From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Pro-Choice
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: tx
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:39:14 GMT

In <ZNlxr*JQ0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:

>In article <1992Aug14.154234.25597@NeoSoft.com>, Doug Andersen writes:

>> In article <Ee2vr*3P0@caleb.UUCP>, jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>> > > Such as . . .?
>> > 
>> > 1.  The VP has to pass a litmus test on abortion.  He MUST support abortions in
>> >     all cases.  That is why Gore was chosen instead of Hamilton (Willie's first
>> >     choice.)  Hamilton said publicly that the Pennsylvania law was reasonable.
>> >     So, he was out.

I've never heard Clinton say that.

>>  
>> How is that any different than the Repubs?  Any Republican VP essentially
>> has to be pro-life.

>I have never heard the President say that.

>> > 
>> > 2.  He wants to raise taxes on the "rich" (actually the middle class.)
>> > 
>>  
>> What is your evidence for that?

>He said so many times.

I've never heard this, unless you consider $200k/year to be 'middle
class'. 

>> > 3.  He favors DC statehood.  (i.e. 2 more liberal Senators.)
>>  
>> Whether or not the people of DC deserve to have representation in Congress
>> should be decided apart from the political tendencies of those citizens.
>> Don't you think it's a little sleazy to figure out how a group is going
>> to vote, and then decide whether or not you want to franchise them with
>> basic rights that all Americans should have?

>That is what the Democrats have done.  They want the votes.  DC was never
>intended to be equivalent to a state.

Why, pray tell, should people in Washington D.C. basically not be
citizens of a state?  Originally, I don't think D.C. was envisioned as
HAVING a permanent population.  Well, times change.  Why, pray tell,
should people in Washington D.C. not be entitled to a voice in
Congress?  Just because you don't like what you think their politics
will be?

>> > 6.  He says he is going to "build infrastructure."  Translation:  tax more and
>> >     spend much more than is taxed.
>> > 
>>  
>> Again, how is that any different from Bush?  Don't you feel a little
>> silly complaining about how Clinton might spend when Bush has increased
>> domestic spending faster than any president since Johnson.

>Not Bush, CONGRESS!  ALL spending bills must originate in the House.

And they all must be signed by the President or be overridden by a 2/3
vote.  George Bush has never had a veto overturned, so tell me again
how it's all Congress.

>> > 7.  He wants to rape the national defense in order to pay for more social programs.
>> > 
>>  
>> In case you haven't noticed, the world has changed.  Do you really think
>> we need to continue our massive welfare-for-defense contractor program,
>> given that our primary enemy has fallen apart.

>There are other enemies (and potential enemies) out there.  Also, if Jesse and
>friends get their way, we may need the military to put down riots here.

>> > 8.  He thinks the solution to the LA riots is to buy off the rioters with more
>> >     of our tax dollars.
>>  
>> President Bush proposed the same thing!  

>He was wrong.  However, Clinton wants to do much more of it.

Evidence?  Evidence that George Bush has recognized his 'wrongness'?

>> > 12.  He was against Desert Storm (at least until the public overwhelmingly
>> >      supported it.)
>> > 
>>  
>> So was Buchannan.  Does that make Buchannan a bleeding liberal?  Better

>Buchanan was an exception.  Most of the liberal Democrats were adamantly against
>Desert Storm.

Yes, all those horrible folks like Al Gore (no, wait, Al Gore was for
it).  Yes, and such noted 'liberals' as Ross Perot were against it.

>> be careful on this on by the way.  It's becoming more and more clear
>> that we didn't accomplish much.  Iraq is building up again and has 

>Kuwait is free again.  I think that is a great accomplishment.

Kuwait wasn't 'free' BEFORE Iraqi tanks rolled in and it isn't 'free'
now. 


-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.