HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Whatever happened to ...Tipper Gore
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 06:51:59 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:

> Typical media double speak.  Tipper Gore is a thorn in the side of the
> record industry, and there is strong memories of her speaking on
> Capital Hill about record labeling, and the costs and legal fees alone
> will deliver support to the Bush/Quayle ticket.  All Tipper did was help
> to bring out some artists who had faded from the charts or would have never
> made it in the first place and make them popular and lots of cash.  She
> possesses no popularity with younger voters, which will cost Albert Gore
> his chance this time.

How is this Al Gore's 'chance'?  We've heard from Bush apologists for four
years that the top of the ticket is what counts and that people don't vote for
a veep.  That's been the justification for Dano since his nomination.  If we
apply the same logic to the Democrats, Gore's nomination isn't worth a bucket
of warm spit.

Clinton isn't going to carry California because of Al Gore, but because of
George Bush.  Same goes for Texas.  Bush isn't going to lose the election
because of Dano, but because of his abuse of the Presidency over the last four
years.

>
> >Ironically, last week the Post had a feature article on Tipper Gore in
> >which it stated that the Hollywood and record company execs had accused
> >Tipper of censorship and called her "nothing more that a prudish
> >housewife" for these very same efforts.
>
> This is a perfect description of her efforts, the woman has to get a
> hobby.
>

Well, I can't argue with you there.  Maybe they'll put her on the FEMA board,
like the Dannsterette?



>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Bush/Quayle's Health Plan -- vouchers?
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:16:58 GMT

In article <92253.150552DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.180602.24891@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) says:
>>I note that any provider can basically decide on how much it wants to
>>spend on overhead (read "waste").  People who think that a much lower
>>overhead system is possible in the US without changes that have
>>nothing to do with payer systems can prove that any time they want.
>
>You note incorrectly.  You should do some studying of health care
>business practices, particularly the arrangements between providers and
>insurers, the literature on monopoly conditions in medical care and
>insurance markets, and the importance of uncertain medical judgement.

Try again.  Other than MDs and facilities who have EXCLUSIVE ties to
HMOs, MDs and facilities will take money from ANYONE, and the
exclusive arrangements are quite rare.  Given that, no monopoly is
possible unless consumers insist on paying more or avoiding your
service.  Remember, payer systems only have to deal with providers and
consumers; they don't have to deal with insurers at all.  (In fact,
the payer is an insurer.)

It doesn't take many customers to get a large enough pool so that the
risks are predictable.  Moreover, if overhead really is an issue and
can be easily wiped out, it's quite a cushion.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.politics.misc
From: coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com (Don Coolidge)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 23:54:46 GMT

In article <9144@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM>, mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
|> In <1992Sep15.170717.5305@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
|> 
|> DN:(I won't mention that Democrats have been saying for years that workfare
|> DN:would be better than welfare, but Republicans have opposed it as worse
|> DN:than welfare on the grounds that that would teach them that government
|> DN:would give them all jobs.)
|> 
|> That's not how I remember it.  I remember both democrats and republicans
|> supporting the idea, but it was almost exclusively democrats who opposed
|> it.

Quick - go to a Liberal health food store and buy some herbal Memory Booster -
you're at least a quart low! :^)

Four years ago the Republicans hammered incessantly at Mike Dukakis for his 
Massachusetts workfare program. They opposed it as an "unwarranted interference
by government in the free market". The fact that a lot of people used the
experience to get a real job when their benefits ended was somehow lost in
the sound-byte shuffle.

Some Democrats indeed opposed it. But it became practically a platform
plank for the Republicans to likewise oppose it.

(For what it's worth, I consider workfare an incomplete solution. I'd
like to see it combined with a realistic job-training program, to give
the welfare recipients a much better chance of getting a real job with
real wages when the program is finished.)
 
|>  Do comparisons to slavery ring any bells with you.

No, none whatsoever.

Nobody is required to participate. And they're paid for their work.
They just don't get paid if they can work, but won't. Can you say 
"Freedom of Choice"? - oops, I forgot! That phrase isn't in the 
rightwing lexicography...:^)

Don Coolidge
coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: sdavis@laforge.ksc.nasa.gov (Steve Davis)
Subject: Re: Cuomo
Organization: NASA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:30:56 GMT

Richard Mulac writes
> By apologizing to Cuomo he's damned himself as either a false accuser or as
> someone who doesn't have the courage to stand up and say he's done no wrong.

  No, he's identified himself as an individual who, being prone to human  
screw-ups, is willing to take personal responsibility for his actions.  That's  
something we've not seen from a president in almost 12 years.  

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Steve Davis                      | sdavis@laforge.ksc.nasa.gov |
| NASA, DL-DSD-32                  | (NeXT Mail preferred)       |
| Kennedy Space Center, FL  32899  |                             |
| (407)867-7582  fax:(407)867-2173 | #include <disclaimer.h>     |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona)
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: gte
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:59:33 GMT

In article <lavh2bINN6cq@spim.mips.com>, mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:
> StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:
> |> Glenn Story) writes:
> |> : forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:
> |> 
> |> : >If the thought he [Bush] was above the law, he'd have said "Piss on this
> |> : >stupid law --- cut the whole fucking forest down!"  (IE: he puts 
> |> : >himself above the law by ignoring it as he pleases [like most of
> |> : >the democratic Congress does] NOT by submitting himself to the 
> |> : >results of due process.)
> |> : 
> |> : Could you give an example of the Congress putting itself above the law?
> |> 
> |> Um, aren't there laws in most states making it a felony to knowingly
> |> write bad checks?
> |> 
> One more time, and slowly.  No one in congress wrote a bad check.  The 
> congressional bank had an overdraft protection program, supported by
> it's members.  You can get the same thing from your bank, although they
> will probably charge you interest.

BZZZZT! Wrong.  The House Bank had a policy to allow the Reps to write
bad checks.  The HB policy was to cash checks until the Rep had overdrawn
his account by one month's salary.  This was *not* a formal overdraft program.  
Certain members found that this policy could be abused in such a manner as
to give them a permanent 1 month-salary loan without interest.  Considering
that some of those guys have been up there for 40 years, this is a 
patently Bad Thing.  

> The Congressional bank was set up just for this reason.  It allowed 
> congressmen new to washington to draw against upcoming pay to set up
> their washingon households.

Anybody who can afford to get elected can afford to get set up on
their own buck.

> I am not saying it was not abused.  I am just saying they broke no
> laws, spent none of our money, violated no bank rules, etc.

They violated the spirit of the law and the bank rules (of course 
they wrote the letter of the law so they could get away with what 
would land you or I in jail).  And I have news for you, the interest
on all those free loans comes right out of our pockets.

> If you want to bash congress, use facts, not bull-shit.

You might try to follow your own advice.

-- 
"25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with
no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy.  However, 4 out of 5 US murders are 
committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?"   -  Andrew Ford
gtephx!forda@enuucp.eas.asu.edu  OR  !uunet!samsung!romed!enuucp!gtephx!forda
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.misc
From: cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:24:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.062620.17652@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>,
fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:

> In article <1992Sep9.111518.26548@sinix.UUCP> ian@sinix.UUCP
> (Ian Malone) writes:
> >Well, criminals in Switzerland < which has the highest incidence of violence
> >with hand guns, other than the US of course> don't seem to get guns.  In
> >Switzerland last year there were 7 murders with hand guns.  In the US there 
> >were over 1000.
> 
> You do Switzerland a disservice: We should look at the total homocide
> rate (after all, dying by knife wounds is just as bad as dying by
> gunshot.) The homocide rate for Switzerland is lower than most other
> European nations.

Come on Frank, don't confuse poor Ian with the *FACTS*!  =;->

> >  Why? The NRA keeps guns accessible to criminals.

I see, it's *ALL* the NRAs fault!  Since the NRA has been selected to
replace the police, and prosecutors, it's THEIR job to remove these
criminals from the street!  When was this law passed?  (not that they'll
refuse to do their new *duty*... ;-)

> 5/6 of the guns used in crimes are obtained illegally. The NRA strongly
> in favor of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, but restricting
> _legal_ sales (as all the proposed gun control laws would do) doesn't
> help. Cracking down on the black market might.

Confusing poor Ian with the *FACTS* again!?...  He'll never gets
his LIES to be consistant if you keep correcting him!  >;-)

> >  Look to other countries if you don't believe me.

OK, let's....

> >That NRA/Right-wingnut talk about
> >your rights being stripped away is ridiculous.

If you are unable to see this, then you obviously haven't read
a newpaper in a while...

> >Oh come on, wake up.  Like I said above, look to other countries for a model.
> >There are plenty.  Switzerland has the second highest hand-gun associated
> >murder rate.  It is literally less than 5% of the US's.  Media distortion?

GREAT!!!  EXCELLENT!!!  Let's use Switzerland's firearm laws as a model
for our own!!!  Can anyone out there give me their opinions on the best
full-auto rifle to own?  I want to stay within our *NEW* firearm laws  ;->

-- 
Charles Scripter   *   cescript@phy.mtu.edu
Dept of Physics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931
-------------------------------------------------------------------
With your one remaining eye, please do NOT look back into the laser
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Bush/Florida/Hurricane Andrew
Date: 6 Sep 92 07:07:55 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <q3VLqB7w164w@mintir.new-orleans.la.us>,
elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) wrote:

> Agreed, there are intolerants in the Democratic party also.  However, when you
> come from David Duke's home town, you see Republican racism at its worst on a
> regular basis...

Where were you when Duke was a Democrat?  Hiding?  He *picked* the party,
not the other way around.

But, if you're gonna blame us for Duke, then I suppose we can slam you for
LaRouche "The only name George Bush feared enough to put in prison."  God,
I love that poster.  What a hoser.

--
Rick Eames                               My Opinions Are My Own (not
Apple's)
athos@apple.com

HERSCHENSOHN for US Senate.  Just say "No" to Barbara Boxer.
From: aa680@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Vern Morrison)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Bush Declines Debates: WHY?
Date: 7 Sep 1992 04:59:55 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: aa680@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Vern Morrison)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, rdetweil@boi.hp.com (Richard Detweiler) says:

>Okay, can anyone give me a good reason why GHWB declined the presidential
>debates?  I can't believe that this would be in his campaigns best interests.
>Debates have come to be expected and are the norm for presidential elections
>so what gives?  Is he really that afraid of being exposed as having no ideas?
>Are the republicans terrified at the prospect of an unmuzzled Dan Quayle going
>off half cocked?  What kind of positive spin can they think they will get out
>of this cowardly decision?

     	I think the fact that George is a gutless weasel and a do-nothing
asshole played a part in this decision.

-- 
     Vern Morrison              |    "It's the damage that we do and
     aa680@po.cwru.edu          |     never know/It's the words that
     vern@cray.csuohio.edu      |     we don't say that scare me so"
     Parma, Ohio: the 'burbs    |        --Elvis Costello
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Bush sucks
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:10:53 GMT

In article <20269@plains.NoDak.edu> green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes:
>In article <1992Sep7.120231.5280@ucc.su.OZ.AU> jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines) writes:
>>Great, so Bush buys votes from the agriculture sector, and the asians laugh
>>at both the USA and the EC, and farmers in Australia, Canada and other non
>>subsidy driven countries, can cry in their beers....
>>
>>Personally, I think Bush's America is a 20th Century Rome, and Bush is Nero.
>
>Leave out the Canadians, they get subsidies too.  By the way, where did this
>Jason guy come from, he sounds like a Democrat that crawled out from under
>some rock.
>

The level of Canadian subsidies is miniscule compared to American and
European agricultural subiidies, except in the poultry and dairy
industries, which have domestic supply management.         

In the grains and oilseed area, Canadian programs provide basically
only a weak income stabilization which serves only to moderate the
rate of loss of family farms from an intolerable to a tolerable level.

Gerald
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 19:12:30 GMT

In article <BuH1Fy.FHv@news.udel.edu> barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich) writes:
	[re: rush twisting the facts for political gain]

>For political gain?  Whose?  He's said several times that he has no
>interest in running for President, he doesn't want to owe favors to
>campaign contibutors.  Maybe a lower office, but why campaign nationally
>for a regional office?  I'm not saying you are wrong, but who's
>political gain is he doing all this for?

	Rush may not be interested in running for office, but he's
sure interested in becoming a Republican party insider. There's big
rewards available for someone who can be a daily 3 hour commercial
for the Republican party.
-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens,
 nor should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God"
                                     - George Herbert Walker Bush, Feb 1989
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: I just can't figure it out....
Date: 7 Sep 92 09:17:07 GMT
Organization: TECHNET, Singapore

In article <sam.1dju@terapin.com> sam@terapin.com (Sam Lewit) writes:
>I'm not a political expert nor am I wealthy. I'm just your average Joe who is
>concerned with the future of this country.
>
>I can not for the life of me figure out how Bush can have 39% in the polls. 

39% is probably an accurate count of the porportion of Americans who would
vote for Joseph Stalin for president, so long as he was nominated by the 
Republican Party rather than vote for a Democrat. If this seems odd, go back
and find out how many Democrates voted for Jimmy Carter for a second term.

39% could also represent the proportion of Americans who actually believe that
George Bush has seen the error of his ways and will not be the tax-and-spend
Republican that he was throughout his first term. Indeed, credibility is
almost certainly George Bush's greatest handicap.
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Defending Clarence Thomas?
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:33:24 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep14.001852.4191@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn) wrote:

Okay, so explain to me why Cuomo is qualified and Thomas is not.

--
Rick Eames                               My Opinions Are My Own (not
Apple's)
athos@apple.com

HERSCHENSOHN for US Senate.  Just say "No" to Barbara Boxer.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.abortion
From: cbrand@cac.washington.edu (Carol Brand)
Subject: Re: Feminists for Life (was Controlling Women, etc.)
Organization: UW Networks and Distributed Computing
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:17:56 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.002526.19597@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>	And may I ask why the only three champions of FFL here,
>namely, Martin Guerrero, Ron Graham, and Stephen Chaney, are male? As
>one pro-choice chant goes:
>
>	4-6-8-10, why are all your leaders men?
>
>
>	Well, the numbers are clear. Of those who post in
>talk.abortion, there is a sizable fraction of women, while there is
>only one woman on the other side with any longevity, our good friend
>Suzanne Forgach. So there go the "Feminists for Life". They do not
>represent the interests of any significant group of professional
>women. I wonder why they call themselves that. Do they just like the
>sound of the word?
>
>/Loren



Thank God we have real MEN out there to tell us poor, brainwashed,
uneducated women what a REAL feminist would think.  Loren could you please
send me an outline of the views a real woman should have.  

As for not representing the views of a significant group of
professional women (oh only professionals count now...)  WAKE UP!!  Just
'cause it's not on the net, doesn't mean it aint so.

My feminist friends and I are tired of you portraying pregnancy as a
weekness and liabilities that should be disposed of.  You and others like
you have made us ashamed of our pregnancies in the past.  You have made us
have to choose between children and career or education.  We are tired of it!

And by the way, the reason you don't see more of us in talk.abortion, is
because we are tired of you men bickering back and forth about an issue
which none of you really has any understanding.

-Carol
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: pdchapin@unix.amherst.edu (PAUL D CHAPIN)
Subject: Re: Idiocies from Al Gore
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:54:55 GMT

Jerry Walsh (walsh@spider.wri.com) wrote:
: In article <1992Sep1.214724.14694@oakhill.sps.mot.com> pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:
: >Gore: (Several minutes of anti-Bush ravings, especially how
: >the evil nasty Bush broke his "no new taxes" pledge and signed on to
: >increased taxes in 1990.)
: >
: >Hume: One last question Senator. Did you support the 1990
: >budget agreement?
: >
: >Gore: Why , YES! .... ( the proud look lasted for about one second,
: >which then turned to one of embarrassed pain)

The issue isn't whether that particular tax was right or wrong.  The issue is
a matter of trust.  Bush proved that you can't trust his campaign statements.
Like no new taxes.  Like 30 million new jobs.  Like no net lose of wetlands.
What he says is strictly for political consumption and has no relationship
with reality.

I will even go so far as to say that I think he knows he's talking nonsense
even while he's talking.  Four years ago just about every economist and 
politician in the country knew a tax increase was coming.  I believe the
Chamber of Commerce, that hotbed of radicalism, was on record as supporting
a tax increase as necessary.  And the only way he could create 30 million
new American jobs would be to annex Mexico
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,rec.humor,talk.bizarre,talk.politics.misc
From: pt@geovision.gvc.com (Paul Tomblin)
Subject: Re: Congress above the law (Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad)
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Reply-To: pt@geovision.gvc.com
Organization: Not officially GeoVision Systems Inc., Ottawa, Ontario
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:47:56 GMT

StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:

>PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>: In article <BuDMDr.Bx@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
>: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:

[crap about congressmen and checkbooks]

Kindly keep this crap out of rec.humor and talk.bizarre.

Thank you.

-- 
Paul Tomblin, pt@geovision.gvc.com or {uunet,revcan}!geovision!pt
(This is not an official opinion of GeoVision Systems Inc.)
"I just posted from babbage.museum.london.uk, and BOY ARE MY ARMS TIRED!!"
   - Rolf Wilson in alt.folklore.computers
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Bush plan on Health Care?
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:35:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department

In article <1992Sep8.134633.29936@cass.ma02.bull.com> ddavis@cass.ma02.bull.com (Dave Davis) writes:
>On the McLaughlin Group yesterday I heard (I think)
>M. Kondrake state that Pres. Bush had a health care
>proposal 'out there'. 
>
>Well, I checked the UMD ftp site, and I don't see it.
>
>Does anyone have a text or a citation?
>

Bush "proposal" ("joke" might be a better word) is to
give a tax credit or health care voucher to purchase 
private insurance to low income people.

Comprehensive health care reform is an absolute necessity
in the US for deficit control, upgrading the health and skills
of the workforce for the global economy, and for industrial
competitiveness.  Small perturbations on the status quo,
which is what Bush proposes, will not do...the health care
problem will continue to get worse.  Clinton's play or pay
is a real reform although not the best or most efficient
alternative, but it is politically more saleable in the
initial stages.

Gerald
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:4125 alt.politics.marrou:1050 talk.politics.misc:43838 alt.politics.elections:12458 talk.politics.theory:4049