From: reaper@wixer.cactus.org (Keath Milligan)
Subject: Re: GEORGE BUSH, STOP THE RED-BAITING
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:52:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.200743.15382@midway.uchicago.edu> shou1@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu (Roger Shouse) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>
>Quite frankly, a lot of people (not just crazed right wing Republicans) 
>don't think that the economy is really all that bad in every way.  Low
>interest rates make home buying more affordable, low inflation softens
>the blow of other economic problems, etc.  

Yeah, a "lot of people", but MOST people are afraid to buy a house or a
car or have a family becuase they aren't so sure they'll be employed a
year or two down the road.  Refer to countless CNN pieces and Crossfire
discussions on the subject of whether or not the country is still in a
recession -- the general consensus is that no, we are not in a
"recession" by definition, but rather a period of extremely sluggish
growth in which people have lost confidence.  You have failed to mention
the issue of JOBS at all -- this is the real issue of this campaign, not
Clinton's character.  Does it really matter what George Bush and the
numbers say when you're standing in the unemployment line?

30 million jobs he promised.  George, you're 29 million short.

>One might argue that Bill
>Clinton's attacks on the economy are a pathetic attempt to divert the
>American people from focusing on Bill Clinton's character.
>

Yes, a fool with more interest in image than substance might argue that.
A recent LA Times poll showed that Americans are overwhelmingly
UNinterested in Bush's red-baiting.  In fact, Americans are insulted by
it because it's such an OBVIOUS attempt to divert attention away from
Bush's utterly indefensible record.

>Bill Clinton and his Democrat buddies have been smearing the president
>for nearly a year now.

How?  Cite some examples.

>I love this.  As if the writer could presume to know what the American
>people want or don't want to hear about.

They're called Polls, read 'em and you'll know that this red-baiting is
a last-ditch effort by a loser.

>> *    Because the Republicans have such a miserable economic record,
>> they've resorted to lobbing hand grenade after hand grenade, hoping
>> that one will explode.  Even as he was attacking Clinton, Bush told
>> Larry King, "I don't have the facts."
>>
>
>To say that the Republicans use "hand grenades" concedes that they have
>good ammunition.  Much better than that expressed by this cheap attempt
>to take a quote out of context.

I'll agree to that.  Lies can be very effective.  Like the
128-tax-increases garbage that EVEN AFTER REPUBLICANS admitted was
misleading opted to keep using it throughout the Republican National
Convention because "it works".  That's nothing but cynical disregard for
the intelligence of the American public and I have a problem with that.
Where's the *character* in behavior like this?

By the way, that quote was very much in context, I watched the
interview.

>There's a name for this sort of attack -- name calling.  Notice how
>the writer tries to shift attention away from Clinton's qualifications
>to be commander in chief ("...he's not a candidate for the future." as
>if we now live in a warm fuzzy world with no enemies to prepare for.  
>Remember--if Clinton had been president when Iraq invaded Kuwait, it
>would be the 18th state of Iraq today.

If Clinton had been president, Iraq wouldn't have had the ability to
invade Kuwait.

>He can travel wherever he wants.  Just be up front about it.  Travel to
>the USSR was unusual for Americans in 1969.  Ross Perot couldn't get
>permission from the Soviet government to travel there, but I'll bet 
>they loved to get young, anti-war students to go there.

Ross Perot was not a tourist.

>Seriously, I'd like to know if Clinton participated in anti-war 
>demonstrations overseas.  I'd find it hard to distinguish such events from
>"anti-American demonstrations."

The Right to Life movement does it all the time in Ireland and elsewhere
in the world.  Demonstrating against your own country, tsk tsk tsk.
In 1969, demonstrating against the actions and policies of the US
government was the RIGHT and MORAL thing to do.  I won't back down on
this, complacency is *Un*American.

>One other note of interest.  Do you get the feeling from reading the 
>original post that whoever wrote it was _extremely outraged_!!!???
>I love that attitude.  It suggests that Bush's supporters have really
>hit a soft sensitive spot!  Why can't the Dems just talk about it
>without the obnoxious pretense?

Getting pissed because Bush is using his power and position in an
attempt to dupe the public AGAIN (remember Willie Horton?) is not
pretense.  And I'm not a Democrat.

>Roger Shouse
>The University of Chicago
-- 
oooooo ooo o o  o            Keath Milligan            o  o  ooooo oooo oooooo
oooo oo ooo  o   o   Prometheus Light and Sound, Inc.   o   o  o ooooooooooooo
oooooooo o oo  o         Real/Time Communications        o    o o ooo oooooooo
oooooo oooo ooo  o  internet: reaper@wixer.cactus.org  o   o  o ooo oo ooooooo
From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:42:55 GMT
Subject: Please Help
Organization: HP Western Response Center