ÀÏ»¢»úÎÈÓ®·½·¨

Hello Everyone,

This is the Week Twenty thread for the next Presidential Series selection (My Life).

For those of you still acquiring the book, be advised that some folks have run into the problem of the book being now divided into two volumes. We will be reading and discussing the entire work so you will need to get both volumes (Volume I and Volume II). For those of you like myself who have the original hardcopy, that will not be necessary because the hardcopy was just one big book.

The week's reading assignment is:

Week Twenty - Ocotber 24th - October 30th -> Chapters FIFTY-THREE, and FIFTY-FOUR p. 865 - 916


We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This book was kicked off on June 13th. We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Borders and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, or on your Kindle.

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to begin reading this selection and/or to post.

Bryan Craig will be your moderator for this selection as he is our lead for all Presidential selections. We hope you enjoy Week Twenty of this discussion.

Welcome,

~Bryan

TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

Bill Clinton

In chapter 53, we learn General Pervez Musharraf crossed the "line of control" in Kashmir and President Sharif asked Clinton for help. By October 1999, Musharraf overthrew Sharif and Clinton had to cancel the operations against Bin Laden. Clinton also worked to re-start the Mideast peace process, and traveled to Morocco for King Hassan's funeral. The president visited New Zealand and Antarctica, and on another separate trip went to Turkey, Greece, Italy, Bulgaria, and Kosovo. In December, Clinton helped the parties come to an agreement on Northern Ireland as they structured a new government. China became part of the World Trade Organization, and the U.S. continued to break up terrorist cells and ordered economic sanctions against the Taliban. In domestic matters, the Clintons bought a house in Chappaqua, New York. Henry Cisneros settled his case for lying to the FBI about paying his former lover, Linda Jones. Clinton traveled to run-down areas of the country promoting his New Markets plan. The president had trouble with the Senate over the nuclear test ban treaty, campaign finance reform, and Ronnie White's federal judgeship. He campaigned for Hillary and Gore, and decided to put his presidential library in Little Rock.

In chapter 54, talks between Syria and Israel fell apart, but he still worked to keep talks between Israel and the PLO going. In July 2000, he invited Barak and Arafat to a summit. At the end, Arafat turned down the deal, because he wanted sovereignty over all of East Jerusalem. Clinton traveled to India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh to build a closer relationship with India, and meet Musharraf. He also traveled to Portugal, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine. He received the Charlemagne Prize in Portugal, went to a Third Way conference, and met Putin, but could not get the Russians to amend the ABM Treaty to work on a missile defense system. Clinton, in the end, was not sure that a defense system was the right solution. He went to Tokyo for Obuchi's funeral. The U.S. also intervened to get Elian Gonzalez back to his father in Cuba. On the home front, Clinton gave his last State of the Union speech. He wanted a tax deduction for college tuition, help get children more health insurance, and shore up Medicare and Medicaid. On February 6, 2000, Hillary officially announced her candidacy for the Senate. He went to the 35th anniversary of the Selma marches. He worked on gun safety, fighting the NRA, but got Smith & Wesson to develop a "smart gun". Finally, he presented Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese-Americans who served in Europe during World War II.

Kashmir conflict:

Nawaz Sharif:

is a Pakistani conservative politician and steel magnate who served as 12th Prime Minister of Pakistan in two non-consecutive terms from November 1990 to July 1993, and from February 1997 to October 12, 1999. He is the current and incumbent President of the Pakistan Muslim League-N, an ideologically western conservative political force in Pakistan.

Before becoming the Prime minister, Sharif served as the 9th Chief Minister of Punjab Province from 1985 to 1990 and embarked his political career under the military regime of President General Zia-ul-Haq. A businessman and lawyer by profession, he owns Ittefaq Group, a private steel mill enterprise and one of the largest producer of iron materials. Sharif is noted as being as Pakistan's one of the wealthiest investor in Steel mill business and a conservative politician advocating for the conservatism in the country, and capitalism as its economic base. His first term was shortened after the Pakistan Army pressured him to resign after developing serious issues with another national conservative President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, which he too was forced to resigned.

From 1993 until 1996, Sharif served as the Leader of the Opposition in the socialist democratic government of Benazir Bhutto. In 1997, he was elected on for a second term by an overwhelming margin after brutally defeating Benazir Bhutto whose government was dismissed on serious economical and financial scandals became known in public. During his second term, he notably ordered Pakistan's first nuclear tests in response to India's nuclear tests, as part of his tit-for-tat policy, a termed he coined after the tests. Sharif controversially appointed Pervez Musharraf— a lieutenant-general and commander of the I Strike Corps— as the Chief of Army Staff and promoted him to the 4 star rank. Sharif later violated the code of conduct of Pakistan Armed Forces when he controversially appointed General Pervez Musharraf as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. His decision forced Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Fasih Bokhari to resign from the Navy.

Despite Sharif giving prestigious appointments to General Musharraf and the Army, Sharif developed serious disagreements pertaining to the undeclared war in Northern Pakistan, and later ordered the Pakistan Army to evacuated and end its illegal occupation of Indian-held Kargil. Problems with Army further escalated and he was finally ousted in an October 1999 military coup by General Pervez Musharraf after Navaz made an unsuccessful attempt to remove General Musharraf as Chief of Army Staff and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. He dramatically returned to Pakistan in late 2007 after eight years of forced exile by General Musharraf in a secret contract he claimed that he was forced to sign. Now in Pakistan, Sharif successfully called for Musharraf's impeachment and the reinstatement of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.

Pervez Musharraf:

John F. Kennedy, Jr.'s death:

How effective do you think Clinton was in his last year in office? Does the term "lame duck" fit?

Interesting I have not thought much about that?

But Wikipedia stated this:

Clinton left office with the highest end-of-office approval rating of any U.S. president since World War II. Since then, he has been involved in public speaking and humanitarian work. Based on his philanthropic worldview, Clinton created the William J. Clinton Foundation to promote and address international causes such as prevention of AIDS and global warming.

And I found this which really doesn't break it down by year but seems to be very pro Clinton and Gore - but accomplishments nonetheless:

Quite impressive, Bentley, thanks for the link.

He did leave office on high ratings, but Gore seems to be having trouble capturing those numbers. We all know the results, of course, but we do find Clinton on the campaign trail in these chapters.

Any quick thoughts on why Gore is struggling? (We could turn to Nixon in 1960 too.)

Gore unfortunately seemed not to have a high like-ability quotient.

Bob Woodward said it was painful to sit next to Gore at a dinner party because he would jump down your throat.

Really I had not heard that but if that is true it explains a few things.

Woodward said it in a talk the other day. Clinton truly did campaign very well and I agree, Gore seemed to struggle with it all.

Here is a picture of the presidential library in Little Rock Clinton is working on in these chapters:



(Source: )

Clinton's 2000 State of the Union:



It is impressive list of "to do" in here for his last year. Somethings Bush pushed for later on, as well.

Here is the Hillary Senate run announcement:



I thought it was impressive that the President did not speak. It was her day, he says.

I never heard of the Charlemagne Prize, so here is some information:

I believe I included some information on the "Third Way" but here it is again. It seemed to be close to Clinton's heart:




You still hear this with Hillary Clinton and Obama.

Neither have I - it is primarily a European prize for folks fostering European Unity - a plum for Clinton since he is not European.

I think the prize shows Clinton's support of global trade and partnership. Whatever political stripe you are, I think you have to say Clinton did a lot in guiding the U.S. in global trade: big time.

Yes he did and he also did a lot to foster peace in Europe in terms of Northern Ireland.

Bentley wrote: "Yes he did and he also did a lot to foster peace in Europe in terms of Northern Ireland."

And Bosnia as well.

More than likely why he received it.

Bryan, I am almost caught up and I have to say that I wish that what was in this book was actually reported by the media in terms of Ken Starr and the witch hunt which appeared to be going on. They were really trying to unseat him; I think because he was doing such a great job and his approval rating was getting so high. Maybe they feared that folks would want him for a third term like FDR or that folks would want to stay with the Democrats because of everything they had accomplished - hard to say. But I think the Dems should stay focused on trying to nominate a person who is a Moderate and being from the South does not hurt either. Or Ohio or Illinois. Or Iowa.

Interesting, Bentley; Like you, I hear Starr actually is a nice guy. I suspect you are right, the right wing part of the GOP used Starr to block Clinton and stop him in some way. I wonder if he forgave Starr for all this yet??

I do thing a moderate works best. You have to work from the center most of the time, and many candidates have to tone down going into a general election. The question is how long will that model hold out?

I am not sure how the model will hold out because for sure there are very, very few moderates left in the Republican party; they really are forced out and become independents or even Democrats. The Republican party is positioned more on the hard right in terms of its platform.

Our president is much more to the left than let us say Clinton was and it is almost like both sides have drawn lines in the sand. I think Starr is probably a nice guy under normal social standards; but I think based upon the facts acted over zealously in the Clinton scenario. They were not even trying to appear neutral or unbiased and they really tried to shake people down to get something that they could hang their hat on. It really is a miracle that he (Clinton) survived (physically, mentally, and still did his job).

Mandela discussed his ability to separate his experiences from how he was treated and abused in prison so that he would not become imprisoned within his own hate. I think he gave Clinton good advice. I still have to say that I doubt that Clinton gives Starr the time of day; probably the best he can do is to be civil and polite if they ever meet which I tend to believe they seldom do.

It is interesting in a biological sense, Bentley, about how he survived the Starr inquiries and the partisanship.

Physical studies have been done on people like Clinton who actually become calmer when the pressure increases. This could be one reason why he was able to survive the stress of the GOP and Starr, compartmentalize, and get things done.

From these chapters discussing Middle East and Arafat, especially in July 2000. I'm beginning to realize why it was much harder for people to work with Arafat, and why Bush would later favor his ouster. At some point, I think you need a fresh vantage point, you have to compromise something.

Another thing is interesting to me is the affect of the NRA. This might be an example of how certain structures affect the power of the presidency. You want gun control, then you meet a large opposing force, and it doesn't get down as you hope. I believe it happens a lot.

How do you think Clinton is doing against these kinds of pressures? Is he making a difference?

Bryan wrote: "It is interesting in a biological sense, Bentley, about how he survived the Starr inquiries and the partisanship.

Physical studies have been done on people like Clinton who actually become calmer ..."

Maybe what he talks often enough about having parallel lives or people with split personalities actually assisted him here in being able to distance himself from what was going on with the other self.

Strange.

Bryan wrote: "From these chapters discussing Middle East and Arafat, especially in July 2000. I'm beginning to realize why it was much harder for people to work with Arafat, and why Bush would later favor his o..."

I do not think that Arafat could let go in the same way Rabin was able to. Arafat was very much his past even though part of him wanted to be a statesman and you could see that so much of him wanted to be respected as one who had those qualities.

Good point, Bentley, yes that probably makes it easier to compartmentalize and do your work.

Bentley wrote: "I do not think that Arafat could let go in the same way Rabin was able to. Arafat was very much his past even though part of him wanted to be a statesman and respected as one with those qualities."

Agreed. And Rabin was someone special.

One thing I don't think Clinton examines too much in these Middle East episodes is what Albright and Christopher were doing. I understand it, it is his eyes we are seeing, but it would be interesting. I get the impression Christopher was not a strong leader compared to Albright.

I think that Christopher was one smart cookie. I think it was easy to underestimate Christopher; yet he was able to accomplish a lot in a quiet and dignified way. However, when I saw him on television, he always reminded me of Jiminy Cricket.

This is what some of the folks who knew him best said about him:

President Obama described Christopher as a "resolute pursuer of peace" for his work in the Middle East and the Balkans.[28] Hillary Clinton described Christopher as a "diplomat's diplomat – talented, dedicated and exceptionally wise".

He was described as "the best public servant I ever knew" by President Jimmy Carter in his memoirs.[26] On March 19, 2011, Carter stated that "[America] has lost a great and revered leader".

I always liked him and I always liked Albright even though I thought Albright was more brash. I bet in his way that Christopher got more done than Albright.

Here is an obit of sorts from the Huffington Post:

One stat which I thought summed up how good Clinton was for the country was this one:

The stock market was at 3200 when he took office and by the time he left office in his second year; it had passed 10000 for the first time.

Also during his 8 years there were 22 million new jobs created .

It would be interesting to see how Christopher and Albright fared with the career state department folks.

Interesting stat, Bentley; Clinton used many of these in the book.

I know but there were too many to mention; but I think these two show how different things became. Where are the jobs and what happened to the stock market for starters (smile).

I think Christopher was like a dog on a bone; persistent, thorough and quietly relentless. This article from the Economist sums him up nicely:

Thanks, Bentley, helpful article. He seemed to have a quiet determination. I wonder how that dynamic played with leaders in the Middle East and elsewhere.

I think probably that would have worked out well. I always wondered how effective a woman was in the Middle East in that role.

Interesting point, Bentley; I'm sure Israel would be ok since they had Golda Meir

Yes, I wasn't thinking of Israel though.

yeah, I hear you. This area has a quite a ways to go to give women power, wouldn't you agree?

I do agree; it is so evident in their culture, laws, dress, you name it.

Bryan wrote: "How effective do you think Clinton was in his last year in office? Does the term "lame duck" fit?"

I noticed this and thought about it and saw the comments of Bentley but I think that this was a unique guy (Bill the guy) who was a communicator (more than Reagan I think) who was YOUNG finishing popular & successful after two terms in this age of living long -

Maybe Eisenhower's popularity could have been comparable but he as "an old man" compared to Clinton both in real years and life expectancy in 1960 compared to year 2000.

So Clinton was/is still vital and vibrant and how could he have "wasted" his last year in office.

Just my view.

