What do you think?
Rate this book
The Clinton Riddle: Perspectives on the Forty-second President
In 2002 a distinguished interdisciplinary group of scholars gathered at the Diane D. Blair Center of Southern Politics and Society at the University of Arkansas to provide a critical evaluation of the Clinton-Gore administration. Their groundbreaking assessment of the most controversial president in modern times treats such crucial topics as race, women, and minorities; the character issue; foreign policy; and the media. This book provides a unique vantage point on the “Clinton riddle” that all future studies will need to consider.
328 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 2004
3 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 12, 2021
This collection of essays examines key aspects of the Clinton presidency, ranging from questions about the man’s character to various policy decisions both at home and abroad. The authors are generally balanced in their approach and conclusions, which is refreshing because of how divisive and polarizing any analysis of the Clinton Administration has become in recent years.
The challenging task of addressing Clinton’s character was tackled in the first essay. If not completely convincing, that selection took an interesting approach to the question and will leave you much to ponder.
Later essays examined Clinton’s navigation of the turbulent foreign policy environment that emerged after the end of the Cold War. Fateful decisions to intervene in the former Yugoslavia as well as to continue involvement in Somalia loom large.
Perhaps most interestingly, the growing ideological polarization of domestic politics in the 1990s also bears scrutiny, providing valuable background for our current 21st Century partisan divide.
What jumps out at you (if you are able to view the evidence without a preconceived bias) is that Clinton was a true centrist politician who disappointed both the progressives of his own party and the conservatives across the political aisle. Despite his flaws as a man and a political leader, he faired reasonably well in a rapidly changing environment. Bill Clinton was no JFK, but neither was he the liberal boogey-man that many try to portray him as today. In fact, he was quite middle of the road and highly pragmatic on most issues.
Of course, it is difficult in hindsight to see his foreign policy as anything other than a nearly a decade of missed opportunities. The seeds of the September 11, 2001 terrorists attacked may not have been planted under Clinton’s watch, but their growth was certainly accelerated. Likewise, his neglect of Russia’s post-communist economic and political turmoil created fertile ground for the reactionary authoritarianism of Vladimir Putin.
For this interested in an objective view of Clinton’s presidency, this book is well worth the read. You can see the man’s flaws and successes on full display.
The challenging task of addressing Clinton’s character was tackled in the first essay. If not completely convincing, that selection took an interesting approach to the question and will leave you much to ponder.
Later essays examined Clinton’s navigation of the turbulent foreign policy environment that emerged after the end of the Cold War. Fateful decisions to intervene in the former Yugoslavia as well as to continue involvement in Somalia loom large.
Perhaps most interestingly, the growing ideological polarization of domestic politics in the 1990s also bears scrutiny, providing valuable background for our current 21st Century partisan divide.
What jumps out at you (if you are able to view the evidence without a preconceived bias) is that Clinton was a true centrist politician who disappointed both the progressives of his own party and the conservatives across the political aisle. Despite his flaws as a man and a political leader, he faired reasonably well in a rapidly changing environment. Bill Clinton was no JFK, but neither was he the liberal boogey-man that many try to portray him as today. In fact, he was quite middle of the road and highly pragmatic on most issues.
Of course, it is difficult in hindsight to see his foreign policy as anything other than a nearly a decade of missed opportunities. The seeds of the September 11, 2001 terrorists attacked may not have been planted under Clinton’s watch, but their growth was certainly accelerated. Likewise, his neglect of Russia’s post-communist economic and political turmoil created fertile ground for the reactionary authoritarianism of Vladimir Putin.
For this interested in an objective view of Clinton’s presidency, this book is well worth the read. You can see the man’s flaws and successes on full display.
Displaying 1 of 1 review