From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Date: 25 Aug 92 22:45:54 GMT
Followup-To: ba.politics
Distribution: ba
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug25.165854.3626@island.COM>, guido@island.COM (Guido
Marx) wrote:

> Okay, so what was Mr. Bush doing for the three previous years which
> weren't presidential election years ?  It took him at least a year
> to even admit that we were in a recession.  If you can't admit that
> we have a problem, you can't do anything to fix it - can you ?

Well, you're assuming that the government SHOULD do something about
recessions.  Maybe we should just let the seasons of the economy take their
natural shape without gov't sticking its hand into it.  I am one who thinks
along these lines.
 
> Nope, great leaders manage to get people to do what they want them
> to do.  I repeat, Ronald Reagan also had to deal with a hostile 
> Congress and yet he was able to get most of his economic package
> through the Congress.  Bush hasn't been able to - I submit that this
> is an indication of his lack of leadership.  He made two promises a
> cornerstone of his campaign in 1988 1) No tax increases and 2) a
> Capital gains tax cut.  We all know what happened to both of these
> "pledges".  He's now asking the voters to "trust me" again.  Why
> should we ?  He must really think that we are stupid.

* Reagan had a Republican Senate for a while there.
* Bush raised taxes, yes, but also made a deal that helped the country
  limit its spending.
* He has tried and tried for that tax cut.  He hasn't gotten it yet.
 
> You and I clearly differ on what we think is smart.  IMHO, Pete Wilson
> has destroyed any chances that he might have had to make a run at
> the presidency.  He will be lucky to get re-elected governor.  The
> political games being played in Sacramento right now by both parties
> are disgusting.  I think that there will be a high political price to
> pay for all of the participants.

Well, when you have to have a balanced budget, when you believe that tax
increases are "bad" in a state that has high taxes already, when you
believe that deferring debt is just a tax on the future and when you
believe that education is not an untouchable thing, you HAVE to do what
Wilson has done.  He cut a deal last time, and it hurt the state.  If the
Democrats wanted a budget they'd have voted on it already.
 
> I doubt that Mr. Bush had some deep abiding trust in the Democrats
> when he first became President.  Remember, he has been in the government
> for almost as long as I have been alive, including the Congress.  He
> knows how these guys work.  I think that Bush made his "no new taxes"
> pledge in a cynical attempt to win votes, never having any intention
> of following through with it.  Again, why should we trust Bush when
> he has shown us that he will go back on a major campaign pledge at the
> drop of a hat ?

Read the August 24th issue of Newsweek.  They go into this a bit and
explain what happened with the tax increase: he didn't think it *was* a tax
increase, but soon realized that it indeed was.

--
Rick Eames
athos@apple.com
My opinions are my own, thank you very much!