4 ms·

> the dot com bubble had nothing specifically to do with Clinton. Similarly, WTF did Enron have to do with the Clinton administration Who is responsible for al

> the dot com bubble had nothing specifically to do with Clinton. Similarly, WTF did Enron have to do with the Clinton administration Who is responsible for allowing these things to happen if not the President at the time? Sure, there are limitations to executive power but far more leeway in raising the alarm via the bully pulpit and plenty of scope for using the investigation and regulatory powers that did exist and it would have been a great opportunity for spending political capital to act or at least try. I’m not aware of any evidence of any of that being done and the notion that Clinton couldn’t have known or couldn’t have done anything at all about it is ridiculous. Therefore it’s the implicit Clinton policy of neglect or inaction which is where the culpability lies. I’m happy to be proven wrong and I’m not blaming Clinton alone or even primarily but he deserves plenty of blame nonetheless.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
> Who is responsible for allowing these things to happen if not the President at the time? The President is not God, or a king. People seem to be confused about the role and powers of the President in our system. What, exactly, do you wish the President had said on his bully pulpit about Enron?? I always find it bizarre that people blame the President for everything that happened on his watch, just as much as I think it bizarre that they give him all the credit. I mean, I generally think Clinton was a good president, but he also had much more than his fair share of luck in presiding during a booming economy (which would have boomed no matter who was president at that time).
- nyokodo 4y ago
  > The President is not God, or a king. Keeping Presidents accountable doesn't mean expecting Godlike powers.