From: anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Is the Honeymoon Ending?
Date: 13 Sep 92 06:41:27 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


OK, so the press has had a love affair with Clinton-Gore.  Big deal.
As long as it ends some time before the election.  The signs are already
in as the press starts to look more closely at the economic plans of 
the candidates:

1. The Newsweek article I quoted a couple of days ago blasting the Clinton 
plan as "Economic Fantasy" and the Bush plan merely as "Political Fantasy" 
(something you Perot survivors can appreciate to a degree).

2. The New Republic, pro-Clinton in general, had three articles in the most
recent issue (I just got it today) pretty critical of Clinton's possible Court 
appointees, economic plan, and possible presidency.  

[Keep in mind that these guys are, for the most part, so-called neoliberals 
(read: moderates), just like Clinton. ]

The first, "Court Test" by Jeff Rosen, criticizes Clinton for indications that 
he'll appoint activist judges (Roe v. Wade being a litmus test, eliminating even 
many liberal judges), his inexperience with choosing judges (apparently he has 
relied heavily on Hillary in Arkansas) and stick with mediocrity (his comments 
regarding Blackmun and Cuomo).  

The next article, "A Clinton Nightmare" by Mickey Kaus, draws up
a scenario in which Clinton wins the election, blows up the deficit, still faces
gridlock (this time from freshman congresspersons who want to do away with
the status quo on capital hill and defy the Democratic leadership), proposes a 
national VAT tax, overregulation runs rampant, lawsuits run wild, his health
reforms are a failure, etc. etc. all by 1995.  Kaus, in some instances, has
tongue-in-cheek.  In other instances, he embarks on flights of fancy. 
Most of the time, he just seems fearful.  Unexpected from Kaus.

Finally, Jonathan Rauch's "Supply-Side Democrat" an article commited to 
drawing parallels between Reagonomics and Clinton.  The comparisons are 
weak; they seem like afterthoughts to an article critical of Clinton.
But the criticisms of Clinton's economic plan are devastating.  Slams 
Clinton's spending increases, saying that "on the spending side, 'squishy'
is kind".  Most of his spending cuts are magic.  Regarding taxes, "His
proposals...exhibit all sorts of squishiness".  His $45 billion dollars 
from Tax Avoiding Foreign Corporations (TM) is pure fantasy, the real number
is around $1 billion per year, according to the Congressional Budget
Office.  Furthermore, soaking The Rich (TM) will only net $20 billion 
a year, by Clinton's own generous estimates.  Rauch criticizes Clinton 
for not even touching entitlements (the only means to cut the deficit)
while acknowledging that "Bush is talking about some kind of cap on 
the growth of middle-class entitlements".  Rauch says that the chance
that Clinton would "rekindle inflation" "a real possibility".  He 
concludes that Clinton "can't govern on the program he is running on".

3. Finally, Clinton has been avoiding direct contact with the press to 
avoid questions about his draft lies.

Number 3 is of marginal importance since the issue is Clinton's honesty,
and most people seem intersted in the economy.

I'm just glad economic issues are finally being discussed fairly and honestly 
by the press.  Newsweek's honestly is especially encouraging, being a little
more in the mainstream that TNR.  Hopefully, TNR's analysis will be picked up,
because, as I'm sure you've all heard in that recent poll, there is very little 
grasp of the most basic economic concepts in this country.

-anwarp
-- 
Anwar Mohammed                FREE       Graduate Student
anwar+@cs.cmu.edu              THE       School of Computer Science
Voice: +1 412 268 3043     KUWAITI       Carnegie-Mellon University
Fax:   +1 412 681 5739        POWS       Pittsburgh, PA  15213-3890
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc