It seems less than likely that Clinton is at all familiar with the concept of the general will in
Rousseau, or with the forces which contribute to its breakdown in society. It is peculiar to
hear this particular President talking about 'responsibility' at all, but it is actually the forces
that destroy responsibility which he is advocating to enhance it! He does mention the
attempts at welfare reform which have been undertaken, but once again, he tries to take
credit for what he opposed, signed only when it was apparent his veto would be
overridden, and has tried to subvert ever since. After floating a series of balloons which
are drawn from focus group positive responses about health care, he sheds his sheep skin
and advocates that we take another step toward the socialized medicine he was unable to
win passage of, but has been seeking to implement incrementally ever since. Now, he
proposes that some groups be able to buy into the medicare system. Already at the heart
of the massive runaway rising costs of health care and facing a certain insolvency even
before social security does, he wants to expand the program. 

An even more serious health threat he wants to address next is teen age smoking. We
haven't heard enough about this already. And he wants to deal with the problem by adding
another $1.50 tax to the price of each pack of cigarettes. He repeats the usual cliches.
Somehow, this is a greater menace than illicit drugs. The man is not just wrong, he is silly.

By this time, the applause of the left side of the aisle has begun to sound like the rythmic
clapping with which the Supreme Soviet used to reply to Brehznev. Nearly all in the
audience are looking glassy-eyed. Many televisions across the country have begun to
change their stations, having realized that nothing has changed, and that Clinton is full of
promises to cover his  predictament. But the man pushes on.

He reminds us that most parents both have to work. Thanks, Bill! But, he doesn't mention
that if taxes weren't so high, most of them wouldn't have to do so so much, and could
have other options open to them. Instead, he wants to put another burden on taxpayers of
having the government provide and pay for improved child care. And to try to hold the
attention of some of those out there who he is losing about now, he suggests that his
proposal would mean no taxes for a family of four earning $35000 a year which has high
child care costs (how many families are there in America in which both parents work, who
have four children, and together earn $35000 annually? -- that comes out to an average of
about $5.75 an hour for each parent). And then he turns his attention to safety.

Clinton's assessment that his administration has contributed to falling crime rates is as
problematic as his reference to completing his goal of putting 100,000 new police on the
streets. This is typical Clinton. Here, he is admitting something he has not been willing to
before this, that they have not put these cops on line. That hardly tells the whole story,
though, for the placement of such officers is met by only a declining federal grant which
must be picked up by local governments. He also asks Congress to pass a tough juvenile
crime bill, but his way of cracking down on young thugs is more gun control and after
school programs; more federal intervention and control in local affairs.

One of the contributing factors to much crime is the rampaging spread of drug abuse, but
Mr. Clinton asserts that "[D]rug use in on the decline." It just isn't so. To combat the
menace, he wants money to close our borders to drugs with a thousand new border patrol
agents and "to deploy sophisticated new technologies."

This President's propensity for partisan jibes and combat rears its head in his suggestion
that Congress get busy with filling vacancies in the federal courts. The inference is a
Senate Republican roadblock, but he has failed to make appointments in a timely fashion
and in some cases, at all. Nor can he expect the Senate to become his rubber stamp. And
he cannot be serious about fighting crime with many of the appointments he has made.

The mediocrity and ineptitude of the speech thus far sinks further when he turns to foreign
affairs. His wreckless expansion of NATO actually even belies the lack of vision with
which this administration has proceeded toward the entire former Soviet empire.
Piecemeal and inadequate tricks have been offered in the vacuum of a new Marshall Plan.
But ignoring that, he turns ot attacking what he calls 'extreme nationalism.' He wants:

	-- An extension of our presence in the former Yugoslavia as part of 
	the peacekeeping force. What he wants us to believe is working is
	little more than using US troops to sit on a boiler lid. Doing nothing
	at all to alter the basic problems is as far-sighted as LBJ was in Vietnam.
	And for this, he is nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize?

	-- Returning to the anti-nuke themes of the past, he wants to blindly 
	pursuing 'a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty.' Quite to the contrary
	of his claims, such a measure would only promote proliferation.

	-- His program for combatting chemical and biological weapons centers
	on Saddam. But Iraq is a threat only in our own diminished military capacity.
	The problem with him, other than that he is thug like at least a dozen or more
	other leaders around the earth, is that he refuses to let the UN micromanage
	Iraq.

	-- The wishful shortsightedness of Clinton's seemingly over-idealistic
	mindset in international affairs is reinforced with his proclamation that we 
	proceed to outlaw biological weapons. On closer inspection, however,
	a deep cynicism pervades. What we really need is stronger enforcement	
	mechanisms, according to Clinton. Rather than pursue development which
	is the path to peace, we need a world gestapo to police nations.





Continue