Monday, January 14, 2008

Where Was The "Change" During The Clintons' First Two Terms?--Part 4

In their current campaign to secure a third term in the White House, in violation of the spirit of the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (which limits U.S. Establishment politicians who become the U.S. president to two terms in office), the Clintons are claiming that a third Clinton Administration in Washington, D.C. will bring democratic political “change” to U.S. society. Yet as the following column items from Downtown indicate, when Bill Clinton was the U.S. President during the 1990s the Clintons failed to bring democratic political change to U.S. society:

238 Days After The Clintons’ Inauguration: Where’s The Change?

Former Nixon Foundation Trustee Ross Perot is apparently considering an attempt to win the Republic Party presidential nomination in 1996 by running in the Republican Party primaries...

Bill Clinton may have a lot of difficulty winning any Democratic Party primary in 1996 [in the absence of being able to obtain Big Media-backing in 1996] if his administration’s next 238 days produce as little genuinely democratic change in the United States as the Clintons’ Administration’s first 238 days. In the absence of huge cuts in Pentagon weapons spending, a huge tax increase for transnational corporations and the super-rich, and a massive federal public works program to employ the jobless, provide homes for the homeless, combat environmental pollution and create more customers for middle-class shopkeepers, it’s not likely that the Clintons’ Administration will restore [permanent] economic prosperity for the Multiple Love Generation under a declining U.S. capitalism.

(Downtown 9/15/93)

252 Days After The Clintons’ Inauguration: Where’s The Change?

As we approach the 30th Anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination, Bill Clinton has still not shown much eagerness to let the people of the United States know who was really responsible for the elimination of JFK. Nor has the Democratic Party Establishment in Washington, D.C. shown much ability to restore economic prosperity for working-class and middle-class people in New York City during the first 252 days of the Clintons’ Administration.

Whether [now-Columbia University Professor David] Dinkins or [now-2008 Republican Party Presidential candidate Rudy] Giuliani gets elected Mayor in November [of 1993], people in New York City still aren’t too likely to see U.S. society change positively during the next 252 days. In the eyes of the Democratic and Republican Party politicians, we’re still just objects to be manipulated every four years by their highly-paid media consultants.

(Downtown 9/29/93)

266 Days After The Clintons’ Inauguration: Where’s The Change?

Despite Bill “Pinocchio” Clinton’s recent flurry of long-winded speeches, 1996 re-election campaign appearances and White House lawn parties for Big Media talk-show hosts and yuppie journalists, the reality is that 266 days after the Clintons’ inauguration their Yuppie Democratic administration has still not radically changed U.S. society. [Permanent] Economic prosperity has still not been restored to Manhattan. Taxes have still not been cut for middle-class and working-class people. Open lesbians and gay men are still not allowed to receive paychecks from the U.S. military. No federal gay rights bill has yet been passed. Federal funding of abortions is still prohibited. U.S. troops are still in Somalia. No free health insurance has yet been provided by the Clintons’ Administration for the 37 million people [in 1993] who still lack health insurance. No federal crash program to provide either apartments for the homeless or a cure for AIDS has yet been established. The CIA has still not been abolished. No special prosecutor to investigate the CIA’s apparent role in the assassination of President Kennedy has yet been appointed by the Clintons. And U.S. alternative journalists are still not allowed to get on the Big Media’s public airwaves to question the Clintons in an adversarial way about either their “evidence” for the alleged Iraqi “plot” to assassinate former CIA Director Bush I, the Waco, Texas and Baghdad missile attacks, or Hillary Rodham-Clinton’s past legal work for U.S. insurance companies.

But insurance salespeople have never been too famous for their honesty—especially after their customers return from the hospital, receive unexpected medical bills in the mail, and finally start to read the fine print of the policies they were manipulated into purchasing.

(Downtown 10/13/93)

Next: Where Was The “Change” During The Clintons’ First Two Terms?—Part 5

No comments: