HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines)
Subject: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 08:18:35 GMT

From article <RLK.92Sep5204746@underprize.think.com>, by rlk@underprize.think.com (Robert Krawitz):
> In article <1992Sep5.153736.6743@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
> 
> BTW, it's about time someone called Bush on the "tax and spend" issue,
> particularly after the blatant handouts of the past week (the grain
> export subsidy and the sale of aircraft to Taiwan).

Yes, Bush has bought farmer votes with the mortgages of Australian farmers,
who produce wheat more efficiently than american farmers, but cannot compete
with grain sold below cost by virtue of subsidies.

George Bush can go to hell.


-- 
Jason Haines - System Operator, MacInTouch BBS (02) 743-5997 (TeleFinder)
jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU
_______________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
	<ART.92Sep10104125@world.std.com>
	<1992Sep10.212650.8832@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 06:15:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.212650.8832@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:

   In article <ART.92Sep10104125@world.std.com>, art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
   > 
   > In article <1992Sep9.183218.14075@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
   > 
   > [...]
   >    > 
   >    > He shouldn't accept it because it's not true.  See the August 31, 1992
   >    > issue of The National Review for a complete discussion of this; a
   >    > discussion containing more numbers and analysis than most people care to
   >    > sit through.  But, read it carefully and see the liberal lies exposed.
   >    > 
   >    > 
   > 
   >    The National Review....now there is an unbiased source....NOT!
   > 
   >    Dr. Norman J. LaFave
   > 
   > Say Doc, instead of puerile statements like this why don't you supply us
   > with some facts to back up that ever so incisive comment.
   > 
   > Allan R. Thompson, Ph.D.
   > 
   > 

   OK you're on Doc,

   The National Review is run by Buckley and has the likes of Reagan, Selleck,
   and Heston doing adds for it. These do not exactly constitute a covey of
                    ^^^^
Jeesssus Doctor, yore so smart I would have thought you wood have lernt
to spel bi nou.

   liberals. Read the rag sometime and then tell me what constitutes bias
   journalism.

   By the way, I see your company put your title in your official .sig too.
   :-/

Tain't my company, Herr Doktor.  Yure just so fuking smart I just kant
imajin how us dops kan kepe up with yor brainz.

On a serious note, Dr. I really would appreciate it if you would provide
us with some objective data showing how or where the National Review has
allowed its admittedly editorial bias to interfere with the facts.  After
all, you are a DOCTOR, and therefore a man of science, which implies
objectivity, so I'm sure you would be happy to supply these facts.  Or
are you just blowing your DRate out your ass?

Allan R. Thompson Ph.D.

   Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 19:42:59 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Sep9.191920.23650@technology.com> richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy) writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.041119.25288@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>[stuff deleted]
>>
>>I'll bet you hold him responsible for this year's bad weather, too. I don't
>>know about you, but I don't put my faith in ANY government official to
>>improve the economy. The best official is one who would get as much government
>>as possible OUT of the economy, and Bush is more in that direction than
>>Clinton.
>>
>I know this "keep government out of the economy" is the key point to
>the republican ideology, but.....the examples of Japan, Korea, Singapore, etc.
>seem to indicate that there can be a very close relationship between the
>government and the economy and things can work out very well. ...

    You might want to add the Soviet Union to your list.  Indeed, didn't
    the Soviets enjoy higher rates of economic growth in the not so distant past?
    While goverment intervention can keep the economy going, for a while,
    it is important to consider the long term consequences too.  Today, Japan's
    economy is a mess, and getting worse.  Sweden, long proud of her generous 
    social welfare system, yesterday boosted its discount rate to 75% (YES, 
    SEVENTY FIVE!!!).

    A couple of month ago WSJ ran an article comparing the economies of Hong Kong
    and Singapore.  Both countries are of similar size and culture.  Both enjoy
    similar rates of economic growth but, thanks to the S. goverment, S.'s business
    investement/GNP ratio is twice as high as that of H-K's. Another word, S.'s
    return on investement is half of that of H-K's.

    Just like the rest of us, goverment officials work to improve their standard 
    of living, and not necessarily the economy.  Their paychecks/fringe benefits
    come from higher taxes and/or borrowing, not from higher economic growth.
    Their future earning potential often correlates with the number of new
    regulations they will have imposed on the private sector...
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: all opinions are mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: Curious Goods (formerly Louis Vendredi Antiques)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 16:17:24 GMT

john@anasazi.com (John Moore) writes:
>jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines) writes:
>]
>]Yes, Bush has bought farmer votes with the mortgages of Australian 
>]farmers, who produce wheat more efficiently than american farmers, 
>]but cannot compete with grain sold below cost by virtue of subsidies.
>
>I'll bet that OZ has it's own version of farm protections.

Actually, they don't 'cos with a population half of California's
(or, 2/3rd of Canada's) they just can't afford it.  When Bush made
his Pacific Rim trip early this year (before Barf-o-mania in Japan)
Aussie farmers were politely demonstrating (seriously) to Bush to
exempt Australia if push comes to shove on agricultural subsidies
targetted against the EC due to French recalcitrance on the issue
before GATT and in current practice.  They were begging not to be
caught in the cross-fire, but got hit anyways.  Unfortunately, it
is taking down GATT allies on America's team such as Australia and 
Canada.

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				
> gld@cunixB.cc.columbia.EDU		Oct 26/92: Just say "OUI!"
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			(Let's worry about the economy!)
From: JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
Subject: Re: Bush  about to get pasted for  Family Leave Bill.. Yay!
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:39:07 GMT
Organization: GM Research Labs

In article <88050@netnews.upenn.edu>
sal@grip.cis.upenn.edu (Marcos Salganicoff) writes:
>and  giving  away my tax  money  along  the campaign  trial to buy off
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Great Freudian slip!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:53:24 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Sep10.212650.8832@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
]OK you're on Doc,
]
]The National Review is run by Buckley and has the likes of Reagan, Selleck,
]and Heston doing adds for it. These do not exactly constitute a covey of
]liberals. Read the rag sometime and then tell me what constitutes bias
]journalism.
]
]By the way, I see your company put your title in your official .sig too.

Gulp. can the mere untitled me put in a comment? Well... I'm going to
anyway.

Unlike our national TV networks, the National Review does not claim
to be unbiased. It is unabashedly a conservative magazine. That does not,
however, mean that facts published there can be so easily brushed
aside. The presentation is conservatives and the selection of facts
may have a conservative bias, but the data itself is apolitical (ie,
whatever facts they choose to present tend to be correct - even if
they may be incomplete).


-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - If a field of study has the word "science" in it - it isn't a science - -
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: u734120@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (John Lamp)
Subject: Re: Australian Farm Supports (Was: Bush is a mother fucker)
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 05:13:25 GMT

dave@alex.uchicago.edu (Dave Griffith) writes:


>Perhaps I'm mistaken, but my I believe that while Australia does not have
>price supports for grain, it has rather hefty price supports for wool
>(which makes political sense in a country with more sheep than people).
>The support takes the form of a government set minimum price for wool.  If
>the market price falls below the minimum, the Australian government buys it
>for the minimum.  My references are at home, but I thought that the minimum
>price was so high last year that it resulted in huge overproduction by
>Australian shepards, with the govt. of Oz forced to buy and then "dump"
>the wool onto the international markets.  Awful nice of the down under
>taxpayers to help pay for my sweaters last winter.

Not mistaken, but certainly out of date, and slightly inaccurate.

The Australian Wool Corporation does have a floor price scheme.  This is
not a subsidy per se, as no dumping takes place.  When the price is down
the AWC buys, when it is up, it sells.  The aim (however mistaken) is to
minimise price fluctuations.

Last year there was a problem, so the floor price was slashed.  Any decrease
in the price was due to a _lack_ of government intervention.

PS don't let the squatters hear you call them shepards (sic) they
will go off the deep end at any suggestion that they indulge in anything as
demeaning as manual labour!

Cheers
John


--
   _--_|\             John Lamp, originating in Hobart, Tasmania
  /      \                 Phone: 002 23 1366 - Fax: 002 34 5685
  \_.--._/                   email: u734120@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
        v <-----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Detroit, MI
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 04:04:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.081835.25466@ucc.su.OZ.AU> jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines) writes:
"From article <RLK.92Sep5204746@underprize.think.com>, by rlk@underprize.think.com (Robert Krawitz):
"> In article <1992Sep5.153736.6743@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
"> 
"> BTW, it's about time someone called Bush on the "tax and spend" issue,
"> particularly after the blatant handouts of the past week (the grain
"> export subsidy and the sale of aircraft to Taiwan).
"
"Yes, Bush has bought farmer votes with the mortgages of Australian farmers,
"who produce wheat more efficiently than american farmers, but cannot compete
"with grain sold below cost by virtue of subsidies.
"
"George Bush can go to hell.
"

