HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Congratulatoin, Bill-Bots!
Date: 28 Jan 1993 18:20:29 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu (J. Morgan Morris) says:

>an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:

>>        Just out of curiosity, Doc.
>
>>        Are you planning to rebuild America BEFORE or AFTER
>>        the fire is out?????
>
>Once again, I implore that someone explain this Broward Horne guy
>to me. He seems to be a few ants short of a picnic.
>

       YES, YES, I don't know WHAT the hell I'm doing.
       Eh, you HAD your chance, Gorman. It's Ripley's turn.

>Later,
>Morgan
>
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>
>John Morgan Morris
>Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
>Georgia State University
>University Plaza
>Atlanta, GA. 30303-3083
>
>Internet: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu
>Telephone: (404) 651-2253
>FAX: (404) 651-2246
>
>

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Privatization
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:39:07 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.071019.8738@news.columbia.edu> gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>
>>Britain is privatising its electric industry.  We can't -- it's 
>>already private.
>
>Except for being private, ConEd and LILCo seem to stumble and bumble
>MUCH worse than Ontario Hydro or Hydro Quebec ... and note that in the
>latter cases, their limited markets (Canada's two *largest* provinces;
>barely midsized on a US scale) would be unprofitable to anyone who'd
>risk dumping a lot of capital into buying them ...
>

Well, Gary, Ontario Hydro and Hydro Quebec have both outlived their
usefulness as public crown corporations and should both be mostly
privatized as has occurred in Britain.  Both are now bloated inefficient
bureaucratic monsters and big polluters, and in particular, Hydro
rates and debt in Ontario, and debt in Quebec are out of control.

In Ontario, for example, Ontario Hydro is blocking a whole series
of cogeneration projects, which is stifling economic development
in the province...and it's perpetual rate increases over the last
few years above the rate of inflation have narrowed the historic
price advantage Ontario industry had over average American rates
to a mere sliver.

Some really tough decisions are going to have to be made about
Ontario Hydro before the end of the century, and the NDP in Ontario
are unlikely to do it soon.

The first, which has to be made this year, is that the aging Bruce
nuclear plants, which are in need of an incredibily expensive refitting,
should be mothballed, which would free up capacity for a multitude
of private cogeneration projects to go ahead...the NDP will be torn
between its unions and its environmental wing on this
one...unfortunately, the NDP has cowtowed to its union constituency
at every turn in its mandate...and I fear they will make the wrong
decision AGAIN.

Ontario Hydro and Hydro Quebec once served useful purposes...but
now both are cancerous bureaucracies eating away at the health of
the Canadian economy.  A good thing often is not a good thing forever,
and the electric utilities in Central Canada need a massive
restructuring...and this should have been done during the good times
of the late eighties...now it will be much more painful to do.

Gerald

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Waiting for Perot (Was Re: Who's weakening the constitution?)
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:35:48 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1728@tecsun1.tec.army.mil>, riggs@descartes.tec.army.mil (Bill Riggs) writes:
> In article <13948@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# #Bush wasn't strong anything.  Large numbers of conservatives (about
# #1 in 5) voted for Perot because of disgust with Bush's leftist politics.
# 
# 	I shudda known - after George Bush wiped Pat Buchanan off the
# electoral map in all 50 states, Clayton the Libertarian sadly and with 
# a heavy heart, turned his back on the Republican Party and turned to the 
# "Great White Hope", Ross Perot.

No, I didn't vote for Perot, though I know a fair number of people who
did.  But then again, I'm not a conservative.

# 	CLAYTON is the reason why Bill Clinton carried California, and  is now
# in his third day as the 42d President of the United States of America.
# 
# 	This point should not be forgotten - after all, elephants never
# forget.
# 
# Bill R.

Clinton received 43% of the vote.  Bush received 37%.  Perot received
effectively all the rest.  Most of Perot's support came from 
conservative to moderate sorts who would likely have voted for Bush --
which would have probably given Bush a thin margin of victory over
Clinton.  Why is this so hard for you to accept?
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"When freedom destroys order, order will destroy freedom." -- Eric Hoffer
Not a goal, just a statement of reality.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: mdl@cypress.com (Matt Landrum)
Subject: Re: Media Coverage (Re: CNN bias 
Organization: Cypress Semiconductor Southeast Design Center
	<randall.727493157@seashore> <C18Mpx.Gzr@ns1.nodak.edu>
	<1993Jan22.053408.16056@pony.Ingres.COM>
	<ATAYLOR.93Jan24150646@gauss.nmsu.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 06:35:49 GMT

In article <ATAYLOR.93Jan24150646@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:


	   Zoe Baird is guilty of a Federal FELONY;

oh, the dreaded "federal" felony ploy

           she and her husband
	   properly should be indicted and tried on Federal Tax Fraud
	   charges; if she was a Bush appointee-to-be, the "unbiased"
	   media would have been demanding same (remember John Tower?).
	   Instead, every news story I've seen or read has been
	   utterly sympathetic.

