of whether of not Clinton was in office.
