ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, September 7, 1996 TAG: 9609090014
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-7 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: K. MICHAEL CROUSHORN
THE AUG. 26 Commentary page article (``Dole won the nomination, lost the war'') by Henry W. Tielman of Riner, a delegate to the Democratic National Convention, focused 100 percent on what Bob Dole and the Republicans have done.
Although it was a good strategy to not focus on President Clinton's record, the real issue is where Clinton is taking our nation. The president's first-term record is not a good omen.
Several recent books, written by respected, impartial journalists, reinforce concerns about the Clinton administration's amateurish and ineffective performance. Examples of this performance include the White House travel-agency fiasco, the bungled health-care debate, stalled economic reforms, the prosecution of former associates and Clinton's failure to honor promises to taxpayers.
Why should Americans tolerate this type of performance from our nation's leader?
Democratic congressional leaders are frustrated by the president's indecisiveness and waffling. His behavior has these leaders questioning when the rug may be pulled from beneath them. If members of the president's own party have doubts about him, why should the nation have confidence in him?
Behavior surrounding tobacco, guns, drugs and AIDS all lead to social and health problems, even death. President Clinton is not consistent on such issues. He attacks tobacco and guns, yet goes soft on behavior concerning drugs and AIDS. If he is so fair-minded, then why are his policies so inconsistent, depending upon lifestyle?
President Clinton and his administration take full credit for the economic recovery that has occurred. Yet the administration's economic officials admit the recovery is attributable more to economic cycles than Clinton's policies. The recovery would have occurred if President Bush had remained in office. Is Clinton naive or is he not being truthful?
In the past, Clinton courted more liberal voters. He continues to campaign for liberal congressional candidates. But now he is courting more conservative voters with more traditional issues. Which group will he betray?
The administration's policy appears to be to blame House Speaker Newt Gingrich for everything. The Republican-controlled Congress passed welfare reform, health-care reform, the line-item veto and congressional reforms, and it aggressively pursued a balanced budget. President Clinton has run from balancing the budget. He suggests taking actions to balance it in 2002, two years after the next presidential term expires.
Clinton has made many promises for the future, but can he deliver on one thing for today?
He has repeatedly expressed concern about what will be the hallmark of his presidency. Is he more concerned about his image or the country?
He raised taxes on retirees, yet promotes himself as the savior for all retirees. The Social Security fund is slated for bankruptcy by 2010. Four years in office, and nothing has come from his administration to address the upcoming crisis.
The Clintons' legal bills to defend themselves against various charges are, to date, approximately $2 million. These bills have wiped out the $600,000 net worth they had when entered office. Their financial loss is sad. However, the carelessness reflected in their personal affairs is also reflected in the administration. The nation will pay for Mr. Clinton's carelessness.
Clinton ran in 1992 as a leader of change, innovation and reconciliation. He was handed the office and a Congress with a Democratic majority. Four years later, we have a guardian of the status quo who focuses mostly on deflecting blame.
Clinton talks about looking to the future. Yet he continues the FDR-era philosophy of ``tax and tax, spend and spend.'' Eventually our economy will be smothered under this philosophy. Why does he continue with the tax-and-spend approach?
In reflecting upon the president's record, one interesting irony: Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich are a lot alike.
Both are intellectual, emotional, verbal and controversial. Both love to throw out ideas, love to debate, have difficult family relationships and desire to see revolutionary changes.
But they go in opposite directions: Mr. Clinton to more government and Mr. Gingrich to less government. Is more government the right answer?
K. Michael Croushorn of Blacksburg is a controller at Kollmorgen Motion Technologies Group in Radford.
LENGTH: Medium: 82 linesby CNB