I assumed they were talking about sex. Or saxophone. Surely they couldn’t have been talking about anything presidential. But apparently, Americans really are dumb:

“In a new poll comparing President Bush’s job performance with that of his predecessor, a strong majority of respondents said President Clinton outperformed Bush on a host of issues.”

The article goes on to name some of those issues, and then refers readers to a video link for a report on whether Americans are getting nostalgic for the Clinton era–something that’s been in the air since at least 2002. Plenty of people do say they’re nostalgic for the Clinton era, in which case the Democratic party should nominate Gary Condit in ‘08. Because he totally outperformed Clinton. Remember how kinky that guy was? There were reports of wild, violent sex. His last name even sounds like ‘condom.’ Plus he was juggling six bitches at the same time, each one with a cell phone he provided and, unlike Clinton, his Jewish ho’ ended up dead. (Clinton snoozed, and the Feds got to Monica first, which is the only reason she’s still breathing.)

“On foreign affairs,” the poll found, “the margin was 56 percent to 32 percent in Clinton’s favor.” True, things were more peaceful under Clinton; the terrorists could do all their planning without being disrupted. But I really have to object to the next one: “Moreover, 59 percent said Bush has done more to divide the country, while only 27 percent said Clinton had.”

I don’t think Bush was the race-war monger who in 2000 spoke to a black audience and brought up the acquittal of the police officers who mistakenly shot Amadou Diallo, saying, “I respect the jury’s decision, but you and I both know that if it had been a white man in a white neighborhood, this never would have happened.” (Non-divisively playing up the country’s racial tensions was a staple of the Clinton presidency.)

This poll’s respondents have about as good a grasp on recent history as the movie “American Dreamz,” which USA Today says, “makes light of a president who has a reputation for ignoring security briefing memos, tangles his words while making speeches, has sinking job-approval numbers and is locked in a Middle Eastern war.”

The most reprehensible part of that summary is Bush’s supposed ignoring of security briefing memos. As The Washington Post reported in February, 2001, “Early each morning when other Washingtonians are soaking up the sports pages or stuck in traffic, President Bush digs into the ‘President’s Daily Brief,’ a 10-page guide to the world prepared by the CIA for an eager student with much to learn. Bush’s reading is followed by a briefing by a CIA senior analyst, a six-times-a-week session that President Bill Clinton DECLINED because he felt he DID NOT NEED it.” (Emphasis added.)

But of course he didn’t need it. Under Clinton, we had no enemies, so intelligence-gathering was irrelevant. Besides, advice from the Pentagon or CIA was the obstacle, because national security was not a goal.

Interestingly, a month earlier–after the good-bye parade Clinton threw himself–a piece appeared in the same newspaper, called “President Do-Nothing.” It read in part: “As for the economic boom, it was largely self-propelled. Clinton’s main contribution was to stand clear. The story is the same for the surprising budget surpluses. Two events beyond Clinton’s making (or Congress’s) proved decisive: the end of the Cold War, which justified deep defense cuts; and the boom, which produced an unexpected tax windfall.

“…The reason impeachment and Lewinsky loom so large in the Clinton era is that there was so little else. He engaged, entertained and enraged. He was full of himself and full of talk. He had an amazing ability to outmaneuver his adversaries and gain short-term political advantage. But all the noise and action merely highlight the larger contradiction. He was always on the move but rarely going anywhere. He was mostly a do-nothing president.”

Personally, I call him the “Un-President.” I mean, at least when you look at Bush you see something that looks like a president. In contrast, when I first laid eyes on Bill Clinton, I didn’t know whether to laugh or take my clothes off.