>>>A little under a decade ago:
>>>
>>>1) Consumer confidence: Record High 1/16/00
>>>2) Gasoline prices in the United States reached an all-time inflation-adjusted
>>>low in February (1999), dropping to less than $1 per gallon nationwide.
>>>3) Unemployment Falls to 4.1%, Best in 30 Years
>>>4) Median home price $160,000, primary use to live in, not an investment vehicle.
>>>5) Tax rate for middle class 28%
>>>
>>>
>>>Since voting in a Republican President in 2000 we have seen:
>>>
>>>1) Consumer confidence plummet;
>>>2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
>>>3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
>>>4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
>>>5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
>>>6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
>>>7) Tax rate for middle class 25%
>>>
>>>The conclusion is clear, lower taxes are bad for the economy. :)
>>>
>>>Now why would anyone be surprised that people are more fond of the clinton years that the Bush years?
>>>
>>>
>>I liked those years. It was something new everyday. Travelgate, Monicagate, Bosniagate, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.
>
>The only resemblance of those "scandals" to Watergate is the names. (And what was Bosniagate supposed to be, anyway?) Bill Clinton's presidency was not exactly a long list of accomplishments but it was not as scandal-filled as his resolute enemies like to claim, either. The only thing I think was out of bounds was the pardon of Marc Rich.

There is quite a bit more than that.
http://prorev.com/wwindex.htm

I believe the damage done by reducing our intelligence capabilities, military strength and his dealings with China will be the lasting legacy. However, I admit that it's way too soon to know. History needs at least 20 years to begin to get a good fix on a president's historical role.