From: haas@wam.umd.edu (The Future Mr. Graf)
Newsgroups: alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: A "New" Reich
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:37:35 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1dk6e8INN7ud@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>
>In a previous article, v557nv8k@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu) (G) says:
>
>>Are u kidding or this is just wishful thinking?  I am getting tired
>>of the Republicans unwillingness to accept their defeat.  I can see
>>it in the interviews and their heralding that Clinton didn't really
>>win a clear majority of the popular vote, that the electoral college
>>is an old-fashioned institution that should be abolished etc.  Why
>>was not this idea expressed in 1988.  I am not sure but I think the
>>margin between Bush and Dukakis was not that wide in the popular
>
>    
>      You're right.  I'm a "Republican" but I wasn't enthusiatic
>about Bush, and he didn't have a mandate.  I don't remember anyone
>claiming he did.
>>
>
>>The Republicans were in power for 12 years.  During that time, the
>>rich got richer and the poor poorer.  As a graduate student I can 
>>attest to
>>the fact that we (full time students) did not pay taxes until the
>>famous tax reform during president Reagan.  Suddenly students
>
>
>       Sigh.  Do you really think that more taxes are a function
>of "Republicans" or "Democrats" ?  It's a function of government.
>The American people have been paying higher taxes continuously,
>regardless of who is in charge.  What I object to in Clinton 
>is what I preceived to be his calculating manner.  I suspect that
>this man BELIEVES he has a mandate from FATE to be president.
>
>    That is not the type of person I want making decisions.
>
>     I want someone who will listen, but have enough strength to
>make the hard decisions, for the GOOD of the country.  

   As far as listening, I believe that Clinton is the better man.  As
far as making hard decisions, from what I can tell, Bush is better at
making hard decissions, but I have noticed that every decission he 
makes has some "hidden agenda".  Everything he does seems to be for 
the good of him and his friends.  I do not believe that Bush was 
what the country needed.  I sincerely like Bush, as a person.  I had
the pleasure of meeting him at Ohio State, while he was still 
Vice President.  He came to me to talk, and that impressed me.  He 
is a good person, as is his wife, but I just don't think that he is 
in the best interested of the country.  I just wish that everyone would
give Bill Clinton a chance.  He is going to be the president for the 
next four years.  Support him, at least until then.  If Bush had won, 
I would expect the same behavior.  If, at the end of the four years
Clinton has done a bad job, then elect someone new.  But please at 
least give him a chance.

   I see a lot of Clinton bashing on the grounds of his campaign and
what is perceived as "false advertising".  The Bush/Quayle ticket was
just as guilty.  It's not realistic to think that a politician is going
to tell the whole truth during a campaign.  Perot was the most honest 
in his campaign, but 1) he's not a politician, and 2) he didn't make 
a lot of promises.  I hear every jump on Clinton, but Bush is not without
fault, but in his public AND private life.

   The bottom line - Please just support Clinton, for now at least.  
In four years, if you don't like him, drop him, but until then, accept
him and support him...

>want someone who *pretends* to listen until elected, then makes
>decisions based on looking good in the history books.  This man
>sees himself as a savior.  Let me remind you of a few historical
>personalities who felt the same way:  Hitler, Jim Jones, Mussolini,
>Michael Milkin, Pat Robertson.              
>
  Oh, this is a good one... Comparing Clinton to Hitler, Jim Jones, etc.
As I recall it wasn't Clinton who sent our troops to the Persian Gulf to
exterminate 300,000 iraqi troops. Yeah, I don't suppose Bush or Regan 
wanted their names in the history books.  I seem to recall a movement 
during the Reagan terms that wanted to add Regans face to Mount Rushmore.
Pretty vane.  And on what grounds can you say that he has only pretended
to listen until elected?  HE HASN'T EVEN TAKEN OFFICE YET!  I also find
it funny that you put Pat Robertson in the same category as Hitler and 
Jim Jones.  Wasn't Robertson a speaker at the Republican Convention?
Gee, if Robertson was a speaker, that would mean that Hitler and Jim Jones
were probably Republicans too...

Jeffrey
HAAS@WAM.UMD.EDU

-- 
***********************************************************************
* Jeffrey Haas     * We Come From The Land Of The Ice And Snow        *
* HAAS@WAM.UMD.EDU * From The Midnight Sun Where The Hot Springs Blow *
***********************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton