HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Family Leave (was Re: Bush is pro-child molestors?)
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:56:18 GMT
 <JASON.92Sep10153211@ab20.larc.nasa.gov> <20368@drutx.ATT.COM> 
 <1992Sep15.110510.23860@hemlock.cray.com> <farenebt.716580972@craft.camp.clarkson.edu>
Organization: SPSS Inc.

farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:

>rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:

>>It's interesting that Republicans see parental leave is seen as government 
>>interference while requiring government contractors to conduct drug testing 
>>is not.
>
>The Republicans are just as much big government as the Democrats. It's just
>that the Dems are big govt in the boardroom while GOP's are big govt
>in the bedroom. 
>
>Why should a woman be forced with the choice, "If I have the baby, I will
>lose my job."? Isn't this contrary to the Republican's pro-life platform?
>If she has the baby, she will have another mouth to feed and less income.
>
>Vetoing the family leave bill is another example of how hypocritical
>the Republicans are on family values!
>
Now lets look at reality, please.  

Exactly how many middle class, two-income families can actually afford to 
have one spouse on unpaid leave for an extended period of time?

Exactly how many single-parent families (in any class) can afford for the
parent to take unpaid leave?

This is a pure political ploy by Democrats.  It is meant to do the
following, in my opinion:

1. Embarrass George Bush

2. Pave the way for mandated PAID family leave...

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams   "Space-age cybernomad"     Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (=Black Ribbon=)
Subject: -=( Perot -- If the parties won't face the issues... )=-
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 13:09:00 GMT

C-Span Excerpt -- Brian Lamb interviewing Ross Perot (9-11-92)

<BL>
Let me also tell ya what one of your supporters out there said.. ahmm
privately,  "I think there's going to be an `October Surprise' and so
do a lot of other Perot supporters, and that October Surprise is that
our man's gonna get back in this, visibly and on purpose." What would
you say to that?

<RP>
Ah.. that is certainly not our objective. Our objective is to get the
two parties to face the issues and deal with these issues responsibly
for the benefit of the American People.  And uh, we are working night
and day to get that done. So there is no plan for an October Surprise
or a September Surprise.. All these things are nice things for people
to talk about, there's nothing planned.

<BL>
Well I guess this is the other thing --  Is there any chance that you
might find yourself at some time in October saying, "I published this
book, I've been watching these two candidates, neither one of them are
really gettin' to the thing I think is important, and I'd better step
back in this thing?"

<RP>
There's no chance that I would do it unilaterally. Uhh.. on the other
hand,  millions of people, on their own,  have done the impossible by
putting me on the ballot in all 50 states. I belong to them. Now this
is interesting:  I don't belong to the PACs,  I don't belong to the
Special Interests, I don't have a Committee 100, I've got a committee
of millions, who put me on the ballot with their creativity and their
ingenuity.

If after we do everthing we can to get the parties to face the issues
-- if they won't..  if the volunteers said it's a dirty job,  but you
gotta do it, I belong to them. Now we will have failed if that happens.
It would be far better we think to get it done the other way,  that's
our `fall back' position.  And we've said that from the day I stepped
aside.   So let's try to get the two parties to step up to the plate,
if they don't, then uhh.. we'll do what we have to do.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Organization: Western Software Lab
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 20:11:12 GMT

In article <ART.92Sep11020240@world.std.com> art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.204740.11450@oracle.us.oracle.com> rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers) writes:
>
>
>
>   >All the liberals on the national scene today want to raise taxes.
>
>   Please define "all" and "liberals".
>
>   Or refrain from such mind-bogglingly senile statements.
>
>Show me a liberal who doesn't want to raise taxes and I'll admit that
>Clayton is senile.
>

I'm a liberal, and I don't wish to raise taxes.  I'd rather see
them spent without the current amount of graft.


Take it back from the fed and let the local gov'ts deal with it.

Later,
George

--
To fathom hell, or soar angelic, take a pinch of psychedelic.
				Dr. Osmond
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43877 alt.politics.elections:12469 alt.politics.clinton:4125 alt.politics.marrou:1053 alt.politics.bush:4151
From: bam@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Bruce A. Martin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Why I cannot vote Demoblican OR Replicrat.
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:53:46 GMT
Organization: (none)

In article <Btwuyz.J18@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:

>  Anyway, it has nothing to do with political parties.  As a recent poll
>  posted here on Usenet, and plenty of others have shown, big government
>  programs are what the voters WANT!   They demand that their elected 
>  officials "bring home the bacon" and this alone is the metric by 
>  which they judge and elect them.  Why can't you guys get this through
>  your thick heads?

Yes, the "bring home the bacon" strategy is the root of the problem.

