I love the quote in the article, "As the only Democrat to win two terms in the White House since Franklin Roosevelt, William Jefferson Clinton retains considerable credibility when it comes to politics and economics."

Clinton won a second term because of two words: Ross Perot. If that man didn't muck up the election, Clinton would never have survived for a second term.

And this makes USA Today think he has "considerable credibility" when it comes to economics? Wow, some people have very short memories.

So that the USA Today can get their facts straight: It was the 1994 mid-term elections that set the country straight economically, not some kind of financial wizardry by Bill Clinton. In fact, Bill Clinton left a recession in his wake when he left office in 2000, and it was the massive tax relief put in place by George Bush that brought the country back economically -- and helped the country survive (economically) after the 9/11 attacks.

It is bothering to see the revisionist articles written by the liberal mainstream press.

I can't for the life of me see why the the right ,conservatives and Republicans are so afraid of change . What the hell! I love change cause that show that this country is moving in the right direction.Whether you agree with President Bill Clinton "wizardry" or not it's a fact there was a surplus when he left office, spin it anyway you like ,but it was on his watch. Just like the 911/attack was on George Bush watch. It was noticed that he was warned also. I guest we all see only the good in the people we like. So very sad for this great nation. All ask is that I am not force do or to like" ,what you think is right". I don't like tyranny it's how this country got away with slavery so long especially(The South)

I'll bite... I'm a little confused about the revisionist history comment so please allow me to get it straight -

Despite most reports of a mild recession in the US between 90 - 93 (before Clinton) - it wasn't the governing of Democrat Clinton that righted the ship... it was the 94 mid-term swing to a Republican congress that pulled us out and kept us going strong for the next 6 years.

Then Clinton leaves office and we're in another recession (which most online sources say comes in 03 not 2000) but now that's his fault?

And despite the Republican's again having control of congress, it's our Democratic President who's at fault for the shape of the country? I'll grant you he hasn't helped much, but then again you could argue he kept things from getting much worse.

And say what you will about Ross Perot and the second election, but if you remember four years later it was Al Gore who won the popular election. Is that all because of the bang up job the Republicans were doing in Congress and nothing to do with the state of the country?

If you really want to view history, perhaps you could find a better starting off point than Democrats are responsible for everything bad and roses grow everywhere a Republican steps.

Hey Putz, how's that hopey changey thingy workin' out for ya so far?