Because Bill utilized what is called the Pay-As-You-Go system... meaning Congress can't spend money they don't have.
This system was the first thing Bush's Congress got rid of when he came into office.
2007-10-10 05:43:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wow, bitter lots? DId the u . s . a . run out of ladies persons, that Clinton would ought to bypass remote places to the worldwide Cup to get one? What is going on in the minds of people who get excitement from the intercourse lives of others so obsessively that years later there remains a fascination with who's getting what the place. If I had the possibility to work out a considerable worldwide wearing journey, i'd bypass, South Africa is a good usa, and its been exciting for those persons who've been soccer mothers or grandmas. i'm sorry you have the form of narrow worldwide view, yet not each and every person, which contain bill, feels the comparable. He would have picked up an interest whilst he grew to become right into a Rhodes pupil in England, or whilst his daughter performed soccer in school.
2016-10-21 06:15:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Erika 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Legislative deadlock. BS bills didn't get passed because the Republicans in Congress were always at odds with the Democrats in the White House. Government spending was extremely low because pork was exposed for what it is rather than glorified as some magic solution to poverty. Welfare reform put a higher value on work than entitlement, and they probably saved trillions of dollars by chasing stupid scandals rather than thinking of new ways to spend money and pay off corporate buddies.
2007-10-06 09:02:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by freedom first 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
A well trained monkey could have been President and we would have had a prosperous economy.
The economy always surges after a war, even a small one.
The internet was just gaining momentum.
The economy was starting to go into a recession during the last year of the Clinton Presidency.
2007-10-06 08:35:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by LC 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
The two previous REPUBLICAN leaders and their lowering of taxes and implementation of pro-business policies: Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
Now, as for Clinton:
I know you true liberals are going to HATE me for saying this, but Clinton was an incompetent, indecisive, pandering pig of a President who had no real affect on the outcome of the 1990s economy, as well as military action to protect our nation and instituting TRUE, revolutionary welfare reform "as we know it," lol. Basically, Clinton and his administration did not contribute in any way to the "prosperous economy" of the time and I would list him among the 10 WORST PRESIDENTS this country's ever seen.
By the way, I'm not a Coulter/Hannity/Rush "hack" conservative. I call myself an "independent conservatarian," so kind of a Boortz Libertarian or Scarborough Republican, if you will.
2007-10-06 09:15:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by BlanketyBlank 1
·
4⤊
1⤋
Bill Gates.
2007-10-06 10:16:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by tom p 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because he was president after the full effect of the Ronald Regan's policies came into being.
2007-10-06 09:56:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Paul C 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
dot com dot comdot com dot comdot com dot comdot com dot comdot com dot com - oops I got stuck reading the republicans answers. Bill Clinton didn't get us into foreign wars that were none of our concern, and employ private armies. We also weren't buying everything from China.
2007-10-06 09:08:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Zardoz 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
You mean besides a war that is unrelated to 9/11?
2007-10-06 08:35:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
the dot com boom of the 90's and "irrational exuberance"
2007-10-06 08:34:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by captain_koyk 5
·
2⤊
0⤋