From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: the US elections...
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 6 Nov 92 05:22:54 GMT


In article <gate.LD0PTB1w165w@pil.UUCP> alizard@pil.UUCP writes:
>
>WE WON!!! As I type, Bush is conceding. An important battle has
>been won. The war for America's future has NOT been won.
> 
>I do not know if Clinton is going to keep his e-mail address. I'll let people 
>know if he keeps it or gets a new one.  

As much as I would LOVE to have the guy's e-mail address so I can send
him multiple congratulations, this sounds like a poor idea.  OF course,
if you want to give me his address, I wouldn't mind . . . ;-).  Or are
you just shitting us all?

>Areas to watch in a Clinton Administration:

>1. Gun control. If you feel as I do that it's a bad idea, make a
>habit of contacting the White House...

I do not feel as you do.  Guns I have no problem with -- but there is no
reason in HELL why any sane individual should have an assault weapon, or
why the gov't shouldn't check on you a little, or at least give you a
handling course.  Jesus, what do they make you go through when you buy a
car, a mere device to haul your ass from point A to point B? 

>2. Censorship. Tipper Gore is the Vice President's wife. She is
>potentially much more dangerous than Marilyn Quayle, especially
>as her husband, unlike Dan Quayle, is going to be allowed input
>at the highest levels of power.

Al Gore, bless him, has never given me any indication that he carries
Tipper's politics anywhere near him, or that he uses his position as an
excuse to push her ideas; though, if a little input DIDN'T occur, I'd be
frankly surprised.  

Marilyn Quayle accomplished absolutely nothing, aside from managing her
husband's sorry-ass campaign for Goddess knows how long.  I can't expect
the First Lady But One to be any different now.  Besides, Tipper stirred
up plenty of trouble before without being any where near the White
House.  I'm not concerned.  (This, however, is not a shock since I love
Al Gore.  Read the man's book -- it will make you love him, too!  The
guy talks in the beginning about learning about all the shit that's
happening to the env. and trying to talk about it in the Senate and
getting furious and frustrated as all hell when he realizes that they
just don't care.  He sounded like Cassandra, with whom I empathize
greatly.  Unless he moons the audience at the MTV awards, I am not going
to dislike him.  Tipper is a twerp, but you can't get him without her,
and I'm willing to take the *minimal* risk to get someone who really cares
about the planet.)   

>3. War on Drugs. In order to keep his promises on crime and the
>budget deficit, we MUST stop the war and bring the boys home. The
>war is costing so much at the Federal, state, and local levels
>that it's a $100,000,000,000 + a year (including spending on
>prison/jail construction) on American resources that now, more
>than ever, must be stopped. We can't afford it if the government
>is going to spend money on economic stimulation, health care, and
>rebuilding infrastructure. More to the point, the money spent on
>the War on Drugs has resulted in the price of crack dropping by a
>factor of 4. We need to stop this before they start giving the
>product away.

Pray tell, you see no interaction between economic stimulation and
drgus?  People get stoned when there's nothing better for them, and when
they have no other way of making money.  Health care similarly affects
drugs -- what do you do when you have such huge problems in your life
but can't do anything about them?  All things are interrelated.  

And, trust me.  They won't give the product away.  This is a business,
as much as anything else.  If a huge new diamond deposit is found
somewhere, the price of diamonds drops through the floor and DeBeer's
goes out of business.  The so-called War on Drugs is the best thing that
ever happened to the drug-dealing, gun-toting assholes.  It insures a
limited and highly expensive supply of what they sell.

No, I'm not advocating necessarily legalizing the hard drugs, like
heroin and crack.  But I am starting to wonder if, logically, that is
not the only real long-term solution.  It galls me to have to "give in"
like that, but fuck gall and fuck pride.  We have a problem to solve.  
(The soft drugs, like marijuana, have no business being illegal -- and
you are talking to someone who has NEVER smoked a single joint.  I'm
starting to think I'm the only human left in North America who hasn't
smoked or ever been drunk.  Ah, well . . . who cares?) 

>This is also, with Bush no longer able to appoint more Supreme
>Court justices, the biggest threat to civil liberties at a
>national level we have left.

Again, I am not concerned.  Perhaps that simply means I am already
expecting the worst.  (I think Willie had best take a page from FDR's
book and find out how the HELL he got re-elected after Hoover got
bounced.  The economy sure as hell hadn't picked up then, either, and
four years later, he was right back in.  What did he do, and how can it
be altered to fit Clinton's needs for today?)  

>4. The Religious Right organizations and their stealth candidates
>that they are bringing up at the local levels. Their kind of
>local organization literally took the GOP away from its
>"moderate" majority. They are running for city councils, school
>boards, and other political posts that largely determine how
>local services are delivered, how our schools are run and what
>is taught there, and provide a training ground for candidates for
>higher office. I have no objections for Christian viewpoints
>being represented for candidates for public office. I DO object
>to candidates who have a moderate agenda for a public office and
>a real agenda for the hard core Christians. These people can
>steal our rights while attention is being paid to "top of ticket"
>issues.

Yaaaaaaggh!  I know.  For me, though, abortion is a top of ticket issue,
as it is for most women.  If the men tend to ignore it or poo-poo it,
you can depend on us in the more liberal areas to shove it out in the
open. 

>5. Independent candidates and new political parties. A
>fundamental principle has been discovered. If an independent
>third party can come up with enough money (note- political
>candidate ad rates are lowest available commericial rates), it
>can buy large blocks of national TV time and get instant
>credibility on a national scale. Perot, Marrou, and even what's
>his name from Natural Law Party became national presences. Look
>for more of this.

Agreed, adn this may very well sap the strength out of the right-wing.
Perot got a lot of attention from the moderate conservatives who were
scared or felt sold-out by Bush's bootlicking and kowtowing to the
religious right.  If Perot does what he suggested he might -- forms a
third party -- we could see moderate conservatives (most of them)
flocking to him in droves, and leaving the Repubs holding the Bible and
not nearly as much money as they had before.

>6. We need to keep Clinton's feet to the fire on his campaign
>promises... health care, economic growth, targeting R&D...

I want mostly to see EFFORT on his part here -- real, honest, sincere
EFFORT.  I don't expect he'll accomplish anything in a mere four years,
so I don't know how hot the fire should be.  I don't want to fry the
poor guy's nards, since even a sincere effort could meet with sinking
(and it will take time for improvements to show), but I want him to
remember what he said.  AND I want some environmental muck-racking on
Gore's part; that's a major reason why I voted for them. 

Blessings,
Janis 

Xref: sparky alt.pagan:12548 alt.magick:5735