George Bush is also a mass murderer who ordered the killing of about
250,000 of our fellow human beings in the Persian Gulf. For that reason
alone, I can never vote for him again. 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.democrats.d:32 alt.politics.bush:4470 talk.politics.misc:44340 alt.politics.clinton:4530
From: echo@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Hagame uno mas!  Esos son muy cool!)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:26:41 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Sep7.181208.980@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> pdl2r@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter D. Lauren) writes:
>In article <1992Sep6.173239.19058@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>>In article <1992Sep6.081835.25466@ucc.su.OZ.AU> jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines) writes:
>>]Yes, Bush has bought farmer votes with the mortgages of Australian farmers,
>>]who produce wheat more efficiently than american farmers, but cannot compete
>>]with grain sold below cost by virtue of subsidies.
>>]
>>]George Bush can go to hell.
>>Err, it would be more appropriate to blame almost everyone in the US Federal
>>Government. The farm "support" silliness goes back 60 years and cannot
>>be blamed on Bush or the current democrat controlled congress. It is
>>done by every government in the world (take a look at what France or
>>Japan do to foreign competitors). I'll bet that OZ has it's own
>>version of farm protections.
>Australia does not have farm subsidies.  I remember that this was a source
>of a lot of anti-American hostility when I was working in Australia.  It
>is obvious that Bush is trying to buy votes in key states

While I'm not a Bush supporter, this situation has nothing (or very little)
to do with buying votes.  The subsidies that Jason is talking about are an
extension of the standard US farm subsidies (the ones that are remnants of
the most "successful" (read long-lived) New Deal program).  The new subsidies
that have pissed the Australians off are subsidies that were instituted in
response to the massive farm subsidies handed out by the European Community.
The threat was that, if Europe didn't back off, we would bolster the subsidies
that we were giving out to keep our farmers competitive in the market.  The
same sort of thing has been going on with Japan; it just hasn't got as ugly.

The problem with this is that Australia, which has no subsidies, is getting
stuck with the high hard one.  Even though they are much more efficient and
cost effective than the Americans or Europeans, they can't compete and survive
because the US and Europe toss buckets of money at their farmers.  And the
biggest problem is that Australia is legitimately pissed, but is too small
and doesn't have enough clout to do anything about.

Of course, they have been threatening a Crocodile Dundee embargo. :)

-- 
  //          ---<--@                     -Echo
\X/                                        The Potato-Salad-Eatin' Fool.
INTERNET: echo@ucscb.ucsc.edu              AT&T: (408) 427-9814 home
                                                 (408) 431-5387 work
"It's a Man Ray kind of sky."

Paul Reed Smith is a god.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: pdl2r@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter D. Lauren)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 18:12:08 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.173239.19058@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>Keywords: 
>
>In article <1992Sep6.081835.25466@ucc.su.OZ.AU> jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines) writes:
>]
>]Yes, Bush has bought farmer votes with the mortgages of Australian farmers,
>]who produce wheat more efficiently than american farmers, but cannot compete
>]with grain sold below cost by virtue of subsidies.
>]
>]George Bush can go to hell.
>
>Err, it would be more appropriate to blame almost everyone in the US Federal
>Government. The farm "support" silliness goes back 60 years and cannot
>be blamed on Bush or the current democrat controlled congress. It is
>done by every government in the world (take a look at what France or
>Japan do to foreign competitors). I'll bet that OZ has it's own
>version of farm protections.

Australia does not have farm subsidies.  I remember that this was a source
of a lot of anti-American hostility when I was working in Australia.  It
is obvious that Bush is trying to buy votes in key states

Peter Lauren.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: thorson@typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu (Bill Thorson)
Subject: Bush giving away money
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 19:26:27 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University -- Atmos Sci


  I wan't suprized that Bush ran around the country buying votes
from farmers and the aircraft industry but one thing made me mad.

  Why did he offer to rebuild Homestead AF base?  I would seem
a likely base to put on the list of base closings.  I was suprized
that nobody in the media thought of this.  We should have an
rule that all bases destroyed by volcanoes, hurricane, or
earthquakes should be put on the list of doomed bases.

Bill
-- 
#!/bin/sh
#-----------------------------------------------------------------------#
echo Bill Thorson                   thorson@typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu
echo Dept of Atmospheric Science    +1 303 491-8339
echo Colorado State University
echo Ft. Collins,  CO  80523
#-----------------------------------------------------------------------#
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: avery@netcom.com (Avery Ray Colter)
Subject: Re: Bush about to get pasted for Family Leave Bill.. Yay!
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 19:58:34 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

sal@grip.cis.upenn.edu (Marcos Salganicoff) writes:

>Seriously, though, I think it's  disgusting the  way he's going  around
>and  giving  away my tax  money  along  the campaign  trial to buy off
>special interest groups to help his reelection  chances.(i.e.  general
>dynamics  taiwan fighter deal and  ultra-generosity  of FEMA  disaster
>money) I  understand that those people need help, but I think he would
>not be so generous normally.  

Well, speaking for the Golden State, he was not nearly so generous after
1) The Earthquake, 2) The Oakland Hills Fire, and 3) The South Central Riot.
Combined, these three disasters caused roughly the same damage as the Florida
hurricane, but we Californians were told we'd get 75% of the rebuilding money
from the government, IF AND ONLY IF we devoted the other 25% without fail.

-- 
Avery Ray Colter ("Elfcat") - 	avery@netcom.netcom.com (IP 192.100.81.100)
(510) 656-1902          	{elfcat|arcolter}@aol.com
"Heaviness is the root of lightness; calmness is the controller of haste"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:00:35 GMT

Re: Subject

No, no, Barbara's his wife, though it's easy to see where the
confusion comes in.
-- 
In the fight between you and the world, back the world.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Reply-To: a.Faris@trl.oz.au 
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne,Australia
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:05:44 GMT

In article <QefqMXC00iUxA2F04G@andrew.cmu.edu>, Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
|> Xref: titan alt.politics.democrats.d:40 talk.politics.misc:43096 alt.politics.clinton:4020 alt.politics.bush:4100
|> Organization: Freshman, CIT general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
|> Path: titan!trlluna!bruce.cs.monash.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!ew2r+
|> Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
|> Message-ID: <QefqMXC00iUxA2F04G@andrew.cmu.edu>
|> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 11:13:39 -0400 
|> From: Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
|> Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
|> In-Reply-To: <BuD7sq.K08@apollo.hp.com>
|> References: <ayrn6jp.jmoody@netcom.com> <1992Sep9.041119.25288@anasazi.com> <1992Sep9.191920.23650@technology.com>
|> 	<BuD7sq.K08@apollo.hp.com>
|> Lines: 2
|> 
|> Of course Bush is a mother fucker.  He's got kids.  Let's keep the
|> language civilized, allright?

Yes he is.
From: hahn@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (David James Hahn)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
Subject: Re: Bush giving away money
Date: 12 Sep 92 19:39:59 GMT
Reply-To: hahn@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Originator: hahn@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From article <3727@faatcrl.UUCP>, by jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan):
> hahn@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (David James Hahn) writes:
> 
> 
>   The "job" of Homestead was not just the missons it provided for DEA,
> Air Force and other things, it was practically the sole provider of an
> economy in that area.
> 

What I was thinking when I mentioned DEA was that Florida (in my view)
has two strategic uses : DEA operations and watching Cuba.  Then, since
Cuba is almost a non-threat today, it seems that the number of bases
should not be kept constant. Moreover, it seems completly impractial 
to reconstruct a base when this constant dips.  The increase of a state
income tax you mentioned, seems that it would have a good short term 
effect, but it doesn't create a solution to the fact that, "it was
practically the sole provider of an economy in that area."  

					Dave



-- 
			     David Hahn
 		   University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
		         hahn@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
	<ART.92Sep9113120@world.std.com>
	<1992Sep9.183218.14075@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:41:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.183218.14075@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:

[...]
   > 
   > He shouldn't accept it because it's not true.  See the August 31, 1992
   > issue of The National Review for a complete discussion of this; a
   > discussion containing more numbers and analysis than most people care to
   > sit through.  But, read it carefully and see the liberal lies exposed.
   > 
   > 

   The National Review....now there is an unbiased source....NOT!

   Dr. Norman J. LaFave

Say Doc, instead of puerile statements like this why don't you supply us
with some facts to back up that ever so incisive comment.

Allan R. Thompson, Ph.D.

Xref: sparky alt.politics.democrats.d:41 alt.politics.bush:4541 talk.politics.misc:44428 alt.politics.clinton:4629