His domestic agenda also included more conservative themes such as reforming welfare programs, expanding the "War on Drugs", and increasing law enforcement funding. Internationally, his priorities included reducing trade barriers, preventing nuclear proliferation, and mediating the Northern Ireland peace process and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts.".

             What is fact and what is a bias opinion as it relates to the two administrations?.

             There was a statistics made by Ackman (2004) on the relation of the president's performance during their term. As summarized, Bush was ranked the least because of his poor performance. And Clinton was ranked higher that Bush because he performed well during his term especially his first term. According to Ackman (2004):.

             "Clinton's two terms in office (1993-2001) were marked by strong numbers for gross domestic product (GDP) and employment growth and especially for deficit reduction.".

             "The key to Clinton's success, says Alice Rivlin, a Brookings Institution scholar who served as his director of management and budget, was adhering to the "pay/go" agreement first forged by President George H. W. Bush and a Democratic Congress, whereby tax cuts or entitlement increases had to be funded on a current basis. She says Clinton raised taxes at just the right time--when incomes were starting to rise after years of stagnation--leading to a surge of receipts. The result was the smallest government in terms of its percentage of GDP since Johnson, and the first substantial budget surpluses since Harry S. Truman. ".

             How the public viewed Clinton and Bush both pro and con?.

             During the term of Bush, people hoped for security and prosperity and he was able to attain the security but a slight below of the progress maybe because of his concentration on the foreign policy. As according to the online source, http://americanhistory.si.edu/presidency/timeline/pres_era/3_701.html:.

             "Bush proved most sure-footed in foreign policy, where, according to one observer, he proved a master of both "timing and substance.