Bush I was against breaking up the USSR. I imagine Reagan was too.
--- John Gulick <john_gulick at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> (SORRY IN ADVANCE FOR FORMATTING... SNIFF)
>
> J Gulick sez:
>
> This seems too stripped of political space-time
> context.
> Clinton I got lucky, chasing the throne just when
> Perot
> split the Repug vote, and getting in office to reap
> the
> windfall of post-Soviet collapse triumphalism --
> orchestrated
> in part by Reagan and Bush I's hoodwinking of a
> credulous
> Gorbachev! That is, the Clinton I boom was largely
> underwritten
> by awed and cowed capitalists and savers worldwide.
> After
> eight years of Bush II tax cuts for the uber-rich
> and
> extravagant spending on a West Asia misadventure
> that has
> perturbed (if not decisively alienated) junior
> partners,
> Clinton II will be reaping a whirlwind, not a
> windfall.
>
> J Gulick
> Tohoku territory, Japan
>
> >D Henwood wrote:
>
> >You could say - I might, though I'm not sure of
> this yet - is that
> >the two parties serve as a kind of balancing act
> for capital. When
> >things get too boomy, it's time for the Reps to
> come in and tighten
> >the masses' belts. When the population gets restive
> after the round
> >of austerity, it's time for a Dem to come in and
> throw the masses a
> >few bones. We're on the verge of a bone-throwing
> phase, I guess.
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the
> Messenger Café. Stop by today.
>
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Lyubo, bratsy, lyubo, lyubo, bratsy, zhit!
ËÞÁÎ, ÁÐÀÒÖÛ, ËÞÁÎ, ËÞÁÎ, ÁÐÀÒÖÛ, ÆÈÒÜ!
____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC