From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
X-Xxdate: Wed, 27 Jan 93 09:10:39 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d15
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:14:44 GMT

In article <ATAYLOR.93Jan26172655@gauss.nmsu.edu> Nosy, ataylor@nmsu.edu
writes:
> <In article <1993Jan25.163710.2788@kadsma.kodak.com>
pajerek@telstar.kodak.com 
> (Don Pajerek) writes:
> <   In article <1993Jan25.144828.18072@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J.
LaFave 
> <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
> 
> <   [article deleted]
> 
> <>These arguements about "promises" are either mere partisan fru-fru,
> <>or show a complete lack of understanding of the realities of politics.
> 
> 	Ho, ho, ho. 
> 	LaFave had no problem taking the Shrub to task for breaking
> 	promises, but whine in his beer when Clintoon is asked
> 	to "pay up"!

At least I waited until Bush was president and had actually done something
(or failed to do something) before I took him to task. I even tried to
give
him most of his term before I passed judgement. My complaints were based
on facts, not on unsubstantiated predictions of the future. Let me ask
a question. Did you hold Bush up to the same standards you are forcing on
Clinton? Did you take him to task the same way for breaking most of his
campaign promises? I can tell you that, despite my criticisms of Bush's
effectiveness as president, I never criticized him for not keeping all
of his campaign promises. Campaign promises are ear-candy for the masses.
It's the public record that really counts.

> 
> <   Judging by the volume of persistent, hysterical anti-Clinton
postings
> <   from sources such as Mulac et.al., it's going to be a long four
years
> <   on t.p.m.
> 
> 	HAH!
> 	Judging by Pajerek's hysterical reaction to criticism of
> 	his "King", it will indeed be a long four years on tpm..
> 	for Pajerek.

If the criticism was based on anything but partisan whining maybe
Mr. Pajerek wouldn't mind so much. This country
needs desperately for Clinton to do a good job and for all of us to
provide constructive help and criticism in this daunting task.
He is going to be president for the next four years. period.
Given the situation, you nose-picking, whiners are not only an
irritant, but could be a detriment to making any real improvements
by taking our eye off the task at hand.

If you think you have ideas, present them. If you have constructive
criticism which will help Clinton do a better job, by all means present
it. However, if all you can do is whine, bitch, and moan because
your candidate lost, then you are less than worthless.

> 
> <   The frivolity of some of these postings if laughable. For example,
> <   'DAY ONE: WHERE'S THE PLAN?': I suppose Mulac et.al. would be happy
> <   if Clinton *had* submitted a 'plan to save the economy' on 'DAY
ONE'?
> 
> <   Yeah, right.
> 
> 	Who knows?
> 	But the fact is, Clintoon PROMISED an economic plan to send
> 	to Congress "on day one".
> 	Pajerek and LaFave want to pretend that this promise being
> 	broken is "no big deal"....but they probably know otherwise.

Here's a clue for you nosy, free of charge. ALL politicians make
unrealistic promises during a campaign. Bush did it, Perot did
it, and Clinton did it. If you are voting just based on campaign
promises, especially ones like this, then you are being
extremely naive. With a system as dynamic as the economy,
anybody who knows anything about it knew that adjustments
would have to be made before the program could be presented.
Would it make you feel better if he presented the plan, without
adjustments to account for current trends, so he could keep an
irrelevant and rather trivial campaign promise?

The electorate is to blame for this situation
because we won't elect politicians who don't make such
promises to office. We force them to throw marshmallow dreams
at us (guraranteed tax cuts, easy fixes) in order to be elected.

Fortunately, candidates have something more substantive to
examine when deciding how to vote. It is called a record. In it
you will find the true nature of a man---how he voted, what he vetoed,
what programs he presented, which bills he signed, what experience
he has, the results of his decisions,....

> 
> <   I'm glad, for my nervous system's sake, that I'm not as full of hate
> <   as some of these people, who at this pace will be totally incoherent
> <   in a few more weeks.
> 
> 	Indeed, some folks may create an entire newsgroup just for
> 	their hatred....or has Pajerek not met Harelb?

I think you are being hypocritical....

Norman

Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Senior Engineer
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company




When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc