-Caveat Lector-

Worse Than The Clinton Years
Implementing Bubba's Liberal Agenda
By: Dave Franklin

If conservative voters thought that the Supreme Court gave America a "lesser of two 
evils" when it ruled that George Bush won the Florida election in 2000, two years 
since that fateful decision have proven otherwise. It all began with Bush's support 
for Ted Kennedy's bill that expanded federal involvement in education, his push for 
amnesty as a response to illegal aliens, and the President's announcement he would 
sign John McCain's campaign finance anti-speech non-reform.

Not that we'd have gotten any better from a President Gore. But if we could measure 
the difference between President Bush and former President Clinton, one might surmise 
what used to be "less than a dime's worth of difference" has depreciated to less than 
the value of a share in Enron stock. So who was surprised when Bush announced he'd 
propose new gun rules that restrict clips to 10 rounds and add to the BATF's budget? 
It's just what America needs, more jack-booted thugs.

But there is something more insidious about a President who claims to support 
conservative values and knifes conservatives in the back when given a chance. At least 
we knew what we had with President Clinton. No one was under any misconception about 
what Clinton would do with regard to important issues. He was a liberal and proud of 
it. In fact, when Bill Clinton sold out his supporters (it happened on a number of 
occasions) all he did was demoralize a liberal base.

With President Bush, things are worse than ever. Instead of healthy conservative 
skepticism meeting each new federal initiative, voters are ignoring that their 
President has signed laws allowing the Feds to search houses without letting the owner 
know about it, add phone taps to lines based on no review by a court, and limit free 
speech before elections, among other things. If Bill Clinton had tried it, Americans 
would be screaming for impeachment.

And, read his lips; George Bush will do nothing about abortion. As a senior leader in 
the pro-life movement wrote to one activist about the "type of do-nothing philosophy 
on the babies that Bush does, I can assure you that nothing of substance will be 
accomplished in the next two years." And, lest we forget during the modern war on 
terrorism, Bush continues to operate our military under Bill Clinton's "don't ask, 
don't tell" policy -- a move that presents significant security risks in the form of 
people with secrets who may be compromised by blackmail.

Beyond his failure to stand for the right values, George W. Bush has dropped the 
economic ball. Since his inauguration in January 2001, the stock market has dropped 
40% and more than 1.7 million net jobs have been lost. Maintaining his father's 
commitment to global free trade, Bush is in stark denial of American 
de-industrialization that has proceeded with NASCAR velocity. All over the country, 
people gave gifts made in China this Christmas season.

Instead of finding ways to implement fair-trade while maintaining the Constitutional 
mandate for Congress (not some un-elected international body) to regulate foreign 
trade, the President is using his new "fast track" authority to establish a Free Trade 
Area of the Americas. It seems the Bush program for stabilizing economy means joining 
Argentina and Venezuela at the hip with markets in the United States. Again, there is 
no difference between Clinton and Bush on trade, except almost no one in America's 
great silent majority will speak up.

Then there are the borders, remaining wide open as a number of Muslim men managed to 
slip through in the last few days. The FBI is working hard to find them now that 
they've made it into the country. Instead of putting an emphasis on closing down the 
flow of illegal immigrants, the Bush administration is working in reactionary mode. 
There are a number of ways to solve the illegal immigrant problem, including putting 
troops on the borders. But the last politician who announced support for that was 
Trent Lott... We know how Bush treated him.

Is the United States going to surrender its markets at the same time our borders 
remain open? The answer is a resounding "yes" so long as Bush remains in the White 
House. And that's not all to which Americans give a silent approving nod as their 
President plans to take us into yet another undeclared war.

We've got stem-cell research that was paid for with our federal tax dollars, though 
only on the lines of embryonic human beings who were already killed by non-government 
institutions. While nothing is done about the same being funded by private interests, 
the President hand-picked a new Senate Majority leader, Bill Frist, medical architect 
of record on stem-cells.

Then Americans were quiet when Bush told us that a religion, which drives fanatics to 
hijack planes and smash them into buildings, is a "religion of peace". Who knew? Maybe 
people were too stunned over Bush's plan to put Mexican citizens on our Social 
Security payroll. Breaking and entering remains an illegal act that President Bush 
wants to reward. His definition of "homeland security" meets with reality at the same 
point as "religion of peace".

Neo-conservative pundits and radio talk show hosts are not going to question George W. 
Bush as they would if Bill Clinton or Al Gore were in office. There will be no 
"contract with America", no "republican revolution", and no "vast right-wing 
conspiracy". Working Americans who fiercely opposed Bill Clinton are sitting quietly 
as President Bush implements Clinton's agenda.

-----------
  Dave Franklin is a writer for the American Reformation Project and USA Daily . He 
works in telecommunications and has over ten years of experience as a technology 
consultant for government agencies, including the Department of State and the Joint 
Staff. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.
Dave Franklin can be reached at:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Published in the January 2, 2003 issue of  Ether Zone. Copyright © 1997 - 2003 Ether 
Zone.
------------------
-iNFoWaRZ
If men use their liberty in such a way as to surrender their liberty, are they 
thereafter any the less slaves?  If people by a plebiscite elect a man despot over 
them, do they remain free because the despotism was of their own making?
- Herbert Spencer The New Toryism, 1884

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to