From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A78C421FED06192A@42.25.154.146.in-addr.arpa>
X-Xxdate: Wed, 27 Jan 93 13:43:59 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d15
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:47:57 GMT

In article <1k6jrsINNav9@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> Richard A. Mulac,
ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu writes:
> Even if I follow your guide of voting for a candidate based soley on
> his record and not on campaign rhetoric (following up on campaign
> promises is a good indication of character, so I assume you don't
> care about the character of the person you vote for.

BZZZZT! Read what I said again Mulac. Since I don't believe that
campaign promises are anything but voter-induced ear candy,
whether the candidate makes good on them is irrelevant to their
character. In contrast, what programs and decisions are indicated in
the candidates public record are a clear indication of their beliefs,
principles, and character.

> Also, Bush
> was ROUNDLY criticized for not believing in anything.  Based on the
> enormous amount of Clinton flip-flops, who knows what he believes
> in), Clinton had a DISASTEROUS record in Arkansas.  Bush pointed
> it out, Perot pointed it out,

Oh...well...you've convinced me.  :-/  Bush's commercials critical of
Clinton's record in Arkansas were denounced by the very sources he
used for his so-called facts. The fact that you think the other
candidates are a reputable source of proof of Clinton's incompetance
proves your naivetae.

> but the media did a cakewalk on it.
> I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who voted for Clinton
> because of his record in Arkansas.

I know at least 5 people just on this net.

FACT: Arkansas students went from 50th to 20th in standardized test
scores under Clinton's education reforms.

FACT: Arkansas went from 50th to 47th in manufacturing.

FACT: Arkansas has made modest to great strides in several catagories
despite having little in natural resources or state revenue.

FACT: The governors (Repub and Demo) voted Clinton to be the MOST
EFFECTIVE GOVERNOR in the country.

Now let's here your facts proving he was a "terrible" governor....

> Clinton is the luckiest man
> alive, having fallen into the office of President by pure chance.

Would you like to prove this statement.

> Clinton happened to be in a pack of token Democrats who were being
> thrown at Bush in a race they expected to lose.  Elder Democrats
> are kicking themselves now because they didn't take a chance and
> enter the race.  George Bush ran the WORST campaign in american 
> history and deserved to lose.

Yeah, it's funny what you get when you can't run on your record....

> But the point is that Clinton
> didn't win the election, Bush lost it.

Yeah, and he lost because he was an ineffective leader.

> 
> Like I stated in another post, I don't think Clinton has a shred
> of character, but I consoled myself after the election in the
> thought that most of Clinton's campaign promises would be good
> for the country and maybe he would do a fine job.

Since he has only been president for less than a week, he has plenty
of time to implement his programs and promises. Did you really think
that everything would get done in a week? If you did, you don't know
anything about how government works.

> Now after
> his blatant abandonment of those promises, he appears to be just
> another old guard Democrat who is placing top priority on implementing
> left-wing, liberal social policy and further addicting the public
> to the nipple of big government through increased spending.

He hasn't done anything yet! This is pure speculation on your part.
Another man with a crystal ball.... You clairvoyants get funnier by
the post.

> I would really like to hear from Clinton supporters on which Clinton
> policies were responsible for attracting their votes.  I would
> expect most of them to deal with THE ECONOMY (STUPID!), since Clinton
> himself said he would exert 'laser-like' focus on that issue.

And it is the subject he has spent the most time on since election day.
At least wait until the program is unveiled before criticizing it....
You guys were screaming for deficit reduction and he has been adjusting
his program toward increased deficit reduction. I would think you would
be happy......unless all your complaining was just partisan belly-aching.
No....that couldn't possibly be it.  :-/

> Now, how many of those policies has he abandonded or shows signs
> of abandoning?  You know, I never thought the day would come when I
> would cheer for the Congress (both Democrats and Republicans), but in
> recent days I have been.

What are you talking about????

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