You don't read much news do you?  Maybe I just don't read enough.  The
two daily newspapers I get grilled her as did most of the discussion
type news shows I watched.  Maybe the next 20 news stories I see or
read will be utterly sympathetic.

	   And these are just off the top of my head, mind you...

It's a plot I tell you.  I will not deny that if she had been
Republican there would have been more yelling and screaming, but
that's just my opinion.

[stuff deleted]

   <And if they caught Bush and Reagan in scandals then you shouldn't 
   <blame the press  for revealing it (not that I'm saying you are. 
   <I'm just making a point).
   <	   O.K. I'm done. Flame away.

	   And when the press finally admits that Baird commited
	   a FELONY, they brush it under the rug with a mumbled
	   comment such as,"Oh, well, everyone's doing it".

Well, why don't you get the appropriate enforcement people convinced
before you worry about the press.

	   No, not everyone is evading Federal FICA taxes....sorry
	   about that, media drones.

oh, the old "federal" fica taxes

and why don't you sign your name like the other 90% of the people
that post?
--


Matt Landrum, CAD Engineer      | e-mail: mdl@cypress.com
Cypress Southeast Design Center | office: (601) 324-4609, FAX - 4614
1 Research Blvd, Suite 200      | "You can get what you want if you
Starkville, MS  39759           | know how to find it." -- Tower of Power


Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69062 talk.politics.theory:5711 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13394
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Minor Historical Nitpick (Was Re: National debt is not bad)
Date: 22 Jan 1993 00:34:47 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) says:

><In article <1jmdbaINNqbj@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>
><In a previous article, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) says:
>
><>Defense expenditures during peace didn't become a Very Big Thing for
><>the US until the Cold War.  The US has historically had a very small
><>military establishment prior to 1939 or so, and has depended more on
>
>
>< Historically, the U.S. has been a second-rate agrarian colony too.
>	
>	Uh, not since the 18th century have we been a colony.
>	And we've not been primarily agrarian since, oh,
>	the late 19th century. 
>
>	A "second-rate agrarian colony" would have been hard
>	pressed to win the Spanish-American war, for example.
>
>

       Our military spending is in direct proportion to our 
   becoming a world power.  Sorry the analogy was too much to 
   handle.  I'll tone it down.
>

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: zygote@cs.uiuc.edu (The seed of all life)
Subject: Re: State's Rights (Was: Re: Destruction of the U.S.)
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:15:34 GMT

colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:

>In article <C187rF.3HI@cs.uiuc.edu>, zygote@cs.uiuc.edu (The seed of all life) writes:
>> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>> 
>> >It's a pretty lousy way to limit power.  From my experience, people
>> 
>> Its all we got, unless you wish to rule be decree.
>> 
>I'm advocating denying the right of State authorities to rule by
>decree.  If that is not what they have done - why were some 

Reducing the power of the FG IS NOT ALLOWING THE STATES TO DO
ANY DAMN THING THEY WANT, any more than not submitting the FG to
the 'higher' authority of the UN is allowing Clinton to rule
by decree.  You cannot rely on having a 'higher authority' limiting
abuses, because at some point, some government will not have another
level over it,
by decree.   
>> No state forced anyone to own slaves, they just protected the practice in
>> the same way that the Fed protected it with the powers available to it at
>> the time.

>Interesting way to look at it.  Would you actually have gone up to
>a slave and told him that "hey, no one FORCED anyone to own you."
>I'm not concerned with whether someone was forced to own slaves, but
>whether people were forced to BE slaves.

My point was that BOTH the FG and state governments protected the practice
with the powers they had available.  They both reacted IN THE SAME DAMN
WAY.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl)
Subject: Re: Are you pro-choice on education? (was Re: Pro-)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:33:54 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <1993Jan21.201613.27707@oakhill.sps.mot.com>, pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:
|> How would a voucher system be any more a 'subsidy for the rich'
|> than the current public school system? This is a red herring.

It will be a subsidy for those who can already afford to send their
kids to private schools.  Those who can't, tough.  Private schools
are a business, and should not be supported with government money.

|> Pro-abortion-choice folks often speak of the family planning
|> angle. (can't let an 'unwanted' child be brought out into the world.)
|> Why isn't the best education for your child considered
|> a part of the important life choices that a family should be able to
|> plan for? We are not speaking of choice in education as a "right", but
|> that choice in education is simply good social policy that
|> is in the best interests of the children and the families involved.

You want an abortion?  Fine, you pay for it.
You want to send your kid to private school?  Fine, you pay for it.

It seems that pro-voucher folks think that private schools have
unlimited space and will take anyone.  Well, that's not true.
They have size limits and admission standards.  And I would guess
that many of these schools would not consider people who need 
vouchers to pay tuition "their type of people."


Jared Dahl
Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: appalled
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:39:26 GMT


         HAITI: Statement - 5/27/92



	 Statement by Governor Bill Clinton on Haitian Refugees

	 I am appalled by the decision of the Bush administration to pick 
	 up fleeing Haitians on the high  seas and forcibly return them to 
	 Haiti before considering their claim to political asylum.  It was  
	 bad enough when there were failures to offer them due process in 
	 making such a claim.  Now  they are offered no process at all 
	 before being returned.

	 This policy must not stand.  It is a blow to the principle of 
	 first asylum and to America's moral  authority in defending the 
	 rights of refugees around the world.  This most recent policy 
	 shift is  another sad example of the Administration's callous 
	 response to a terrible human tragedy.

	 .......


	 As I have said before, if I were President, I would -- in the 
	 absence of clear and compelling  evidence that they weren't 
	 political refugees -- give them temporary asylum until we restored  
	 the elected government of Haiti.

===============================================================================

yup....


--
James W. Meritt:  m23364@mwunix.mitre.org - or - jmeritt@mitre.org
The opinions above are mine.  If anyone else wants to share them, fine.
They may say so if they wish. The facts "belong" to noone and simply are.
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Zoe Baird should step aside
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:26:11 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) says:
>I'd say that it is more a case of trying to get a qualified person
>confirmed dispite the (ethical) warts.  They underestinated the
>size of the warts, IMHO.


       Hmmm.  Underestimated Zoe's warts.
              Underestimated the Haitian Armada.
              Underestimated the debt.

    Well, let's hope the government doesn't going into the contracting
    business, too, shall we?

        ADMISSION:

            Clinton has exceeded my WILDEST dreams so far.
            Michael McKinsley's vaguely troubled and disappointed
           face is PRICELESS.  I have in on tape.  

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHA.

    Oh, man, I hope I cna drive home.

    hHAHAHA

    Everyone wonders what the HELL I have on this screen that's so funny.


heheheh.

HAHAHAHAHAHA
>
>>              George Bush, caught up in the rhetorical smog that said
>> that no one BUT a black could fill the shoes of the St. Thurgood,
>> wound up with a woefully inexperienced Clarence Thomas (though 
>> probably better than any nominee that Clinton will pick).
>
>I've yet to hear anyone claim the Zoe is not qualified due to 
>inexperienced.
>>                                                            Clinton
>> has his Zoe. Serves him right.
>-- 
>Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
>------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
>EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
>

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70365 alt.peeves:19747
From: PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Statement of President Clinton on Health Care Reform Task Force
Organization: University of Tennessee 
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:23:39 GMT

In article <1k578pINNn2u@news.aero.org> helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) writes:
>>Hitler and Stalin liked socialized medicine. Why not President Slickwillie?
>
>Yet another right-wing idiot who's too young to remember a successful
>Democratic presidency. Just because you were pre-pubescent when Reagan
>arrived on the scene doesn't mean there wasn't a world already
>there. Truman was proposing Universal Health Care in 1949. 

Just because an idea is old doesn't make it a good one.  Truman was wrong 
in '49, and Slick Willie is wrong now.


>The beloved
>A.M.A. pounced on it and called it socialized medicine. They also called
>HMO's that, until most doctors realized that was the wave of the future and
>began starting their own group and HMO practicies.

The difference is that HMO's are private, and membership is voluntary, not 
coercive.

>
>Funny, you scream "socialized medicine" but don't seem to have any problem
>driving on public highways and streets which were paid for with TAX
>dollars by EVERYBODY. 

Um, actually, highways and streets shouldn't be paid for with tax dollars.  
Privately owned toll roads, or publicly owned toll roads would move the cost 
from the back of the taxpayer to that of the people who use the roads.


>It's called a SOCIETY, child. We all pay for it,
>we all use it. 

No, it's called a state, and we are forced to pay for it, whether we use it 
or not.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
E-Mail to PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu, mail to ARCHER at that address will
bounce.    "Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70463 misc.legal:23511
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: Statement of President Clinton on Health Care Reform Task Force
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 04:46:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.201607.4782@news.columbia.edu> jsb16@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jennifer S Broekman) writes:

>May you be faced with the choice between buying food and buying penicillin,
>despite having worked since age 13.

A theft is still a theft, no matter what the purpose is.

Dov

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69714 alt.sex:43137 talk.religion.misc:27527 soc.college:6047 alt.peeves:19580
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,talk.religion.misc,soc.college,alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Shocked Beyond ALL BELIEF!!!!!
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:20:40 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1993Jan25.151635.659@st-andrews.ac.uk> ccjm@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin Charles James MacDonald) writes:

|Would you be more shocked to learn that prostitution is legal here in stuffy 
|old Britain? It's only *soliciting* that is illegal. What's the difference?
|How should I know? Solicitors are prostitutes that get caught?

I thought solicitors were attorneys?
-- 
Mob rule isn't any prettier merely because the mob calls itself a government
It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
Wilson's theory of relativity: If you go back far enough, we're all related.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
From: kenter@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Almus Kenter)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Great idea for cutting the deficit
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:27:33 GMT
Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA



	I think that the Clinton administration has chanced upon
a great idea for cutting the deficit.....
     Hire illegal aliens for govt positions!!!!   Just think 
NO Overhead!


			 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,misc.legal
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: NO! President Bill, 72% of Americans are NOT lawyers!
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1993Jan17.061634.6084@midway.uchicago.edu> <13949@optilink.COM>
	<1993Jan22.054522.21869@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:14:36 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.054522.21869@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:

<   Clinton never had a quota.  He had a goal of diversity.  Diversity by
<   ethnic group, geography, and ideology has been common since the beginning
<   of democracy in making appointments.  What Clinton proposed to do is
<   expand this diversity beyond white males by including qualified women 
<   and minorities in the process.

	Yes, we've noticed all the Asian-Americans in the Clinton
	cabinet.....
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70361 misc.legal:23478 alt.politics.usa.constitution:1579
From: spencer@cats.ucsc.edu (Michael Spencer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Necessary and Proper
Date: 28 Jan 1993 18:53:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


Mr Kolodney ruins a very nice summation of the rationale for
"presentism" in interpreting the Constitution by appending 
thereto a rather infantile attempt at psycho-analyzing those
who disagree with him.

There are good arguments against "presentism".
I'm sure that the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson was in its
day applauded as interpreting the Constitution in modern
and up-to-date terms.

The issue is a delicate one, and does not respond well to heat.

-- 

===========================================================================
Michael Spencer            |      2640 Borregas
spencer@cats.ucsc.edu      |      Aptos, CA   95003
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: international response needed
From: mscs240@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
Date: 24 Jan 93 15:49:30 -0600
Organization: Mankato State University

I need someone to send me electronic mail for this computer class I am enrolled
in.  The only requirement is that the mail must be from a country outside the
United States. So someone please send me some mail!  Thanks in advance! My 
user id is mscs240.
From: mancini@fysik.uu.se (Derrick C. Mancini)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: DAY THREE: Either a lie or utter stupidity
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Date: 24 Jan 1993 13:15:18 GMT
Organization: Fysikum, Uppsala Universitet
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: usx221.fysik.uu.se

In article <1jtdkiINNnfg@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
(Richard A. Mulac) wrote:
> I don't know why CBS signed up Letterman to go up against Leno.  They should
> have signed Bill Clinton.  He'll make more people laugh (or possibly cry)
> over the next four years than either of them.
> -- 
> Richard Mulac  

Gee, Richard, I thought the answer to that was obvious.  Clearly, it is
because CBS feels Leno's ratings are vunerable, and that Letterman has
a good chance of taking over the number one spot for late-night
talk/variety
shows.  Seems your analysis of issues in entertainment are as weak as in
politics.

Oh, I see.  It was hyperbole.  Well, I guess most all of your statements
are.
                                     
Derrick C. Mancini
Fysiska Institutionen  -  Uppsala Universitet
Box 530  S751 21  Uppsala  Sverige
mancini@fysik.uu.se
---------------------------------------------
"Are we having fun yet?"  -  Zippy