First, when Clinton won the White House, the federal budget deficit was at a historic high of $290 billion, 10 million Americans were out of work and the nation's economic growth rate under the outgoing Republican administration was the lowest in more than half a century.  Clinton introduced his controversial economic plan that raised the income taxes of the richest 1.4 percent of Americans.  We immediately heard from the Gloom and Doom congressional Republicans, every one of whom voted against the Clinton plan.  Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, announced, "This tax bill is a one-way ticket to a recession." House Republican Whip Newt Gingrich predicted, "This is the Democrat machine's recession, and each one of them will be held personally accountable."
        What followed is unarguable: creation of more than 22 million new jobs; the nation's lowest unemployment rate in 30 years; the lowest unemployment rate among women in 40 years; and the lowest Hispanic and African-American unemployment rate in history.  The nation went from the largest budget deficits in history to the largest budget surpluses in history, while the average family's income went up more than $5,000.
        Faced with a recession that never appeared, Republicans went from assigning blame to denying the improving economic situation.  In 1996, GOP presidential nominee saw the dark side: "(Clinton's) big-government policies slammed on the brakes, starting with the largest tax increase in the history of America . . .  His economic legacy is the Clinton crunch, slow growth, high taxes and stagnating wages."
        Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, agreed, "Two factors combine to make up the Clinton crunch: taxes going up and incomes going down."  That November, three out of four voters said they were better off economically than four years earlier, and Clinton became the first Democratic president since FDR in 1936 to win a second term.
        Time to switch arguments for the GOP in the face of a booming economy.  Former Vice President Dan Quayle spoke for many in his party: "We do have prosperity, but let's give credit where credit is due.  Ronald Reagan started the prosperity we have today.  George Bush continued it (sic).  And Bill Clinton inherited it."
        After the federal budget deficit had gone down each of the Clinton years and the cascading tax revenues generated by the prosperity led in 1998 to the first balanced budget in 30 years, Clinton still got no credit.  "The federal government is balancing its budget, thanks to the Republican Congress," said Senate Republican leader Trent Lott of Mississippi.
        But what about the continuing great economic news under Clinton? Lott offered kudos: "I agree that Bill and Al deserve a lot of credit, but I'm talking about Bill Gates and Alan Greenspan."  Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, agreed: "I agree that Bill and Al are responsible for the prosperity we are currently enjoying across America.  That's Bill Gates and Alan Greenspan."
        So Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the nation's economic record of the '90s, according to fair-minded Republicans.  But wait, President George W. Bush in his speech on corporate responsibility blamed the faltering economy on the Clinton economic expansion: "We were in a land where there was endless profit.  There was no tomorrow ...  and now we're suffering a hangover from that binge."
        Let's be blunt.  Bill Clinton gave his political opponents a pistol loaded with his own reckless and unacceptable self-indulgence, and then re-loaded it on the way out the door with his pardon of the loathsome Marc Rich.  But Mike Michaud was right.  Bill Gates is still there.  Alan Greenspan is still there.  The House Republicans are still there.  Ronald Reagan's tax and budget policies are still honored in the White House.  The only two things missing are a good economy and Bill Clinton.