Reply #41: Aww, don't take it personally. And - I'm sure you're right that the next [View All]

[RichM]

Dem president won't be to the left of Clinton, & that I won't like him/her any better.

IMO (and in retrospect), things weren't really much better in the 90's. (I realize that most DUers think this, but I don't.) I think it was a stage in a logical sequence of deterioration that led directly to today's horrors. Clinton helped hand the country over to the rightwing. In many ways, Bush is a continuation of Clinton, not an antithesis. The main difference is in style (the Busheviks are far more vulgar, brutish, & less subtle). But the effects & policies are much the same.

If Daddy Bush had won in '92, we also would have seen NAFTA, Welfare Reform, the Telecom Act of '96, and the increasing inequality of wealth. We would have seen identical defense budgets. Clinton gave us all that, but still managed to look & sound like a "liberal." This is a tribute to his smoothness.

I don't expect you to agree; mine is a minority opinion here. :hi: