Jeff,
You make some valid points. And yes, I do have that impression of the American public--what they are indicating in the polls says it all. Let's face it, Clinton hasn't accomplished anything of note in the past four years except for keeping his and Hillary's name out of any Grand Jury indictments. The economy is OK, though all of the people who have a legit reason to bitch about it--the people who have been victims of downsizing and corporate restructuring--seem to think their problems are the result of Newt and the vicious Republicans, after all, it is Bill that "feels our pain..." If they only knew the truth--look at Clinton's whole life--it is a story of shameless self promotion and an insatiable quest for power. He's never shown anything that would make you believe he really wants to make things better for the average Joe. And everytime he faces a choice between doing the right thing or looking out for #1, he always takes the latter. He dodged the draft when his peers were getting killed in Vietnam. He sits back and lets his Arkansas buddies go to jail in the self-serving vein of "I'll do anything it takes to remain in power, regardless of how bad my friends and supporters get hurt in the process." He turns on the Democratic leaders who helped him get elected, and takes on welfare, NAFTA, et. al agendas--"hey, screw the people that got me here--I'm looking out for #1!" just to ensure his re-elections.
You're right about people not caring about his deficiencies in moral values, but maybe they should. Maybe it doesn't matter on the surface if a president sleeps around on his wife and engages in shady real estate deals that end up in S&L's going broke. That's his personal life. But shouldn't people look at these actions and think, "Wow, he screws his friends, even on his wife--can he really be trusted with anything of importance?" The old axiom, "If he'll steal for you, he'll also steal from you..." comes to mind.
I will agree with you that the Republicans sometimes seem to be ruled by the vocal minority. Guys like Ralph Reed, with their own narrow agendas, have given the Reps in general a bad name with the public. Even I had some early misgivings early in the campaign when it looked like goons such as Reed and Pat Buchanan were going to have a big handle on the Republican positions. These guys go against the original agenda of the Republicans--smaller government and less regulation. The Moral Majority would make you think that they are against the 1st Amendment and want to be involved with the ways you live your life. If the Reps stuck with the idea of less govt, less taxes and less regulation, and ignored the religious wackos, Ma and Pa would have a much better feeling about voting Republican. |
