HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: adler@nic.cerf.net (Bruce Adler)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: WHERE WAS BILL???
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:57:07 GMT
Organization: CERFnet

While we're at it, someone should ask Clinton where he buried
Jimmy Hoffa's body.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:17001 alt.politics.bush:9303 alt.politics.clinton:10624
From: mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Lost some respect for CNN (was Re: Vice Shrub won)
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:52:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center [Cleveland, Ohio]

In article <1992Oct15.090221.14669@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>In article <1992Oct15.052924.26438@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac) writes:
>
>>Back to p.304 - How many times when the US was involved in a multinational
>>collaboration (Desert Storm, NATO, UN, etc.) did the US NOT have to pick up
>>a major (> 50%) share of the costs?  Case closed.  Quayle's interpretation
>>had it's merit.
>
>At least one -- Desert Storm.  We paid closer to 5% than 50%.  We
>extorted billions from S.A., Kuwait, Japan and Germany.

Oops! You got me on that one.
 
>NATO we're still paying for because for some inexplicable reason,
>Bush/Quayle think we should.  Not for any other reason.  *Why* 150k
>troops in Europe?  As Bush said *directly* in the debate, "Jobs."  I bet
>you never knew the U.S. army was a social welfare program, did you?
>
>The U.N.?  We don't pay what we owe, so it doesn't matter.

I thought we only owe a portion of what we're expected to pay.

 
>And Quayle's interpretation has *no* merit.  This interpretation goes
>1) Gore called for many countries to spend $100 billion
>2) In the past, when many countries have done something, the U.S. paid most.
>3) Other countries won't pay much this time, either.
>4) The U.S. will pay most.
>
>There are 2 major flawed assumptions in this.  First, that other countries 
>won't pay.  Second, that Gore will advocate us paying all the money
>ourselves when the other countries won't.
>
>Since these are guesses, rather than what Gore said, this has no merit.

But given that the Democrats jumped up and down when Bush would not commit
this country to large environmental expenditures at the Rio summit, I could
envision the scenario Quayle described.  It's really not a question of
whether Quayle or Gore was right or wrong, but whether Quayle's point had
it's merits in that Gore should explicitly come out and say how much he
wants the US to spend in the future on the environment.  He uses his book
to gain support from environmentalists but doesn't push the economic
details to avoid losing other support.

-- 
Richard Mulac                                     mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov
NASA Lewis Research Center, 21000 Brookpark Road, MS 5-9, Cleveland, OH  44135
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"With our combined strength we can end this destructive | These pontifications
conflict and bring order to the galaxy." - Darth Vader  |      are my own!    
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: fsspr@acad3.alaska.edu (Sean P. Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan)
Subject: New group proposal
Followup-To: alt.config
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41.UAC
Organization: University of Fairbanks, Alaska...no wait, that's not right...
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:21:00 GMT

[For your information.  Please follow-up to alt.config]

Now, for the new alt.* group proposals:
[...]
Plus, the following alt.politics.* groups.  These would cover some of
the lesser-known presidential candidates, and would serve the same
purpose as the currently-existing alt.politics.* groups for presidential
candidates.


alt.politics.fulani
-------------------

Discussion about Lenora B. Fulani, candidate of the New Alliance Party,
running with Maria Elizabeth Munoz.

alt.politics.gritz
------------------

Discussion about James "Bo" Gritz, candidate of the Populist Party,
running with Cy Minett.

alt.politics.hagelin
--------------------

Discussion about John Hagelin, candidate of the Natural Law Party,
running with Mike Tompkins.

alt.politics.larouche
---------------------

Discussion about Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., running under the banner of
Independents for Economic Reform with running mate James L. Bevel.

alt.politics.phillips
---------------------

Discussion about Howard Phillips, candidate of the U.S. Taxpayers Party,
running with Albion W. Knight, Jr.


I believe that the existing alt.politics.* groups are far too overloaded
and dominated with discussion about the media candidates (Bush, Clinton,
Perot).  As such, it makes it impossible to carry on meaningful
discussions about anyone else running for President.  I know that
supporters of the above-mentioned candidates exist on the net, as I talk
to them quite often when I'm actually able to identify them through the
mass of dreck about the media candidates.

I know that I'm probably asking for too much here, but the only thing I
would ask with these alt.politics.* groups would be no cross-posting,
and all articles should have a 'usa' or lesser distribution.

************************************************************************
Sean Patrick Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan*****Internet: fsspr@acad3.alaska.edu
WWIVnet: 220@9704*CFN: au414*IRC: RadioKAOS, Aoxomoxoa*Ph: (907)488-8365
BITnet: FSSPR@ALASKA****Snail: P.O. Box 83381, Fairbanks, AK  99708-3381
***"I'm gonna Kentucky Fried Chickenize your prostate surgery." - Oswald
Bates, In Living Color***Disclaimer?  BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!***
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Choice! (was: Re: Vice Shrub won)
Date: 16 Oct 1992 04:37:51 GMT
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
NNTP-Posting-Host: eno.wpd.sgi.com

---
sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
|I wish I could remember who said "Truth is rarely plain and
|never simple."  

Oscar Wilde.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com       C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"The truth is rarely pure, and never simple."  Oscar Wilde
From: Clinton for President <75300.3115@compuserve.com>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Statement by Governor Bill Clinton
Date: 14 Oct 92 01:54:01 GMT


 For Immediate Release:                  
 October 13, 1992                                  
                                               

                Statement by Governor Bill Clinton

      Choosing a running mate is the first major decision that a
 future president makes.  If the American people were to vote on the
 basis of that decision alone, the Clinton-Gore ticket would win a
 landslide.  Tonight, Al Gore made it clear that he has the character,
 judgement and vision to step into the Oval Office should, heaven
 forbid, something happen to me.

      Al Gore said it all in the first minutes: A Clinton-Gore
 Administration will not take four years to discover America.  Indeed,
 in the first 100 days, we plan to change America.  We plan to offer
 the country an end to trickle-down economics, a real jobs program, a
 bold lifelong learning agenda and a truly comprehensive plan to offer
 health care with real cost controls to all Americans.

      I'm proud of Al Gore.  And tonight all America knows why.  In
 January, Al Gore will be a Vice President America can be proud of.


                            -30-30-30-


Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 01:13:10 GMT

In article <H3XqsB1w164w@cellar.org> kml@cellar.org (Scott Tiger) writes:
>BZZZZZTTT!!!!  Gore voted against it when he was a congressman.  When
>it came a year or so ago, the continued funding for the project was
>bundled into an omnibus bill, which passed the Senate 92-0.  
>
>Looks like Gregg pulled a Quayle!

Errr... ahh... facts. Facts are funny things. Inhale for once, Scott.
Give it a rest. Take a Quayle-lude and learn to stop worrying and love
the "trickle-down crowd."

---
Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16930 alt.politics.perot:2193 alt.politics.bush:9255 alt.politics.clinton:10552 talk.politics.misc:51921
From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Bradley K. Sherman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Polls on VP Debate
Date: 15 Oct 1992 05:31:18 GMT
Organization: Committee to Impeach H. Ross Perot's Barber
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: alfa.berkeley.edu

Who won the debate?

      Gore  Quayle Stockdale    Sample 
NBC    50     32      2          623 adults
ABC    38     35      7          500 adults

----
    --Brad Sherman

In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward
to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression
    --everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way
     --everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want ...
The fourth is freedom from fear.

    --Franklin D. Roosevelt
From: isbell@ai.mit.edu (Charles L Isbell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Mary Matalin and James Carville
Date: 15 Oct 92 05:58:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
In-reply-to: glhewitt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU's message of 14 Oct 92 20:40:28 GMT

glhewitt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Gary Livingston Hewitt) writes:
|The NYT of a few days ago reported that Mary Matalin (chief spokesperon
|of the Bush/Quayle campaign and overall incarnation of evil) and James
|Carville, Clinton's chief campaign strategist, are romantically linked.
|Man, what a great relationship they must have.  They must have great
|sex, because they sure as hell must not be able to talk about much...
|:-)

Actually, I have the suspicion that this whole nasty campaign is some
sort of sexual mating dance for those two. Whoever wins gets to use
the whip or be on top for four years or something.

Of course, I have the suspicion  that Quayle's people are purposefully
graying his hair.
--
Peace.
                           "If I could find a way to get [Saddam Hussein] out
                            of there, even putting a contract out on him, if
                            the CIA still did that sort of a thing, assuming
                            it ever did, I would be for it."
                                           -- Richard Nixon
                                   -\--/-
    Don't just adopt opinions     |  \/  |       Some of you are homeboys
          develop them.           |  /\  | but only I am The Homeboy From hell
                                   -/--\-

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: westfgj@eng.auburn.edu (George J. Westfall)
Subject: Re: Bush is a chinese spy?
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 23:19:23 GMT

In article <39232@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi) writes:
>
>
>
>What was Bush doing in China pretending to be an Ambassador only
>20 odd years after the Korean war? What was he doing in a country
>filled with commies? How dare he accept the ambassadorship to an
>enemy nation that had killed so many brave American soldiers in
>the Korean war? He and KGB spies lived in the same city.. was he
>in contact with them? Was his puking at the Japanese dinner a secret
>code signal for his 'masters'? I saw him talk nicely with Raisa 
>Gorbachev once? Maybe they were having an affair? 
>He should level with the American public on all these matters. 
>
>Proof? You ask. heck, who needs proof anyway. Let HIM prove that I
>am incorrect.
>
>BTW, why was Bush supporting the arms sale to a country that had
>kidnapped and held hostage American citizens for 400 odd days?
>And then lied about it. There actually is a proof for this.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________
>| Prashanth                    |                      |
>| U. of California @ San Diego | prash@raman.ucsd.edu |
>#######################################################

i have never posted before but it seems to me
that to compare an ambassador to a spy is crazy.
the point of the clinton-moscow debate is why his 
memory of the events is so slective.  i don't recall
the pres hedging or dodging on questions about what he
did in china.

george westfall
westfgj@eng.auburn.edu
From: turney@kenyon.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Perot for President
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:35:38 GMT
Organization: Kenyon College

At election time, the citizens in our country can be grouped in
four categories:

     1. Staunch republicans who would vote for Charles Manson if
        he were on the ballot as a republican.
     2. Staunch democrats who would vote for Charles Manson if he
        were on the ballot as a democrat.
     3. Independent thinking citizens who vote based on their    
        personal judgement of each candidate.
     4. Citizens who have given up in disgust (40-50% of the      
        population) with the political system and do not vote.

While our country is going bankrupt at an increasing rate each
day, we are currently watching another campaign that is avoiding
the main issue, the economy.   The campaign again has degenerated
into endless name calling and accusations.  This is for a good
reason.  Bush has no track record on the economic issues to brag
about.  Clinton and his political handlers are afraid to
completely and truthfully face the economic issue because the
real solution might cost them votes.  After all, no one likes
distasteful but necessary medicine.  

But we do have a third candidate, Ross Perot, who is "telling it
like it is".  True, there are questions about the effectiveness
of a non-politician in the oval office, but Ross Perot is the
only candidate who is giving us straight talk about economic
problems and offering a process (not one line solutions) for
solving those problems.    

Our federal government has been on a spending binge for the last
12 years.  We are currently borrowing $1 billion each day (that
is $1,000,000,000 each day!) to cover fiscal mismanagement in the
federal government.  Sooner or later we (or our children) must
pay for it.  

This kind of fiscal management does not work in your personal
budget, does not work for any business budget, does not work in
your church budget, does not work in your school budget, does not
work in local or state government, and certainly cannot continue
forever in the federal government.  Any elected federal official
who has had a hand in creating this fiscal mess should not be
rehired by voters to return to the White House or Congress.  They
should be fired and sent home!

I am in favor of hiring Ross Perot to be our president for four
years and let the other two job applicants continue to call each
other names on their own time.  I encourage independent voters to
vote for Ross Perot.  I encourage the disgusted citizens, who
don't usually vote, to get out and vote for Ross Perot.  For the
first time you have an alternative.

Glen Turney
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
From: watanabe@milton.cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: Re: Presidential debates #2
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:41:40 GMT

aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>Having read both Clinton and Bush plans I can say that both offer !Real
>Solutions!; or at least specific ideas.

Bush's solutions are like vaporware: they never seem to
materialize.

Whatever happened to "a thousand points of light"?

His solution for health care is like a thousand points of light".
A thousand doctors and thousand insurance companies all separately
bringing health to the nation in their own separate way.

-Larry Watanabe
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16761 alt.politics.bush:9131 alt.politics.clinton:10391 alt.politics.perot:2134
From: dgp@atlas.wustl.edu (Don Porter)
Subject: Re: Election '92 Drinking Game
Reply-To: dgp@atlas.wustl.edu
Organization: ESSRL -- Washington University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:02:43 GMT

23508@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov@, (patrick m. ryan) writes:
> 
> I've started the bare bones of a drinking game for this
> election season.> 
> 
> One drink each for:

Bush begins an answer with an apology.

(For example, "I'm sorry, but I just think it's wrong to demonstrate against
 your country on foreign soil at a time of war.")

---
|   Don Porter | dgp@saturn.wustl.edu | Washington University in St Louis   |
|  "The effect of liberty to individuals is, that they may do what they     |
|   please; we ought to see what it will please them to do, before we       |
|___risk congratulations." -- Edmund Burke._________________________________|

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Bush threatens to put the gloves on (again)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:31:03 GMT

Energized by Quayle's attacks in the VP debate, Bush is said to be preparing
to fiercely attack Clinton tonight. Yawn. Whatever he does, it is not done
in a vacuum, as Clinton's effective counter attacks have shown. Bush is
simply not in a position to take the moral, political or economic high
ground on any issue. And he gives Clinton fresh ammunition on a daily
basis!

Prediction: If it is a slug-fest tonight, Bush will be gored. He will be
impaled on the horns of his dilemma to attack or lay back.
---
Joe Knapp    jmk@cbvox.att.com

clinton: (KLIN-tun) v. tr. 1. to wade into a torrent of bilge, bile, and
sewage and emerge victorious smelling like a rose.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis)
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:21:16 GMT
Organization: Austerlitz, Gershovitz, and Carmichael

In article <7160@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> dejst5+@pitt.edu (David   E Joslin) writes:
>jdooley@maemaster.eng.uci.edu (John R. Dooley) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct8.025825.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
>>>> That's a personal matter, none of our business.  If you insist on harping on
>>>> this topic, then I'll insist on an explanation why Bush 
>>>>won't deny ever having an extramarital affair.
>>>He did. And so did Miss Fitzgerald, for that matter.
>>
>>He denied having an affair with Miss Fitzgerald, but
>
>When did he deny having an affair with her?  All I've heard is one denial
>of a specific incident, the one that came out of a footnote of some book.
>He has never denied having an affair with J. Fitzgerald, as far as I
>know.  Any references?
>
And while we're on the subj of unescorted visits to Communist countries:
didn't Bar leave Poppy alone w/ the ChiComs for much of his tenure as
Ambassador there? And wasn't the aforesaid La Fitzgerald loyally at
his side? Until Poppy comes clean in re: every single moment of that time,
albeit 20 years ago, I for one will consider Bush convicted not only 
of making whoopee, but considering the Bush family financial dealings
with the ChiComs & his refusal to rebuke the butchers of Tienamen Square
COUPLED w/ the current, otherwise inexplicably wretched state of the 
economy (PROOF BY PONDEROUSLY HAMFISTED DESPERATE ASSERTION) but also that 
George Herbert Walker Bush is a double agent, recruited in Peking,
with the despicable assignment to completely undermine the our way
of life, our economy, and our freedoms. I think the American people deserve
no less. And God bless you all and  God bless the USA!!!