But whenever your "Representative" (sic) brags about bringing another
million dollars back home "to our district", just remember that to accomplish 
this he had to agree to spending at least $434,000,000 in the districts
of his log-rolling cronies.  

People are gradually beginning to catch onto this scam, but not quickly enough,
and they don't know what to do about it.

The problem is systemic -- it cannot be cured on a district-by-district basis.
Any member of Congress who fails to cooperate in this scam will find his
district cut out entirely.  Throwing out your own Rep. helps a little bit, 
but it's not enough.  Also, your own district will get less from the new guy, 
so nobody wants to start the process.

What you really need is the ability to simultaneously throw out
the other 434 bums, or at least limit the damage they can do.

The only hope is term limits!

Since the Congress is unlikely to initiate a term-limit amendment,
this  requires bill from the legislatures of 2/3 (34) of the states.

bam@bnl.gov (Bruce A. Martin)     /|\Master of the Tripods of Hephaestus./|\  
[My opinions are my property, belong to me only, and represent no one else!]
# include discaimers.h          /*** Repeal the Sixteenth Amendment now! ***/
# delete BUSHLIPS&&SlickWillie  /*** Marrou/Lord in '92.  (800) 682-1776 ***/
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.drugs,alt.conspiracy
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Possible Connection...
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:46:05 GMT

PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (David Veal) writes:
] In article <1992Sep3.124045.8199@wetware.com>
] drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] >mmarx@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Matthew Marx) writes:
] >] >drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] >] >> dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
] >]
] >] > AMEN Brother And PREACH IT!!!!!!
] >] > HeteroSexuality IS CUREABLE!!!!!
] >]
] >] > As Long as Hetro's Are Allowed to Wallow in their Sin and Degradation
] >] > what Will Protect the MORALS and SCRUPPLES and WholeSomeFamilyValues!!!!!
] >]
] >] > I Agree Brother! OutLaw Hetro's NOW!!!!!
] >] > Its Not enough to "Just Say NO! to Hetro!"
] >] > We Must OUTLAW THEM! We Must Make THEM find The CURE!!!!!
] >]
] >] I *hope* drieux (, just drieux) is joking, for his petty war against
] >] heterosexuality (not to mention proper cApitalIzatioN) is inane.
] >] Suppose we outlaw heterosexuality. Then the human race is extinct in
] >] one generation. Think about it.
] >
] >think about the Fact that all the BRUTAL MASS MURDERES
] >and MORAL DEGENERATE SICKO's on this planet were born
] >by Flagrant HeteroSexuality!!!!!
] 
]      *And* the breathed oxygen, *and* they we subject to gravity, *and*
] they all had DNA, *and* they all had circulatory systems.

I never Noticed THAT!!!!!

Obviously as a Part of the War On Drugs we MUST
outlaw this 'oxygen' stuff, as OBVIOUSLY it is
a leading cause of SO MANY DANGEROUS social Problems,

Like HeteroSexuality....

ciao
drieux

ps: is there some sort of 'oxygen lobby' in DC that
has been suppressing all of this or what?


-- 
If I have Told You Once, I've Told You a Thousand Times:
To Keep Good Girls From Going Bad,
Put them back in the Refrigerator.
This Also Works for Stale NFS Handles.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines
From: mike@uunet!tellab5!odgate (Mike J. Kelly)
Subject: Re: Health care will-o-wisps
Organization: Odesta Corporation
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:04:58 GMT

<DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>>In <9209011924.AA00410@poly.math.cornell.edu>, harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU
>>(misc.activism.progressive co-moderator) writes:
>>        My dad had a heart attack last week.  He obtained immediate acces to a
>>cardiac critical care unit, and his angiogram is being done today.  Not next
>>month.  Not next year.  And yes, I think the increased cost is worth it.

>If his need was urgent, he would have received the care in Canada, too.

I just can't believe that intelligent people would take seriously the 
propaganda that Canadians are dying because of lack of access to care.
Canada is not a poor country.  The standard of living is fairly similar
to the U.S.  It is a democracy.  Do you seriously believe that Canadians
would put up with a system that wasn't serving their needs?  Why do you
rarely hear *Canadians* complaining about their system?

Let's have some common sense here.

-- 
--
Mike Kelly               Odesta Corporation, Northbrook, Illinois, USA
...!clout!odgate!mike    - Until odesta.com is registered.
odgate!mike@clout.uucp   - From the Internet.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: What Here!?! (Re: Working for change?)
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:41:29 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Tom Nelson RD) writes:
|> >
|> >Do you REALLY think that Clinton .vs. Bush is a CHOICE?
|> 
|> Yes I do think that there is a choice there, Ross Perot is still on the 
|> ballet here in California,  Leona B. Felani (did I spell that correctly?)
|> is running.  There are plenty of choices out there, you just have to go 
|> and find out what they are, not stay home and complain that third party 
|> candidates don't get enough coverage in the mass media.  Of the two major 
|> candidates it is a choice between continued or accelerated progress 
|> towards catastrophic social change, and dragging that particular pain out 
|> for a few more years (or possibly decades)
|> 
Actually, I am beginning to agree.  Ross really is a choice.  After all, he
is demonstrating that he is as good at double-speak as both major party
candidates.  

