Based on what I just read that you wrote, you know enough not to vote Republican in this election.
Best bet for liberty is for a Democratic president to get elected and NOT immediately be tagged, thwarted and sourly fingered early on by Republicans. For instance, GOPwingers put a stain on Clinton right out of the gate? Didn't they. Relentlessly, the GOPwingers, pushed on, never quit. Now they want to wash unproven linen from Clinton onto Gore.
But it won't work.
Ironically, even with the economy good, a solid issue, GOPwingers would prefer to stain and obfuscate the facts.
Ultimately, down the road, GOP slurs don't, won't and shouldn't work.
Reasons?
Jobs.
Republicans?
Taxes from jobs?
Would Republicans really prefer fewer jobs with less taxes? How many jobs did Republicans ever have in a recent administration?
Could it be that the increase in jobs has helped to reduce crime in our society? Should Clinton-Gore get some credit here?
Beyond this, I find the following incredible:
Why is it the Clinton-Gore Administration gets NO CREDIT for finding jobs for Cold War downsized military folk?
Is it a fact the Clinton-Gore administration nurtured a military-to-civilian transition with little to no credit? Think about it. This actually happened.
Next thought is: Would Bush be more like Ford?
After all, how many jobs did Ford get for returning Vietnam Veterans? How many jobs did Clinton-Gore get for post-Cold War returnees?
On top of that, what's the present unemployment rate? Is that rate good for Republicans in this election? I don't think so. What is the tax loss from having fewer jobs in our society, as has been the case in past Republican administrations? For that matter, what, if any, Republican administration substantially created well-paying, full-time jobs for folks?
Just imagine the feeling of serving in Vietnam, coming home and getting discharged only to find no job. Thank you who? Nixon? Ford? Republicans? Take your pick.
But, today, it remains a fact that when the Cold War ended it was the Clinton-Gore Administration's task to find meaningful jobs for the downsized military folks. Did they do it? You bet!
Interestingly, the GOPwinger folk participating on this thread won't give Clinton or Gore any credit for this, will they? Who among you will be first to do so?
I leave the question: Is it possible that with Bush it'd be like a Ford Administration?
Go ahead. Answer.
My thoughts?
Give me a job, its good income and consequent security. I'm capable of building things from there. And I won't fall prey to Bush's electioneering tax cut proposal. My good job is money enough for me, my family and what I hold precious. I don't need big interest rates for banks if the money's coming in weekly.
Still, yet, another switch in thought.
Global markets?
Clinton-Gore did OK on this, haven't they?
Poverty? Name me a recent Republican who championed fighting poverty. How many have gave to its cure?
Have you?
More down the road thinking. Even if Republican thought and instinct could survive the future of the Internet, its inherent perception of change--to a point even where becomes the question as to what a nation state actually is--could GOPwingers ever find a candidate worse than Bush to deal with this?
More thought. Are European leaders now conservative?
Would Bush get along with them? With the Middle-East? Africa? The real Latin America?
Hey! I think winks are cool too. But I don't think Bush's winks are real enough. Do you?
No doubt, Gore's gotta work on this stuff also. But I think he's better suited to it, mostly 'casue of reasons described above. |
