Off-topic garbage and flagged. If Greenspan was so awful, why the following?
"Greenspan stayed on at the Fed after George Bush’s loss to Bill Clinton in the 1992 election and built a good working relationship with the Democratic administration. He began his third four-year term in June 1996, and his influence over the global economy only increased as his tenure continued."
As I recall, the Clinton years were pretty good, economically speaking, until the dot.com bust (which George W. inherited, along with 9/11 -- though I never heard him whine or blame Clinton for either).
Lies, distortions, and half-truths are no way to win an argument.