From: kevin@drogges.tti.com (Kevin Carothers)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Who cares if he inhaled!ISSUES MATTER
Date: 21 Jul 92 07:11:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.

In article <1992Jul20.224533.25539@infonode.ingr.com> haefner@infonode.ingr.com (Mark W. Haefner) writes:
%>Jerry Reno (Nobody N. Nowan) glreno@afterlife.ncsc.mil
%>                             reno@cps.msu.edu
%>soon-to-be-unemployed computer science student --- please help
%
%Well then Jerry, logic would dictate that it would get monumentally
%worse, and actually surpass the depression of the 30's!
%
%By the way, this recession was felt less by the average family than
%the "recession" we went through under Carter.

 More ramblings...
 
 That wasn't recession. That there was Stagflation: A
 stagnant economy with an inflation chaser. The Carter administration 
 woefully shot themselves in the foot by trying to "micro-manage" a U.S.
 energy policy. But then again, Carter micro-manages EVERYTHING (to this 
 very day) - I was once good friends with his communications officer. He 
 said Carter was more concerned about who played on the tennis court than 
 he was with 21% interest rates. 

 As far as I'm concerned, Carter illegitimatized the democratic party 
 for an entire generation. I think all the fogginess about the mid-
 seventies is a signal that people have forgotten the period, and are 
 again willing to give the democrats a whirl :-) For those of you who 
 remember, the vast majority of the economic woes  of the mid-seventies
 were the direct result of high gas prices. We had $1.75 per gallon gas
 because Carter simply couldn't cut a foriegn policy deal to save his
 life. So he tried to utilize the gas, coal, solar, and petroleum resources
 to the best of his abilities. Unfortunately, it was both too-little-too-late,
 and completely unaffectual on the economy because it was based on outcomes 
 which  WAY into the future. The foriegn policy deals HAD to be made, and 
 he simply couldn't do it. He could cut a deal Macon, GA, but was a little
 fish in a big pond in Washingto (with a republican controlled congress).
 In pops Reagan (and Bush. Reaganomics would have not worked without Bush.
 I sincerely believe that Reagan would have been  NOBODY without the 
 Bushmeister). 

 I, like anyone who spent half their life in the seventies at a gas 
 station and used a credit card for it's "low" interest rates hated
 the democrats for it with a passion. Reagan was the economic cocaine
 of the eighties. In the nineties we're experiencing the after-the-trip
 bummer. Clint is offering a kind of "rehab" program. Bush is still trying
 to sell economic "marching powder" :-)

 I'm personally feeling brave enough to try a democrat on in the White House. 
 Pretty much all of the rest of the world is in as bad of shape as we are, and
 frankly the thought of global thermo-nuclear war is a lot less potent than
 it was (although I could pontificate on that for hours too :-).

 My vote for Clinton is a statement that I think Quayle is a lot 
 closer to the presidency than we all might think. Bush has Thyroid,
 Glaucoma, and other related illnesses. He also doesn't eat his vegetables...

 Sure. Clint could break our hearts the way Carter did - But frankly, these
 are pretty scary times. My vote for Clinton is also actually a vote against 
 Bush and his washed-out 20-years too-old political policy, and that bozo 
 V.P. of his that can't spell simple words wright :-)


--
Kevin Carothers   {psivax,philabs,retix,quad1}!ttidca!kevin
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:35880 alt.folklore.urban:19736