12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004 03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004 04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004 05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004 06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004 07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004 08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004 09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004 10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006 11/01/2010 - 12/01/2010
Syndicate this site
You Should Read Every Word They Write:
Thursday, June 24, 2004James Taranto's Best of the Web Today at OpinionJournal.com has a nice surprise. It's a chapter from the new book, "Presidential Leadership: Rating the Best and the Worst in the White House" (edited by James Taranto and Leonard Leo), available at the OpinionJournal Bookstore.
The chapter is written by noted historian Paul Johnson and, man, is it good. His subject is Bill Clinton. Would that the whole book were written by Mr. Johnson, but it's not. (There are, however, other fine authors contributing to the book - William Bennett, Richard Brookhiser, Lynne Cheney, Brendan Miniter, Fred Barnes, John McCain, Theodore B. Olson, Max Boot, Robert Bork, Edwin Meese III, Peggy Noonan, Kenneth Starr, Paul Gigot, Robert Bartley, Victor Davis Hanson, and others.) Anyway, Paul Johnson's contribution is wonderful. He begins,
Presenting a just estimate of the Clinton presidency will pose perhaps insoluble problems to historians. The printed record of his doings, misdoings, and omissions is unarguably deplorable from start to finish. Yet he was reelected without difficulty, and some would argue that, had it been constitutionally possible for him to run for a third term, he would have been elected again. It is a fact that historians will have to take into account, for it is central to the success he enjoyed that William Jefferson Clinton was a formidable personality, at least in one sense: Face-to-face, it was almost impossible to dislike him. Indeed it was difficult not to like him very much. As Tony Blair put it to me: "I found I had to like him, despite all the evidence."And he goes on, giving Clinton credit for nothing except being Bill Clinton. In fact, one of his greatest strengths as a President was his lack of activity.
If Clinton had been a continent man, and so with time to be an activist president, the consequences would almost certainly have been disastrous for the American economy. As it was, with the president busy elsewhere, the nation thrived mightily, as always when the White House does nothing.In the end, I guess we're fortunate that he did so little and yet unfortunate that he was so successful at it.
Comments: Post a Comment
Add Us To Your Blogroll