Ah no, Larry Agran's proposals were far more radical than that.

Called for total withdrawal by Dec. 31, 1994, of United States forces from Europe and Japan and for those "prosperous democracies" to pay for their own national defenses. Agran also reiterated his desire for a 50% cut of U.S. military spending, with the $150 billion savings to pay for medical, transportation and other social needs, for cleaning the environment and for repaying the national debt. http://articles.latimes.com/1991-08-23/news/mn-1095_1_larry-agran

Anyway, if you look at the Clinton procurement holiday in a wider perspective, it's obvious that he was a "status quo" candidate. He certainly didn't do anything as un-American as invest in America in the way Larry Agran was proposing. It's pretty clear that Clinton was an establishment candidate and Larry Agran was not, and the media treated them as such. By the way, it's kind of odd that you think the media should exclude any political candidate based on their status in society, it's very revealing.