Activism Change

Gore, Clinton/Malaysia, Indonesia, China policies

Question:

A truly incoherent foreign policy regarding human rights.  Mr. Gore’s speech recently in Malaysia . . . would he have made that speech in China? Has he?  And we just haven’t heard about it?  An abandonment of old-time Democratic loyalty to American workers, both union and non-union, by the promotion of extremely low-wage labor in factories set up for "American" companies, for example, in Indonesia?  Have the union workers been sold out by their leadership?  Do American consumers realize as they watch their favorite sports hero promoting these goods that although these companies pay incredible endorsement fees to promote their foreign-made products, that we as Americans are selling each other out by purchasing these products?  The people for whom the economy is really better are the stockholders of those companies. The time is coming for American workers to set up their own factories and profit-sharing companies and take back the business and the pride of "Made in the U.S.A." . . . totally!  We do not need to be used by Republicans or Democrats if they sell out our jobs.  Machinists, garment-makers, shoe-makers, et al.  Who needs the help of Clinton, who is not a true old Democrat, nor are any who have helped promote his policies that have taken away jobs from Americans.  We might blame Republicans for some things, but it is even worse when a Democrat has failed us in this way. Just yesterday, Senator Byrd of W.Va. reminded us of Mr. Clinton’s campaign promises/comments during his visit to the Weirton steel workers in 1992 . . .  what has he done to fulfill those promises?  Right now, just in recent months, our government is allowing massive dumping of steel products into our country to the detriment of our own steel industry and workers and their families and communities.  Steel products manufactured in other countries where they do not have the expenses associated with the standards followed here?  In my opinion, this is a "conflict of interest" on the part of our government. Some of us who are concerned about the "Chinagate" situation are waiting to see whether anyone else considers that a matter of bribery, where money was received and policies were enacted (or otherwise not properly enforced) to the detriment of our nation’s interest, that of our core industries, our workers, and our national security . . . and, with regard to national security (such as the missile technology situation), treason.  With issues such as these, it is little wonder that Clinton and company would like the scope of the impeachment hearings limited to the Lewinsky matter; perhaps they even cynically view that as a "gift" so that they can proclaim it is "just about sex." About travel arrangements for the press, in regard to getting squeezed out by the Clinton administration on various trips, it would be interesting to see if someone in the press would do a good piece of "investigative journalism" as to whether this was such a problem in previous administrations (pre-"Travelgate").  About "Travelgate" . . . it seemed to many of us that it was basically "cronyism" on the part of Clinton and company, looking to the White House travel office as a franchise, a plum, a "cash cow" rather than part of our constitutional system (that is, helping the press to cover the government through modern-day travel arrangements, the scope of which was not needed in 1776, but which are needed today) . . . a way to ensure that the "fourth estate" has access to cover activities of our public officials, on behalf of the American people.  In California, there is a law against pubic officials conducting the public’s business in secret meetings, the "Brown Act" . . . I do not know if other states have this type of law, but I think the same thing should apply to our federal government.  Regarding the Clinton White House, if they are trying to reduce the access of the press, they are going further afield than "cronyism" . . . they are conducting business in secret, and trying to limit the freedom of the press. Thanks again for all of the letters [via JWV] today! Sincerely,

Response:

Red,         Good stuff.  What boggles my mind is that Horowitz, and his ilk, want us to think that they don’t like Clinton.  Hell, they should be sending him flowers.  Clinton has sold the U.S. worker down the drain almost from the moment he took office.  In fact this country has never had a greater friend to business–and at the expense of all but the wealthiest, especially the average working guy and gal, those everyday people who work for wages and try as hard as they can to provide a decent standard of living for them and their families. Doug

Response:

Filed under: Human Rights

Related Posts

• Malawi - Southern Africa
• Turkey's 'Islamic' party wins - Pledges to maintain pro-Western stance - May God be with you brother
• life is difficult
• #Elie Wiesel Says Hate Still Prowls !
• PSmith:Re: Federal agency slams forced psychiatry!
• Pakistan Puts West First
• The Case Against John Ashcroft
• What's the priority for America?
• the death penalty IS racist...
• Attn: simon smith