HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dan@ektools.ssd.kodak.com (Daniel P. Schaertel)
Subject: Re: no new york republican primary
Organization: Eastman Kodak
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 19:50:09 GMT

In article <1992Apr08.183813.282682@cs.cmu.edu> dredish+@cs.cmu.edu (David Redish) writes:
>In article <1992Apr7.233641.16220@acsu.buffalo.edu> jadahlin@acsu.buffalo.edu (sm00sh) writes:
>>since when did new york
>>cancel its republican primary?  
>>
>
>Does anyone have any information about this?  I haven't heard any news
>about new york republican primaries?  (lots of news about democrat
>primaries tho)  If this is true and new york cancelled its primary, then
>why haven't we heard anything?  If new york didn't cancell its primary,
>then why haven't we heard anything?  This sounds worse than the
>old soviet system where they at least got a chance to vote
>yes or no.  (remember at the end they were actually voting no in enough
>numbers to throw some old guard out.)
>
>david redish
>

Buchanan wasn't on the ballot for NY, leaving only Bush. So he wins by
default.  There isn't a need to have a primary if there is only one
candidate.



Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 05:07:34 GMT

In article <bblF02VMbfsK00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> fierro@uts.amdahl.com (Doug Fierro) writes:
>  You have obviously read/heard nothing about Perot.  Why don't you read
>the Larry King interview that has already been posted here twice?

With all due respect, I've read the Larry King interview, and I still don't
know anything more about the man other than 

1. He was a successful computer salesman.
2. He founded EDS which was a great success.
3. His haranguing of GM caused them to give him a lot of money to go away.
4. His rescue of hostages in Iran.
5. His work to get Texas to implement a no pass/no play law.
6. He held his employees to a very high moral standard in their outside lives.
-- 
Ted Frank          + "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in
U o' C Law Skool   +  color and content according to the circumstances and
Chi, IL 60637      +  the time in which it is used."  --  Holmes
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Why vote Libertarian?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Distribution: usa,local
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 22:39:17 GMT

niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>>Business represents normal people spending money.Business has no power to force
>>anybody to do anything. The only thing that a business is able to do is spend
>>money. They get power over people, because people are willing to do things for
>>them in exchange for goods and services. There is absolutely no philosophical
>>basis for what you suggest. The only ways that businesses are limmited, are by
>>governmental regulations that detract from the freedom of their owners.


>Have you heard of company towns?  Have you studied the history of the US
>around the turn of the century?  Do you know how Pinkertons got started?

Yes.  All with government involvement.


>Why is government able to infringe on people's rights?  Because it is
>big and has lots of power.  Major corporations have, or in the past have had, 
>the exact same powers that government has to infringe on people's rights.  
>That is, they're big and they've got lots of money, which can buy power.

They buy the help of the powerful government.  They support their
monopolies by getting the government to pass laws about that.  They
get the government to agree that shooting is a reasonable way to deal
with a strike, or that it's okay to keep people from leaving the
towns.  They get their power by appealing to the government.  Reduce
the power available for abuse.

If a company does something illegal, go after the bastards and throw
the chain of command in jail.  A crooked capitalist is just as bad as
a corrupt socialist.  A fine hardly discourages them, they'll just
pass it on to the consumers.  This also deals with accountability and
incorporation, which you discuss below.


>Which brings up a question I've had, which I hope the net.libs can
>answer.  What's the Libertarian position on incorporation?  As far as I
>can see, a true Lib should oppose the concept; a company is a bunch of
>people getting together to do something, not a government defined person.
>Incorporation prevents accountability; in the example someone gave about
>a factory which leaks carcinogens, they pointed out that the EPA limits
>liability, but that without it, the company would have incentive to NOT
>pollute.  But as long as you have corporations, in which they can declare 
>bankruptcy if too many people sue them, and in which the executives are 
>not responsible, then Libertarian liability-accountability doesn't work.

No, you got it right!  Incorporation is another government-supported
way to avoid accountability.


-- 
Pessimist: One who, when he has the choice of two evils, chooses both.
      -- Oscar Wilde
From: strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: H. Ross Perot on social issues
Date: 6 Apr 1992 00:53:49 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

smithw@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Billiam) writes:

>    Where does he stand.  WHO IS ROSS PEROT.  Ok he's the libertarian 
>candidate.

Eh, no, he isn't.  If Perot decides to run for President, he will have
to be an Independent in almost every state.  The LP have already
decided on a candidate... Andre somethin-er-other.

>  But beyond those on this net who knows WHO the hell Ross Perot is.

Perot is a rich dude from Texas.  You can FTP his bio and a lot of
information (from this net) about him at:

cco.caltech.edu

The Perot information is in /pub/mjmccall/Perot/.  Submissions are
encouraged, and should be placed in the /pub/bjmccall/Submissions
directory.  If you need help with ftp, finger ftp@ooo.caltech.edu for
information.

>I heard Sen. Tsongas and Jerry Brown mention him briefly on news programs
>sunday morning.  But the interviewer did not respond at all to it.  Why doesn't
>the media recognize the candidacy of Ross Perot.

He isn't a candidate yet.  Most of what I've heard about him is here on
the net, in our college newspaper, and on C-SPAN.  For a list of future
media events, dial this 800 number: 1-800-685-7777.

>  In this sense is the media
>helping to keep intact the exclusivity of power between the Republicans and
>the Democrats?

I think this is a good point.  The media would love to have a purely
two-candidate contest, because it is so much easier for them to say
"Republicans" and "Democrats" than it is to remember the exact platform
of 3 or five candidates!  The problem with the two party system of
today is that the parties are now divided along lines of assotiation
rather than ideology.  To me, at least, the terms "Republican" and
"Democrat" mean nothing.

Stratocaster

-- 
  Steve Davis  |    Contact me at ...            | The Boarding House BBS!
               | Internet:  strat@cis.ksu.edu    | 9600 baud (v.32/v.42)
               | FidoNet:    Steve @ 1:295/3     | America: 913-827-0744
 Anarchy means having to put up with things that really piss you off.
From: sjsup@bucknell.edu (stephen sup `94)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Perot admits COBOL affair; details at 11
Date: 13 Apr 92 23:00:13 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pa.

If Jerry Brown's flat-tax is anywhere near a good idea, they why doesnt
Clinton support it or, why does he emphatically go against it.  From what I
see and how it will affect my workingclass family, i say go for it.  My father
figured that it will save us money next year, if such a system would be installed
today.  So who is really trying to help who?  The republicans are full of it, and
I cannot see what distiguishes Bill from the elitists.  Anyone can clear this one
up for me?????????  Jerry Brown > a bottle of soda > Bill Clinton > George Bush.
my opinion only.
From: ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil (G. Host)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: How to modify my kill files (yes, really!)
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:21:23 GMT
Reply-To: ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil (G. Host)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC


> Article <1992Apr6.234040.12724@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> From: cah@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Allen Halsell)

> Just as a note, how do I keep certain authors out of my reader?  Call
> me an ostrich, but if I see one more post about "Just look to the Libs
> for new ideas" and "such-and-such are closet Libertarians" I'm gonna
> puke.  And who wants that?

Depends on who you puke on :-)

Here are two authors I have in my kill file.  If you use
"rn" you use controk K to edit it.  One I remember adding
because of the continued seeing of the signature with the
Libertarian 1-800 number in it; the other I can not remember.

/pmetzger@snark.shearson.com/a:j
/feustel/a:j

If you want to see the titles as well (so you know when the nonsense
ends), put the following in your kill file.
/pmetzger@snark.shearson.com/a:=:j
/feustel/a:=:j

This can be done for newsgroups too; the exercise is left to the reader.
-- 
Glenn Host - Senior Systems Analyst (ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil)
NRL Code 5800, 4555 Overlook Ave.; Washington, DC 20375   (202) 767-2046
12307 Tigers Eye Court ; Reston, VA 22091                 (703) 620-1141 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,soc.culture.usa
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: How to fix the country
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 23:16:18 GMT

cole@farmhand.rtp.dg.com (Bill Cole) writes:
>|> And that's the way to fix it, not with another worthless law.  Make it
>|> embarassing, not illegal.

>That's an interesting approach and it does work -- sometimes.  But we've
>embarassed the hell out of a variety of things, people and organizations
>-- all of which persist.

Which indicates that there is enough support for them regardless.  The
idea isn't to embarass a company right out of existence, but to make
it think twice about its executive salaries.

>Many times the reaction to being embarassed is 
>not to fix the problem but fix the perception (manage our information into
>confusion).  How many of these overpaid managers have been embarassed 
>into homelessness?  Give me the name of a corporate president or CEO who
>has been embarassed into joblessness and destitution and I'll agree
>with you.

I don't want them embarassed into joblessness and destitution.
Someone just steps in to replace them.  I just want the company to
realize that especially when the company is performing badly, the
disparity between CEO and employee wages can be a source of bad public
relations and employee resentment.
-- 
Help the police - beat yourself up.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: pangrle@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Barry Pangrle)
Subject: Re: The American Way
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 14:15:43 GMT

pat@chinet.chi.il.us (Patrick Louis Sugent) writes:
>  You forget to mention that dirty politics have been around since the
> start of the Republic.  By Republic I mean the Roman
> Republic not the U.S. Republic.

>  One of the most interesting political articles I've read is Quitus Cicero,
> "Handbook on Canvassing for the Consulship.".  It is a brother writing
> to a fellow Roman who is doing just what the title suggests.  Written
> circa 63 B.C.  The brother suggest that:

>  1) People remember words more than actions, so don't worry about what
>  you've done just tell them what they want to hear.
>  2) Hire spies to dig up dirt on your opponents.
>  3) Remember everyone's name.
>  4) Imply (in private) that you are on everyone's side.
>  5) Make sure everyone believes you are of high character.

>  What is most impressive about this article, is the complete lack of
> any attention to "taking a stand on issues."

  Perhaps we are heading in the same direction as the Roman Empire too?

Barry

-----
Barry Pangrle		Who believes we have a progressive tax system now?

pangrle@cs.psu.edu
From: TELANG@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Perot's 1-800 number
Date: 17 Apr 92 21:23:08 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <bcmK02o8cfEM00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>, fierro@uts.amdahl.com (Doug
Fierro) says:
>
Does anybody have information on a number to be reached if one wants
to volunteer for Perot's campaign.
>  (Stefan, my mail bounces back when I try to mail to your address)
>
>
>  The 1-800 number for Perot is:
>
>  1-800-685-7777
>
 somebody gave me this number but like u said it's an automated response
>  It is a fully-automated system, so don't expect to talk to a person.
>According to Mr. Perot on last night's interview with Larry King, his
>1-800 number is the busiest 800 number in AT&T's history.  At peak times
>as many as 30,000 calls an hour were being made (I'll have to check this
>of course :-)
>
>  Doug
>--
>                                                     Doug Fierro
>                                      |\             UTS System Software
>  O                         __________|_\______      CASE tools development
>  \_.______________________| * * * * * * * * */      fierro@uts.amdahl.com
> __\____                   |=================/       (408)746-7102
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 22:47:59 GMT

appel@xcf.Berkeley.EDU (Shannon D. Appel) writes:
>It actually really surprises me that this would occur.  I would think that
>Libertarians would support Perot because it would prove that an independent
>could win/do-very-well and thus bring more support to independents and minor
>parties in the coming years.  Seems quite strange to me.

Yeah, but if all Libs cared about was winning, they would have allied
with one of the major parties, probably within the republicans (social
policy varies more within the parties than fiscal policy does,
allowing more leeway on those issues).  This baffles those who say the
LP is a joke because it doesn't do just that, but Ls just don't want
to give up their principles for expediency.  How could a libertarian
even admit to being in the same party as George Bush or Bill Clinton?
So even if Perot's election might help the LP later, it's not worth
compromising those principles.  I think the very existence and
strength of his campaign does plenty of damage to the Republicrats,
and the candidates they're running can't help either.

-- 
The plague that makes your booty move... It's the Infectious Grooves!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: pmetzger@snark.shearson.com (Perry E. Metzger)
Subject: Re: Vote Libertarian? (was Re: Ross Perot)
Reply-To: pmetzger@shearson.com
Organization: Lehman Brothers
	<PMETZGER.92Apr1164502@snark.shearson.com>
	<1992Apr6.160054.8398@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:46:43 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.160054.8398@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> folse@crs.cl.msu.edu (Mark Folse) writes:

   Do they still favor the elimination of Social Security and Medicare?
   Of the EPA and the FDA? Do they still favor legalizing  drugs?

I want to make it clear that we DON'T favor eliminating old age
pensions or medical care for the poor; what we favor is taking these
services out of government hands.

I also want to make it clear we don't want people selling untested
drugs; we merely prefer having private organizations check them out;
Underwriters Laboratories is a fine example of how private safety
testing can exist absent government solutions to societies problems.
We also don't want to eliminate people's protection from polution; we
want a good job to be done of protecting the environment, and from our
perspective, that means taking the bulk of the job away from the
government, which we don't see as doing a competant job.

On the subject of drugs, most libertarians you ask will tell you that
they don't think its a good idea for children to be shooting up heroin
with dirty needles; however, it is a fact of human nature that you
can't stop people, even children, from doing such things. Even with
our current draconian laws and ten times the enforcement spending of a
decade ago scarcely a dent has been made in the drug trade. You can go
virtually anywhere in this country, even into prisons, and buy
virtually any drug you want. We would prefer to make the trade, which
we have no choice but to live with, peaceful, so that only those
people who choose to take drugs are directly harmed by them and so
that we may start treating drug abuse as a medical problem rather than
one for the courts. Not only will the bulk of our nation's crime go
away within a fairly short time, but, as a nice side effect, we will
suddenly have 80% of our police resources and jail cells freed up to
handle REAL crimes like rape and robbery.

--
Perry Metzger		pmetzger@shearson.com
--
"That government is best which governs least."
		-- Thomas Jefferson, former US President and early libertarian.
Restore the American Dream: Andre Marrou for President! Vote Libertarian!
Libertarian Party info: Phone 1-800-682-1776, E-Mail 345-5647@mcimail.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: weverka@spot.Colorado.EDU (Robert T. Weverka)
Subject: Re: NYT on the difference between Clinton and Brown
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 14:35:26 GMT

In article <Apr.5.21.05.41.1992.27851@math.rutgers.edu> cromar@math.rutgers.edu (Scott Cromar) writes:
>
>The April 5 edition of the New York Times has a table comparing Brown
>and Clinton on various issues.  If you're still not familiar with
>their platforms, you might want to look it up.
>
>In the accompanying article, the author outlines what he sees as the
>differences between Clinton and Brown.
>
>"Before the campaign began last year, the Arkansas Governor published
>a booklet that set forth his views on everthing from the economy to
>the cold war, from race relations to the environment.  In anticipation
>of the New York primary, he released a 10-page paper on urban policy.
>
>"He has a five-point plan for ending the recession and another
>five-point plan for long-term economic growth.  he has three
>"principles" for invigorating cities, nine ways of "empowering
>inner-city youth," a four-part "crime strategy" and a four-point
>health care plan.

     ... and a partridge in a pear tree.
From: fierro@uts.amdahl.com (Doug Fierro)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: LETS VOTE
Date: 17 Apr 92 15:55:30 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Apr17.032659.4780@acsu.buffalo.edu> v136pds9@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu writes:
>
>	Is anyone interested in putting together our
>vote for the president, now?
>
>	It would be interesting and would take a little
>effort.  We could wait until OCT but it would also be
>interesting to do it twice. (now and later).
>
>
>JOHN

   It would not be a representative cross-section of the voters of this
country, but it would be fun nevertheless.  I'm sure the Libertarian
percentage you calculate from your poll will be much higher than when
the numbers show in November, being that they are very prolific througout
the net :-)

  Doug
-- 
                                                     Doug Fierro
                                      |\             UTS System Software
  O                         __________|_\______      CASE tools development
  \_.______________________| * * * * * * * * */      fierro@uts.amdahl.com
 __\____                   |=================/       (408)746-7102
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: rap@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Ryan Porter)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Vote Libertarian? (was Re: Ross Perot)
Summary: Gators for Perot
Date: 8 Apr 92 00:06:33 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.


This is to announce to the net, and in particular to those nodes of the
net in Florida, the formation of the group Gators for Perot as a student
group at the University of Florida.

We are a group of students who have banded together of our own volition 
and decided that we are ready for a breath of fresh air in our 
government.  We are supporting H. Ross Perot as this breath of fresh 
air.  

We are now working on our campus to gather information on Perot and 
make his name as familiar as those of the demopublican candidates.
We are reaching out to other groups across the country with similar
goals for collaboration on research and electronic communication.

If there are any 'lurkers' out there that can identify with this or
are interested in trading information, respond via email to 
rap@cis.ufl.edu.

We just managed yesterday to become part of the national effort to 
get Perot on the ballot, before that we were not part of any 
external campaign process and were quite independantly putting our
sweat into it.  There are many of us out there doing the same thing 
and looking for the same information.  Let's collaborate and 
reduce exeryone's workload.
From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Bradley K. Sherman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Perot admits COBOL affair; details at 11
Date: 12 Apr 1992 07:44:48 GMT
Organization: Truth, Justice and the American Way
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: alfa.berkeley.edu

Always wondered about this.

If the Republic lasts long enough something like the following is
bound to happen:

What if three days before the election one of the candidates of the
two parties dies in a plane accident?

... is assassinated?

... suffers a stroke and is in a coma?

--------------
    --Brad Sherman (bks@alfa.berkeley.edu)

We the People of the United States, in order to form a more 
perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, 
provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and 
secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do 
ordain and establish the Constitution of the United States of 
America. 

(Yikes! They included welfare in the constitution but forgot to
mention Political Parties, Christ, or the Altar of Free-marketism.)
From: solman@athena.mit.edu (Jason W Solinsky)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Regulations
Date: 13 Apr 92 04:45:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: athena.1992Apr13.044542.15882
Distribution: usa
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <18012@oasys.dt.navy.mil>, tdsmith@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Timothy Smith) writes:

|>     Exquease me?
|> 
|>     The phone company was broken up BECAUSE of government anti-trust
|> regulations. Anti-trust regulations are intended to preserve market 
|> forces and competition.
|>     Without these regulations there would be only one long distance
|> carrier.  That carrier would have ownership of ALL of the local markets.
|> Look it up.  It's not hard to find. After all, it was the BIGGEST ANTI-TRUST 
|> TRIAL OF THIS CENTURY!

What you've missed is that the phone company monopoly was created by government
regulations. It's nice that they've made regulations to undo the damage, but they
should never have caused this in the first place. Regulations are often necessary
to correct regulations, but the errant laws should never have been passed in the
first place. This is a good argument against regulation. 80 years before the
break-up of AT&T, the government had no idea that they were creating a huge
monopoly. They thought it was in the interests of the general welfare. It was in
the short run, but not in the long run.

Jason W. Solinsky
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections