From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: A few things in Re: The big flaw in Clinton's Vietnam scenario
Date: 7 Sep 92 23:49:37 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) writes:
|eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
|>trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell) writes:
|>:elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) writes:
|>:>1.  He's pro-choice with restrictions. He's not abortion on demand. While n
|>:>a minority view, it's one that could give him trouble with the NOW folks.
|>:    Once again, I have to ask, who the hell else are they going to vote for?
|>       Ok, I assume we're talking about Bill. He may not be personally
|> in favor of abortion on demand, but why is he publicly advocating that
|> he will have a litmus test for Supreme Court justices regarding choice?
|> Saying that Mario Cuomo is qualified to be on the Supreme Court to me is
|> one of the most stupid things I've heard Clinton say!
|
|Oh, I don't think so.  Talk about the perfect sop to Mario's ego.  Clinton
|didn't say he would appoint Mario, just that he'd make a good justice.  It's
|hard for that asshole in Albany to keep mouthing off about Clinton after such
|nice things have been said about him. That's one less problem behind Clinton's
|back.  Now, if someone could just shut up Charlie Wrangel...

Agreed about the bit about Mario's ego. But you're right: Clinton said he'd
make a good justice. That should indicate to you what Clinton is looking for
with regards to people he would consider to be on the Supreme Court. (Humor:
if Marchbishop Cuomo decides cases as quickly as he decides to run for the
Presidency, we'll have quite a swift judicial system.)

|>:>2. He's for raising taxes.  Minority view, if you ask the GOP.
|>:    Obviously not, looking at the polls.  Popular perception is that he's on
|>:for raising taxes among the upper 2% who aren't paying enough now.
|>       Sorry. I don't like this "class envy" politics that Clinton is
|> using to "buy" votes from middle-class Americans. I am not a member of
|> this upper 2%, but I sure want to get there! As I've said, if you soak
|> the rich, you drown the poor.
|Hmmm...and the Republicans don't play on class differences?  Bush tries to
|'buy' votes from the middle class with all of this 'family values'
|fearmongering.  One is no better than the other.
But the family values debate isn't pitting the upper class against the
other, and the economic plans of the candidates are going to take precedence
over any "family values remedial course" when the appropriate man gets into
the White House. When you hear Republicans criticize the economic plan,
Clinton and Gore say they're only going to tax the wealthiest 2%. They used
to have a middle-class tax cut in their program, but they scrapped that
idea after the end of the primaries.

I only point this out because we've heard a lot in the mainstream media about
how Republicans always use "divisive" politics. I have not heard any critique
about Democrats using similar strategies. I don't intend to pardon the
Republicans for anything, but I want to say that the Democrats are doing
the same things and getting away with it without any critique.


-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck (Duke BME '93)		eyc@acpub.duke.edu
I'm too busy for my class, too busy for my clubs, too busy for my work.
I'm too busy for my mail, too busy for my news, too busy for my life.
I'm too busy for this .sig. 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:4712 alt.politics.elections:12842 talk.politics.misc:44807 alt.rush-limbaugh:4569