Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Fri

10

Nov

2006

Mid-Term Election Post Mortem
Friday, 10 November 2006 06:28
by Mickey Z.

So, the Democrats have a majority in Congress. The bad times are over. The evil ones have been vanquished. Let's go ahead and declare world peace, an end to global warming, and‹while we're at it‹the cancellation of The O'Reilly Factor. I mean, what could be better, right? Hmm, we could also have a Democratic president to go along with a Democratic Senate and Democratic House. Can you say Hillary Rodham Clinton, boys and girls? Imagine that: A pinko by the name of Clinton running the White House with a merry band of liberals calling all the shots in Congress. How grand it would be...

Well, if you want a good idea of how things may go under the above scenario, you might want to reflect back upon the years of 1993 and 1994 because that's when President William Jefferson Clinton was enjoying the "advantage" of a Democratically-controlled Congress.

In just two years, the notorious liberal managed to abandon his pledge to consider offering asylum to Haitian refugees, renege on his promise to "take a firm stand" against the armed forces' ban on gays and lesbians, and back away from his most high-profile campaign issue: health care. He also signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), increased the Pentagon budget by another $25 billion, fired Jocelyn Elders, dumped Lani Guinier, ordered the bombing of Iraq and the Balkans, renewed the murderous sanctions on Iraq, ignored genocide in Rwanda, deported hundreds of thousands of "illegal" immigrants, and passed a crime bill that gave us more cops, more prisons, and 58 more offenses punishable by death. (All this came before the much-hyped Republican "revolution" in 1994. Can someone please explain to me why the right wing didn't like this guy?)



Then we have the environment-allegedly Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore's domain. In 1996, David Brower, former president of the Sierra Club, penned a Los Angeles Times op-ed entitled, "Why I Won't Vote for Clinton." In this piece, Brower offered a litany of Clinton administration moves, which utterly smashed the public image of Bubba and Gore as "pro-environment." Some of these moves include: The passage of the salvage logging rider, the continuation of the use of methyl bromide, the weakening of the Endangered Species Act, the lowering of grazing fees on land, subsidizing Florida's sugar industry, weakening the Safe Drinking Water Act, reversing the ban on the production and importation of PCBs, and allowing the export of Alaskan oil.

These, and other proud Clinton/Gore accomplishments, led Brower to declare that the dynamic Democratic duo had "done more harm to the environment in three years than Presidents Bush and Reagan did in 12 years." That's Bush the Elder he's talking about, of course. As for Bush the Lesser, consider this: the total logging cut in national forest during his first three years of Dubya's reign was less than the annual logging cut in national forests was under Clinton (Bill, not Hillary).

This story had both a moral and a lesson to be learned, if we are willing to hear it before 2008. There is one primary difference between the Democrats and Republicans: They tell different lies to get elected.

More from this author:
Who killed Michael Moore? (Why and what's the reason for?) (10793 Hits)
(Inspired by the recent assassination of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya) There's no shortage of outrage on the Left. Plenty...
"Boiling Point" - Eroding Freedom: From John Adams to George W. Bush (12955 Hits)
Put a frog into a pot of boiling water, the well-known parable begins, and out that frog will jump to escape the obvious danger. Put that same...
Read This Before You Vote (11859 Hits)
If one were to believe the hype, nothing less than the fate the civilized world is riding on the results of the upcoming midterm elections....
Nukes: Iran and North Korea are not the problem (13660 Hits)
by Mickey Z. Thanks to the nuclear aspirations of North Korea and Iran, there's no shortage of rhetoric along these lines: "We can't let...
When "anti-war" doesn't mean anti-war (6291 Hits)
by Mickey Z. A casual stroll through most major U.S. cities would provide ample opportunity to encounter numerous stickers, buttons,...
Related Articles:
Catapulting the Propaganda with the Washington Post (11752 Hits)
by Chris Floyd The ever persipacious Angry Arab, As'ad AbuKhalil, plucks out the hidden (or not-so-hidden) propaganda in a passing...
Threats to Hugo Chavez As Venezuela's December Presidential Election Approaches (10703 Hits)
by Stephen Lendman On December 3, 2006 voters in Venezuela will again get to choose who'll lead them as President for the next six...
It's Election Eve, Do You Know Where Your Country Is? (7728 Hits)
by Frank Lindorff When you go into the voting booth tomorrow, here are a few things you need to think about. First of all, this is not a...
Election Postmortem: What's Next? (7929 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff Here's the way to look at the Election Day outcome: If the U.S. were a parliamentary democracy, Bush would be history. Our...
Election 2006: Been Down So Long It Looks Like Up To Me (8442 Hits)
by Chris Floyd Ordinarily, the elevation of a gaggle of corporate bagmen, spine-free time-servers and craven accomplices of tyranny and...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (1)add comment

Jimmy Montague said:

0
Yeah, yeah, ooohhhhh yeaaaaahhhhh!
See what condition our condition is in.

You are right. Don't let anybody tell you different. The Clintons are not Democrats. They're Southern Democrats, which means they're more conservative than most Republicans. The GOP hated the Clintons because the Clintons usurped the GOP's agenda, leaving Dole, Gingrich, et al. nothing legitimate to bitch about.
 
November 10, 2006 | url
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top