	This morning he said "I don't want to have to be a candidate."

	Also, if he is planning on re-entering, which certainly looks 
	likely, then he is ducking the open forum the other candidates 
	are facing.  Much like Bush's ducking of meaningful debates.

	Ross says he is not a candidate, but has written letters to a
	number of state registrars saying he is a candidate.

Ross Perot, the prevaricating clone.  (Or is that clown?)

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: James Baker
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 15 Sep 92 12:21:30 CDT


In article <1992Sep14.181807.29941@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
> In article <1992Sep14.114727.7279@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
> >
> >If Bush really needs James Baker to save his campaign (ie create
> >a domestic program for Bush to run on), why not dump the middle
> >man (Bush) and have Baker run for president.
> 
> The James Baker who failed to reveal his stock in a major American
> bank while he was negotiating a bailout of South American debt to
> First World Banks,

But did he claim to be "out of the loop"?

>                     the James Baker who was Secretary of the Treasury
> while nothing was done about the S&L crisis in Reagan's second term,

But did he blame it on Congress?

> the James Baker who presided over the Willie Horton campaign,

But did he blame is on "the liberals"?
>                                                               the
> James Baker who was Secretary of State while the US encouraged,
> financed, and armed Saddam Hussein, 

But did he blame it on Carter or "the Great Society"?

>                                     and encouraged Milosovic by
> saying the US preferred maintaining Yugoslavian territorial integrity,

But did he blame it on "the liberal media"?

> and tried preventing Gorbachev's Soviet Union from collapsing...

But did he promise not to do it again?

> this James Baker?

Sure.  The policies would not be any different, but at least we would
not have to listen to blame, excuses, and promises not to do it again 
for everything he's done.

-- 
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!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Perot Again?
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 15 Sep 92 11:33:15 CDT


In article <1992Sep15.114959.14996@midway.uchicago.edu>, sug6@amber.uchicago.edu (Patrick Sugent) writes:
> 
>   I was just watching PBS last night and the anchorpundit (or whatever)
> said she had been tipped that Perot was calling a news conference
> Friday and will probably re-enter the Presidential race.
> 
>   I'm not sure how much (if any) difference it will make, but I thought
> people might like to know.

I heard on the radio that a CA poll showed Clinton with a 21 point
lead in a three way race.  It was something like

	Clinton mid-40's%
	Bush    mid-20's%
	Perot   17%

Given the tight race in TX (Wall Street Journal has an article on it 
today), I think Perot would tilt the state to Clinton.

-- 
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!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: On-Line Copy of REPUBLICAN PLATFORM desired!
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 04:21:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.224308.21494@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>In article <5d2yk_j@rpi.edu> buckmr@vccnw02.its.rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire) writes:
>]We oppose efforts to include sexual preference as a protected minority
>]receiving preferential status under civil rights statutes at the Federal, state
>]and local level." --1992 Republican National Commitee campaign platform.
>
>So what is wrong with this? Why SHOULD a sexual preference be a "protected
>minority receiving preferential status?" This goes far beyond equality
>or lack of prejudice, to the point of preference. Perhaps you would favor
>making sexual preference as a protected minority if the preference 
>favored was heterosexual, or perhaps pedophilia?

Preferential status, yeah.  Like being able to marry?  Like being able
to serve in the military without fearing that you'll be one of the
1500 people they kick out every year because they're lesbigay?  Like
not receiving security clearance because you're lesbigay and you can't
come out because you can't get security clearance because you're
lesbigay?  Like losing your job when your supe discovers you're
lesbigay?

The much debated California bill (AB101) that our governor vetoed
would have added sexual orientation (please note that, covering all
sexual orientations) to a long list of other traits that people can't
be discriminated on the basis of:  gender, religious beliefs and
practices, color, race, ethnic background, country of origin...

You don't think being hetero isn't protected in the US?  When was the
last time you heard of someone being fired for being hetero?  When was
the last time a hetero couple was denied a marriage license because
they're hetero?  When was the last time you heard of gangs of gay
teenagers lurking around hetero bars and beating up hetero couples
coming out of the bars?  When will you realize that to the religious
right lesbigays being able to live as openly and freely as heteros can
_is_ preferential treatment to them?

>Those voters are already there. These quotes are quite a bit more moderate
>than I had been lead to believe by the media, who told me that the
>platform was absolutely antiabortion from the moment of conception (not
>supported by those quotes) and that it opposed any form of anti-discrimination
>against gays (which is also not supported by those quotes). Sigh, but then
>what should I expect from our mass media?

Really?  You and I must have been watching different versions of the
GOP convention.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals
From: fist@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Richard Pierson)
Subject: Re: Cat Control!
Reply-To: fist@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Richard Pierson)
Organization: Leave the #@*&$# bylaws ALONE
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 15:23:23 GMT

I live in the somewhat growing area of the Poconos in PA.
While standing with my son and waiting for the school bus
2 years ago I watched a Mastif (200lb or so-my neighbors)
named 'Bear' and a Black Lab tackle a normal sized Doe'
right in the middle of the street 100 feet away after it
slipped on the ice, first time I had ever seen a pet do
that. From that time on I take my Bulldog and keep it in
my pocket when I'm out. :-)
Back when I was growing up in NJ I lived in Morris county
in the town of Randolph about 10 miles from Morristown in
Northern NJ. I got my first dirt bike at 12 and my friends
and I used to ride in the woods and on an old abandoned rail
road bed that went from Suffern NY to the Delaware river/
PA state line. An area of Randolph called MT Freedom was
a big jewish resort back in the 40's and 50's and had 10
or so major hotels and many Bungalow colonys (small houses
not sutable for winter habitation-no foundations or running
water just outhouses), many of the families would buy 
their kids a dog for the two weeks of vacation and would
not be able to bring them back to NYC apartments so they
would turn them loose, the dogs (and cats) would turn
feral and were putting quite a dent in the local dairy
industry, the town had an open season on anything with
four legs and not on a leash, paying $5 for the ears.
My friends and I had been chased while riding and one
night while camped out on the rail road bed we had built
a stockade of branches around a large pine tree (kind of
a fort- stuff that 12 year olds did back then) when 14
assorted dogs started trying to rip the stockade apart.
We spent the night in the tree dropping pine branches into
the fire until a state game warden drove up to investigate
the smoke, he shot 4 of them (all german shepards) two had
rabies. That was when the town stepped in with the bounty.
That day we went to Rockaway Sales (it was a large discount
dept store w/gun dept) and all bought .36cal Navy cap and
ball pistols (black powder) {yea we had our parents with us}
The pistols paid for themselves over the next two weeks.
The deer population also increased dramatically over the next
two years.
BTW: Hunter safety was required and taught during phys ed.
The schools closed the first day of deer season.
-- 
##########################################################
There are only two types of ships in the NAVY; SUBMARINES 
                 and TARGETS !!!
#1/XS1100LH	#2/10/10/92
Richard Pierson E06584 vnet: [908] 699-6063
Internet: fist@iscp.belcore.com,|| UUNET:uunet!bcr!fist  
#include <std.disclaimer> My opinions are my own!!!
I DONT CARE IF I SOUND CONFUSED, I KNOW WHAT I MEAN !!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Distribution: usa
Date: 10 Sep 92 14:08:10 CDT


In article <lassppINN6pm@spim.mips.com>, mpolen@suntory.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:
> Michael P. Deignan) writes:
> |> somebody wrote:
> |> 
> |> >	Let's get real people. Reagan and Bush just happened to be
> |> >on the watch when the collapse came.
> |> 
> |> So what? Dukakis just happened to be on the watch when the "Massachusetts
> |> Miracle" occured, and that didn't seem to stop him from taking credit for
> |> it, either.
> |> 
> No problem, as long as Bush takes similar credit for the recession we are
> in.  I am sure the only reason he didn't admit responsibility was that
> he didn't notice that it was happening.  He still refuses to admit
> we are in a recession.  He says the recovery is going slower than planned.
> 
> Decreases in jobs is certainly a slower recovery than planned.

A decline of ~80,000 jobs on non-farm payrolls and a decline
of ~180,000 in private sector employment.  Quite a "recovery".

The Federal Reserve did not waste any time cutting interest rates
when the job numbers came out.  Do you think they would do that 
if the economy was picking up steam?

Check out this interview with Milton Friedman...

] Most of the following is taken from _Forbes_, August 17, 1992.
] Interview with Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman.

] FORBES: How's the economy?

]       Friedman: If you look closely, and pay attention to the short-term
] money supply movement, it looks very scary.
]       President Bush has a policy I've been calling reverse Reaganism.  It
] promises slow growth in the 1990s.  Now, on top of that, the short-term cycle
] came down sharply, then started to go up, but has been severely retarted by
] slow monetary growth.  It may indeed turn into another recession.
]                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-- 
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:44245 ca.politics:7520 ba.politics:5106 soc.motss:38519