Why I Will Probably Vote For Clinton
William B. White
WHITEWB at JCCW22.CC.SUNYJCC.EDU
Wed Oct 9 12:09:48 MDT 1996
From: NAME: Bill White
TEL: 326/371 <WHITE, BILL AT A1 AT JCCV03>
To: IN%"rushtalk at athena.csdco.com"@MRGATE at JCCW22
>Dennis asked why anybody would vote for Bill Clinton. Here are my
>1) He is more likely than Dole to appoint moderate to liberal justices to
>the Supreme Court (ie more Ruth Ginsberg's less Clarence Thomas's)
Makes sense: liberals want liberal judges. A Federal judge in Texas
recently wrote in her decision that parents' rights re: their children
cease the moment they drop their children off at school. Want more of
this kind of government intrusion between parent and child, Will?
>2) He is pro-choice and proud of it as opposed to Dole who is sometimes
Clinton panders shamelessly to poll numbers. Principle may be the
least of his concerns. Doesn't that bother you, Will?
>3) It has been shown that massive deficits can be tackled in a moderate
>way, thus preserving the social safety net and being fiscally prudent.
>Clinton is more likely to follow a moderate more patient course in deficit
To the extent that he has followed this path at all, he is indebted to
the ideas and momentum of Reps. I don't believe Clinton is committed to
anything except gaining and maintaining power. Surely, that has occurred
to you, too.
>4) I had no problem with health care reform having grown up in a
>centralized system that by every objective standard I have seen is
>superior to what you have in the US now.
Socialists (regardless of the bankrupting price) want socialistic
programs. (Read PJ O'Roarke's essay on Sweden in Rolling Stone.)
>5) Clinton is more likely to take a risk adverse environmental policy.
I don't know what this means. Is it like "risking peace"?
6) Clinton will veto any attempt to overturn the Brady bill.
The Brady bill is a cause celebre of anti-gun liberals, but
aside from infringing on our Constitutional liberties, it is an ineffective
deterent to crime, and may contribute to making decent citizens even more
vulnerable to the depredations of criminals and tyrants. Oppressive regimes
that are ascending to power and that are maintaining that ascendency have a
history of systematically and incrementally depriving citizens of their weapons.
The liberal view on this issue is most short-sighted and naive.
>7) The foreign policy of his administration has been far from a joke, the
>most damage done to America's standing in the last 4 years has been the
>Helm's - Burton bill. I am not sure you appreciate the anger that bill
>has generated in Canada and by many reports in Europe as well.
What is the ultilitarian measure of this anger? I'm sure Canadians
have a lot of things to be angry about. Many that I have met are quite
charged with a litany of grievances, one of which is high taxes and bureaucratic
snafus and runarounds in obtaining proper medical attention. Are there still
separatists in Quebec?
>8) Clinton is more likely to attack the medicare and social security
>problem in a way that in which I would approve.
Clinton has been pushed all over the board on this one. Haven't
you been following his waffling track?
>9) I remain unconvinced that his character is as questionable as portrayed
>by R.L. et al.
This is hardly an informed opinion. Even the polls reveal a majority
of voters distrust Clinton. Besides RL, there are lots of et al's.
>10) Charisma is important in a leader, Clinton has it Dole doesn't.
Dole has a long record as an effective leader. Have you ever read
personal reports written by Hitler's admirers, after they heard him speak?
Charisma junkies should buy Calgon beads and forget about being hypnotized
by personal charm.
>In addition, while both candidates are undoubtedly influenced by lobby
>groups (like Dole said "let's be honest here") I am less threatened by the
>thought of the president being influenced by the NEA and labour than I am
>by et thought of the president being influenced by the NRA, the Christian
>Coalition and big tobacco.
Are you so comfortable with the steady encroachment of government into
family life, education adgenda, economic freedom, and constitutional guarantees?
>However I really have not made up my mind. I might vote for Ralph Nader
>since I think Clinton has a protest that Clinton has not been liberal
I heartily endorse your liberal choice to vote for Nader - it's just
More information about the Rushtalk