At least Reagan could speak publicly.
Bush looks like he doesn’t know what he is talking about most of the time. He’s not stupid but he needs to get better at getting out what he is trying to convey.
Normally, I wouldn’t stick my neck on out on something like this, but since the OP asked for foreign input:
It’s not just a matter of breaking laws, but also a matter of which laws you break.
Bush continuing the “war on drugs” looks like a bit of a double standard. He didn’t get caught, but he feels entitled to condemn those who do ? Does not compute.
That he’s a “recovered/recovering alcoholic” is utterly irrelevant - he qualifies for the job under the rules set up and he (probably) got the votes.
I don’t remember the Clinton administration passing laws against consensual sex with the CINC. Fraternization in the military is a special case - I don’t believe the President is obliged to live under military regs ?
I know, he lied under oath and obviously he shouldn’t have. Then again, he was cornered and perhaps Mr. Starr should have asked himself if he was serving his nation by having these questions asked in the first place. It certainly looked as if the courts were being used to justify a character assasination and that is more damaging to a nations reputation than the head of state getting some on the side.
So while Mr. Clinton broke the law, he didn’t do so for kicks (cocaine abuse is, pr. definition, an attempt to have a bit of illegal fun). And he was put in a situation where it must have been very hard to maintain respect for the majesty of law.
Well, you asked.
S. Norman
I´m originally Icelandic, but I live in The Peoples Republic of China.
To start with the most regionally relevant topic, obviously Bush´s missile defense plans are going down VERY badly here at the moment. Bush is generally viewed as a step back from Clinton in more ways than one. While Clinton was of course far from being a Communist/Socialist/Marxist, you might say Bush is taking his politics about as far away from that as you can.
Also, many Chinese are afraid that Bush will start a war between China and Taiwan (I’m not saying it´s likely, just that it´s a popular idea at the moment.)
The American bombing of the Chinese embassy taints Clinton´s image around here too, but he is viewed as someone who had the common sense not to mess with the largest country in the world.
My personal oppinion is that Bush is going to be a dangerous man for the next four years. He has dangerous ideas and dangerously little intellect or experience to deal with the changing world around him. He’ll be a one-termer just like his old man.
I always liked Clinton more than the average American politician, though. I know he is not a good man, I know he is a hippocratic liar and all that, but at least he´s smart and charming! 
Oh, and it´s terrible to see his pro-choice era ended so quickly by the new prez.
If you want to compare the two leaders, I think it´s best to remember what Bush said of his meeting with William Hague (the rather plump Leader of the Conservative Party in England). He said he was an amazing jogger and a former pro-athelete, and their talks had gone well and ranged from projections about the Euro to American politics.
The problem is, he was describing a completely different person, Sebastian Cobb (I think it´s spelled like that), who he also met with in England. He didn´t remember Mr. Hague at all!
Now, I don´t see Clinton not being clear on who the leader is of his “allied” party in a incredibly important country like the UK, which is one of Americas strongest traditional allies!
Anyways, those are my feelings, and what I have garnered from the Chinese people around me (in Beijing, to be specific).
— G. Raven
Can anyone back this up? If this is true, then we all have some serious cause for concern!
I would guess that the whole “born again” phenomenon isn’t as popular overseas, then.
Many born again/fundamentalist Christians seem to wear such youthful indiscretions as a point of pride: I was a terrible sinner, but then I was BORN AGAIN, repented, and found Jesus, etc. Often, the more heinous and wicked the previous life, the more wonderful it is now considered (by like-minded folk) that you have found Jesus.
So as long as you repent and find God, those folks don’t much care. Bush will have no problem pursuing the war on drugs. Will he look hypocritical to the rest of us? Sure. But he’s in now, so what the hell can we do about it?
Yes, most people I know here don’t quite get the Bush/born again thing, especially the Christians I know here. They do believe in forgiveness, of course, but they tend to be much more pragmatic about it, i.e. one should do right and not just talk a lot about it. They also tend to have this funny conception of it being a faith that teaches tolerance and non-violence, strangely enough.
I can forgive anybody for failing to remember that they had a meeting with William Hague.
He is the leader of a seriously weak opposition that has no genuine hope of taking office in the next term and possibly after that too.
His supporters will beg to differ but world leaders are usually well briefed about who the power brokers are in every country they visit and it looks like Bush’s advisors know their stuff.
Clinton:
Far as I can tell, the US didn’t suffer much during his time in the White House. My biggest beef with him has already been stated – the post-Columbine missed opportunity to actually make a start on getting some controls on guns… I know, I know: Gun control is a steady hand.
Dubya:
I think y’all are gonna regret this guy real soon. Take a look at how the Texas Rangers, under his ownership, accquired the land on which to build The Ballpark at Arlington. Then tell me if you think this is the guy you want leading your country.