From: jdsurlow@uci.edu (Jim Surlow)
Subject: Re: Why I won't vote for Clinton
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: Office of the Dean, Humanities, UC Irvine
Distribution: na
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:39:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.172523.1642@meaddata.com> king@meaddata.com (Mike King) writes:
>From: king@meaddata.com (Mike King)
>Subject: Re: Why I won't vote for Clinton
>Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:25:23 GMT
>In article <1992Aug28.153116.28827@meaddata.com>, joeg@meaddata.com writes:
>|> Clinton has placed himself in to many comprimising positions.  Whether
>|> he inhaled or not, he tried drugs.  Whether he dodged the draft or
>|> not, he received his notice and didn't comply.  I am not clear what
>|> truth lies in the allegations of his affairs.  I try not to let the
>|> allegations cloud my judgement, but given his other personal failures,
>|> I'm not sure what to believe.  These are the problems I have with the
>|> character of Bill Clinton.  Why should I look any farther?  He doesn't
>|> have the qualities I want in a leader.
>
>You should've looked farther.  When you consider all of the factors,
>Clinton has the abilities to lead this country not George Bush.
>Clinton has, in the past, done things to damage his credibility.  But
>that was the past.  It can and should only count for so much.  We have
>to look at what the candidates will do for the Country.  George Bush
>has had four years to show the American people that he can lead this
>Country and he has failed.  His theories of trickle down economics
>have only made the rich richer and the poor poorer.  One out of every
>five children live in poverty.  Unemployment continues to rise.  He is
>not and can not be the choice for the future.
>-- 
>Michael W. King 

I think we ought to look at what the president can do.  First off 
politicians propose their positions to the media regardless of what they can 
do.  For instance:  Health Care, Tax Cuts, Economic Reform, Abortion 
issues.  What can the president do on these issue without Congress?  Very, 
very little.  The president is a part of the executive branch of government, 
designed to enforce the laws.  So other than foreign policy, the 
_nomination_ of supreme court justices and the veto power to limit Congress 
what are looking for in a president?

Most likely there will be only one supreme court nomination in the next four 
years, so I don't particularly see that as a very strong issue.  Between 
Bush & Clinton who do you see vetoing the Congress porkbarrel bills more?  
Even if the Democrats control both houses of Congress & Bill Clinton wins 
the nomination, there is no way Congress will give the President a Line-Item 
Veto.  It gives up too much control.  So we will continue to have bills 
saturated with porkbarrel spending.

Regarding Foreign Policy who do you think is better?  Clinton has already 
admitted weakness.  Foreign leaders, like John Major, have praised Bush in 
the way he is in contact with European leaders.  The Bush administration has 
also brought Palestinians & Israelis leaders face to face.

I don't particularly like Bush as a president, but I will vote for him 
because he is, by far, the lesser of 2 evils.

Jim Surlow