These chapter were chock full of thought provoking insights

He points out that they were constantly after Bin Laden. At the time of publishing a reminder that Bush did not succeed to protect from what was a known threat during the Clinton administration. (at the same time I note that the attach on 9/11 was only 8 months after Bush took office and had been in the planning works well along during the Clinton administration)

I note his recognition of Tom DeLay as an adoptive parent (pg 871) and that he had supported Hillary in this area tven though he "didn't believe in consorting with the enemy"

On page 875 he mentions the architect for his library as the same who did the Rose Center planatarium in New York (attached to the American Museum of natural History) and I would, being a New Yorker who has been there several times - suggest if you get a chance to see it it is worth the time. I also was to the Clinton Library - worth more than the Rose center but the Rose center is easier to get to for most of us (being in New York)

Again I have to disagree with his pushing China into the WTO without more agreements for equal trade access and enviromental limits and individual rights - maybe I am wrong but I think they needed access to our markets more than we needed cheaper TVs or more profitiable ipods for Apple.

I continue to be amazed at what he accomplished and kept accomplishing.

I think the Israeli situation is so difficult. Do the Israelis really want peace? Can they accept equality of Palestinians near them without feeling too insecure for comfort? I don't know that I fault them. 70 years ago the world let the Jews face extermination efforts with little objection and virtually no resistance.

Thanks, Vince. I didn't know the architect did the planetarium.

I think many of us thought the China trade policy was unwise. Possibly he was thinking of the bigger picture, embrace China's economy potential, but it left a mess we are still working out of.

Israel...he tried very hard and you have to give him props. But it true that you are not going anywhere unless the principals really want peace and willing to compromise.

Clinton was and is a very bright man but sometimes those ideas that sound great on paper and have far reaching hopes are not that good in reality. The China deal I think is one of them. But at the same time; I think China has a lot of pride and wants to be on the center stage as a world power than can wield influence. However, it is also a power that distrusts the rest of the world and that is why it keeps beefing up its military at our expense.

As far as the Israelis, despite the despicable way they were treated in the past; they seem to also treat the Palestinians the very same way. It is odd how often in history the abused become an abuser with all sorts of reasons why. I do not believe that the Israelis will operate in good faith and really want peace and therefore Hamas will always be a thorn in their side. Sincerity is something that works every time and when a country is not being sincere that is also very easy to spot. I wish the Israeli people peace and security and wonderful lives but at the same time the world should be hoping that the Palestinians also find some semblance of a home country for themselves.

If one listened to the Republican debates, you would not believe that the Palestinians had a leg to stand on and that all of the candidates were best buds with Bibi.

Obama has not been terribly successful at peace efforts and he is not as persuasive and likable as Clinton. Having said that - if a Republican gets the Presidency next time, I highly doubt that for the next 8 years there will be much improvement if any in acquiring peace in the Middle East. I do hope Obama wins despite his lack of leadership so as to not worsen the already bad situation that exists between Hamas and Israel. Status quo is better in my book than a war with Iran or worse.

Vince, having visited both the Rose Center and the Clinton library - I have to agree that both are impressive. There was so much at the Clinton library, one could have spent a month digesting it. By the way did you get to their fine dining restaurant - very nice.

It seems every president wants to cement their greatness with lasting peace in the Middle East. But, as Bentley says, it has to be sincere, both have to make sacrifices. Clinton did help work with Israel and Jordan, get the Oslo Agreement, and the historic hand-shake was a step.

You do hope it will happen. It seems to be working in Ireland and Northern Ireland after centuries of violence.

I think that Clinton was a born negotiator and people pleaser and folks just liked him and were willing to listen and work with him. Unfortunately Obama despite being an excellent speech giver has not lived up to our hopes for him. He is young and was inexperienced and maybe he will get better. I guess I am worried that things do not get worse in the middle east. I know that they do not seem to be improving much and when 'Bibi' came to power I doubted that things would get better and that the efforts of Rabin would not disintegrate into oblivion. Bibi talks out of both sides of his mouth. I think these two sides need a divorce lawyer rather than negotiators and presidents to work out an agreement. Somebody needs to say here this is the deal and live by it. The End.

Bryan, I agree with you wholeheartedly about how every President wants to strive for world peace and a lasting peace in the Middle East which has been elusive. I think in Ireland and Northern Ireland, families, mothers, sons had finally suffered and lost so much that peace seemed to be an alternative which was better than what they had suffered. I think Clinton had a part in that process as well. And no population could be more fully entrenched in their positions than the Brits and the Irish - talk about intransigent positions. So yes, anything is possible if the parties really want it. I think that Israel has the upper hand in the region because of our support and does not feel that it has to do much of anything for the Palestinians - they have a why bother attitude at the present time. Look at how they continue to build up the settlements. The only country that Israel is afraid of is Iran.

Indeed, Iran is a regional power, no doubt and I'd hate to have them have WMD.

Like your phrase: "both sides have to want it."