NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/fan/rushlim/13336

Text File | 1993-01-21 | 1.7 KB | 35 lines

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!kronos.arc.nasa.gov!butch!LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM!J056600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re:  What does sacrifice mean to Bill?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:48:18 PST
Lines: 24

In <[e-mail]>, John R Gonzalez writes:

>Perhaps higher taxes would be good.  If Bill raised them, it
>would probably screw up the economy, thus decreasing his chance
>of winning the election four years from now.  Not that I want
>the economy to go sour just as I enter the job market, but you
>got to find a silver lining in every cloud.

I fail to understand this line of thinking.  I have never been very receptive
to Democrats (not historically, anyway), and I rarely desire to see Democrats
win political elections.  However, if better times ahead mean eight years of
Clinton, then let it happen.  I may be rather conservative about most things,
and I may have a past history of supporting the Republicans or Libertarians,
but I'd rather be wrong about the guy and see the nation flourish then see
our nation go down the toilet just so I could say "I told you so."

Some of us think that the well-being of the nation is far more important than
political manuevering.  I don't expect the Clinton Administration to improve
things, but I'll be ecstatic if I'm wrong.  I'll take political ridicule in
exchange for the good of the nation if it comes down to that.


Tim Irvin
*****************************************************************************