From: mattb@ctron.com (Matt Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.music.gdead
Subject: Re: bush, (and 1996)
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:36:09 GMT
Reply-To: mattb@olympus.ctron.com (Matt Brown)
Organization: Cabletron Systems INc.

First OFAS (obligatory first amendment statement): This post in is in no way
intended to suggest that anybody should be censored. After that, it's open
season.

I can only add a few nuggets to Bruce's "pin the tale on the conservative"
analysis

(Bruce Quaglia) writes:
>bjpc@engin.umich.edu writes:
>>don't get me wrong, i do support bush.
>>i just wish he did something.
>>look seriously at Jack Kemp, the secretary of HUD.  he is doing

IMO:
Finally something intelligent.  After Bush and Danny get stomped
watch for a Kemp/Weld repub ticket in 96, to make up for the pro-life fiasco
of this year.  Take a look at the GOP platform! It is truely astounding. It
is full of raving; it is vitiperative nonsense.  Their only hope is if Willie
Horton moves to Arkansas :-)

>>a good solid job.  baker is doing wonderfully on the international front.

Was.

>(Bruce on Kemp)

Yes. And when Danny slinks back to Indiana in disgrace, They'll bring Jack back

>>tell you the truth i am surprised with all the criticism i have been receiving

Pretty naive.  What would you expect from "flaming" liberals?
This isn't alt.republicans.for.garcia, you know.

>>like you and me taking responsibility of our own space.  look at the 1000
>>points of light program.  what do ya'll think that is about?

Too bad we never found out.  Like most of Bush's campaign dogshit, he never
followed through.

Opps.  I take that back.  He followed through on "good jobs at good wages"
He just didn't tell us he meant "for Mexico"

>I'll tell you: complete abdication of any responsibility for any of the 
>traditional services that the government has provided to the people and
>for which we have all paid taxes. George Bush's policies have never been
>about getting the goverment off of anybody's back besides that of Industry.

Not true Bruce.  He got government off the backs of the Rich also.

>He and Reagan's terms have been one long assault on civil liberties.
>Tax and Spend is nothing more than a rhetorical litany the republican
>supporters chant under their breath when the polls are bad, it's got 
>nothing at all to do with Clinton's stated economic policies.

"Liberal" is a four-letter word that means "not a wealthy, racist, pro-lifer"
(I'm just exaggerating for fun.  Actually, I'm against abortion itself, but
 I don't believe I should dictate that personal moral judgement to any or all
 people)

>>trickle down economics isn't the best idea, but it works all right.
>>if the business can't expand and grow, who will hire the jobless?
>>who has brought some sense of peace and tranquility to israel?
>>
>George Bush called it "voodoo economics" when he was running against
>Reagan, and in fact Clinton's plans are closer to a legitimate model
>of trickle down economics <such as what Kemp introduced to Reagan before
>Reagan had ever heard of it> than the Reagan/Bush form which simply
>uses the model as an excuse to "reform" the tax-codes so that the
>middle -class and poor bear the brunt of the burden and the wealthiest
>portion of the revenue base are freed of their responsibilities.

On target again, Bruce.
I'm sure 25% of the population of New York City would agree (that's the
latest welfare figure; but I guess Dan would say that they could all get
jobs at a Burger King in Indiana, right? So who is perpetuating the welfare
state? Not George "Kinder and Gentler to Japan, China, and Mexico" Bush.

>>bush's leadership can only go so far.

After all, a bottomless pit is only so deep!

>>why doesn't anybody blame congress?  they are the ines who make the laws!!
>>forgot that didn't you?  who has been in control of congress for the past
>>four years??  sad to say, democrats.  what have they done??
>>not a whole heck of a lot, except for the banking scandal, forgot the post
>>office scandal, keating five......
>>
> All that Bush has done has been to blame congress! His leadership? He's
> never given us any, there has never been a bigger poll-watching waffler
> in the white house. Blame congress for everything and claim personal 
> responsibility for the end of the cold war, and the Persian Gulf victory-
> if he had any leadership or competent foreign policy, there would never
> have been any Persian Gulf conflict much less a victory that rings 
> pretty hollow now anyway. The banking "scandal" and the post office
> "scandal" are both completly bullshit. Neither of them cost the 
> american tax-payer one thin dime...the issue was blown out of proportion
> by the republican machine as it looked for a new angle to play.
> The S&L crisis and the arms-for-hostages deals are the real travestys
> and Bush is into both of those up to his scrawny little neck, his greatest
> skill has been to dodge any responsibility for any of these- he makes
> the teflon-don seem like the velcro-don by comparrison.

Never heard it said better, Bruce. Though almost as frenzied as my comments.
What has the Veto King done since his NH threat to join battle with congress
if they didn't pass his plan before March? Nada.

>>in whole people need to take control of their space and clean it up!!
>>i think bush does a better job of allowing people to do that and will make
>>a far better president than clinton would!!

Right. After all, look at all he's done for Boston Harbor after his election
year complaints and "environmental president" claims.  Even the Republican
Governor of Mass, the above mentioned Bill Weld, is complaining.

And look at how much help he and Homeboy John (Sununu) gave New Hampshire.
                   
(deleted request for e-mail continuance, and rebutal by Bruce)

At least the initial response should be public, just like the initial post.
From there on, e-mail is fine.
  
Matt
It's just good clean fun, after 12 years of GOP control, to let loose a bit.
And I've said it before, but I just don't see political discussion as clutter 
here.  After all, how many Dead concerts do you see in Jesse Helmsland?