(Help...I've broken my syntax and I can't get up.)

Gee...McCarthyite raving is fun. C'mon in people. Join the fun.
Plenty of ambiguous moments for everyone! Last one in gets to actually
have some self-respect.
-- 
Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu> No one -- from sea to shining sea -- 
can tell us why we are having all this trouble with our Republic.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Subject: Re: Dan Quayle Should Be President
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:25:48 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.135531.1182@umr.edu> jeff@don't.want.email writes:
>
>The only bad thing about the fact that Bill Clinton will probably win (to  
>my great dissappointment), is that Dan Quayle will not really have a  
>chance to be president.  

This is perhaps the strongest argument I have ever heard in support 
of voting for Clinton.  Thanks for posting it!

>If George Bush wins, I think that Dan Quayle will  
>be able to turn his image around and be one of the greatest presidents  
>ever.

Excuse me????
I've seen children act more presidential than Dan Quayle did during the 
debate last night.



-- 
Scott W. Roby           *This sentence no verb.*      "No Matter where you go..
Phys.& Astr.Dept.    ///// / /  /  *|*  \  \ \ \\\\\      there you are!"
Univ.of Delaware    ((((( ( (  (  * + *  )  ) ) )))))   -> Buckaroo Banzai
roby@brahms.udel.edu \\\\\ \ \  \  *|*  /  / / /////   *Standard Disclaimer*
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
From: skywalke@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won NOT!
Date: 14 Oct 1992 14:08:43 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Howard Hughes Medical Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <1992Oct14.005404.13659@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
 >Yup, I think Our Man Dan actually won.  He came out there shooting,
 >was aggressive with the occassional little fact, and didn't make an
 >obvious gaffe.

True, no gaffe, he just lied, distorted the Clinton Plan and lied about
Sen Gore's book and his voting record. 
Check the record Danny I did and so has every national media outlet.

 >Gore was wooden, and there were a couple of lines I thought he should
 >have followed up on but didn't.  So much for zinging your opponent
 >with the single-moderator.

I can accept wooden. Danny was shrill and very whinny sounding.

 >Quayle was helped in part by having the closing zing a number of
 >times, when I thought the discussion could have continued for quite a
 >while longer.  Lawyers are right when they say they'd rather have
 >closing arguments before a jury.  Further, expectations were so low
 >for him that he would have come across peachy by not saying, for
 >instance, "Hypocracy is when hippos rule the world."  But give the
 >Vice Shrub credit: he came prepared.  Quayle as the GOP nominee in
 >'96?

I thought he did his job, attack, lie and distort and keep the 
debate off the main issue to of the voters, the economy.

 >Adm. Stockdale.  Hmm.  I felt sorry for him, especially at the
 >beginning.

Stockdale is a well respected person but shows the weekness of the 
Perot bid for the presidency, Perot talks about getting under the
hood and fixing whats wrong, you better have some idea of how the motor
works before you start turning bolts and tearing it apart. Once again
the Perot campaign points out problems but offers no solutions.

[This wont change the race stuff deleted]

agreed.

The point of the debate is as Sen. Gore said at the start
"to assume the office of the president of The United States in the case
of the presidents death"

Who could we "trust" to fill this roll from the three ?

Simple:
Sen. Albert Gore 

-- 
Timothy B. Reynolds
CLINTON/GORE
Election Campaign '92
Houston, Tx 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis)
Subject: Re: Class Warfare in America (was Re: Upper--middle--lower class??)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:18:22 GMT
Organization: Austerlitz, Gershovitz, and Carmichael

Mark Wilson writes:
>
>"There are two classes of people in this country.  Those who work for
>a living and those who vote for a living."
>
The poor and the future don't vote.
-- 
Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu> No one -- from sea to shining sea -- 
can tell us why we are having all this trouble with our Republic.