----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com
-This is really perverse, a preference for the counterfactaul over the real. -But don't let me get in the way. jks
I've stated the factual-- Clinton fought and won for a number of progressive bills (fair taxes, family leave, motor voter, raised minimum wage, EITC, Americorps, increased HeadStart funding) and vetoed a large number of rightwing bills (anti-labor legisation, the gutting of Medicaid/Food Stamps/Medicare, anti-environmental riders, the whole 1995 rightwing budget, and so on).
Now, you and others don't accept the importance of those actual liberal policies. To give a factual, rather than a counterfactual, name one veto by Nixon of a conservative piece of legislation? Where did Nixon ever use his veto, the prime legislative power of the President, to acommplish anything progressive? Clinton used his veto power repeatedly for progressive ends.
Presidents don't pass legislation-- they either approve it or veto it. That's their power. If Nixon did not use his veto or threaten to use it, then any legislation he signed is no reflection on him, but only on the Congress.
So again, Clinton used his veto repeatedly for progressive purposes. What did Nixon do that matches him?
-- Nathan Newman
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com>
>To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 10:45 AM
>Subject: Re: Nixon's the One
>
>
> > Apples and oranges, then, I am talking about the policies they did in
>fact
> > enact or advocate. I don't much care what politicians want, just what
>they
> > do. You can elect politicains who do the wrong thing while wanting the
>right
> > one--an odd view for a consequentialist, I might remark--
>
>My view isn't particularly odd or at odds with consequentialism. It should
>come as no surprise to anyone with a modicum of familiarity with human
>nature that those with better desires generally end up bringing about
>better
>consequences, all other things being equal. Nathan's arguments about what
>would happen if the circumstances of Clinton and Nixon's presidencies were
>swapped illustrate this principle nicely enough.
>
>-- Luke
>
> > but I'll do it the
> > other way around.
>
>
>
> > jks
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx