From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Date: 15 Sep 92 06:17:07 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In <12290@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>In <1992Sep13.072748.28109@Princeton.EDU> David Marc Nieporent writes:
>>In <12250@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep10.204740.11450@oracle.us.oracle.com>, rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers) writes:
>>>> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
># ## #All the liberals on the national scene today want to raise taxes.

># ## Please define "all" and "liberals".
  
># ## Or refrain from such mind-bogglingly senile statements.
  
># But you don't understand.  All of Clayton Cramer's statements on the net
># are mind-bogglingly senile.  No :-), unfortunately.
 
># #Clinton, Kennedy, Boxer, Cranston.
 
># Since when is Cranston on the national scene today?  And since when is
># listing 4 Democrats substantiating the claim that all liberals want to
># raise taxes?

>Clinton is the only one of those three that wouldn't be proud to
>call himself a liberal.  (That's because he's running for President,
>and wants to win).

That's because he's never been a liberal, by most liberal people's
definition of the term, but rather a moderate.  Only in the last 6
months has ANYONE ever referred to Bill Clinton as a liberal.

He founded the DLC in 1980, and has been in the conservative wing of the
party ever since.

Let's see: pro-death penalty, pro-WOD, anti govt-funding of abortions,
anti-national health insurance, pro-gulf war, not very strong
environmentally.  Liberal?  I don't think so.

># #In fact, I doubt you can name a single prominent Democrat who opposes
># #tax increases, now that Sen. Proxmire has retired.
 
># You say, thereby switching the subject from "liberals" to "Democrats,"

>Are there non-liberal Democrats?  The last one I saw was Rep. Doug
>Bosco.  He didn't last.

Sam Nunn.  David Boren.  Joe Lieberman.  Those are just the first three
that come to mind.

># and also changing "*wanting* to raise taxes" with "not opposing tax
># increases."
 
># [I daresay all Democrats *want* there to be no taxes (if for no other
># reason than winning reelection.)  Many, however, feel that spending $1.4
># trillion a year and only collecting $1 trillion is sheer idiocy.]

>Odd.  But nearly all Republicans agree.  So why does a Congress
>dominated by liberals (Democrats) keep voting for budgets that
>spend more than comes in, and that keeps raising taxes (1982,
>1986, 1990)?

Probably for the same reason that a Republican president keeps proposing
budgets that spend more than comes in, and keeps signing bills that
raise taxes (1982, 1986, 1990). 

BTW, in 1982, it's hard to make a good claim that Congress was dominated
by liberals.  The Senate was under Republican control, and the House was
basically run by a coalition of Republicans and Southern Democrats.)

In 1986, the Senate was also under Republican control, although the
House was clearly more liberal.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1992 World Series Champions
niepornt@phoenix.    | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
   princeton.edu     | Brady Anderson 1992 AL MVP
Vote Clinton/Gore '92.   Four more months!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45497 ca.politics:7800 ba.politics:5329