HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Subject: Re: Issues: the deficit
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:47:42 GMT

In article <16874667C.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com> JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
>
>Why then the growing deficit?  Congress increased spending by additional
>billions of dollars.  The fatal economic fallacy in all attempts to
>reduce the budget deficit through tax increases is that
> IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO TAKE IN MORE MONEY THAN CONGRESS CAN SPEND.
>All that happens is that an ever increasing share of the nation's
>resources are funnelled into Washington, to be dispensed by politicians
>for political purposes."
>                               Harvard Economist, Thomas Sowell
>                               _Commentary_, September, 1992
>
	To be honest, Congress and the President put the "entitlement programs"
- which amount to over 50% of the budget - on autopilot many years ago, with
cost of living increases and the like. This way, the politicians don't have
to take the blame for cutting someone's pet program or signing a bill that
raises spending - it's out of their hands, and they like it that way.
>
From: markn@firenze.orc.olivetti.com (Mark Nass)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: gas tax
Keywords: tax hike, spending cut, deficit reduction
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:27:15 GMT
Reply-To: markn@firenze.orc.olivetti.com (Mark Nass)
Organization: Olivetti Research California

In article <1992Oct5.125633.21895@sunova.ssc.gov>, rocko@ireland.ssc.gov
(Rick O'leary) writes:
> In article <4OCT199223044991@acad3.alaska.edu>, ksjwr@acad3.alaska.edu
(REDELSS JOHN W) writes:
> |> Some are squawking about the burden on the poor of a tax hike on
gasoline.  I
> |> fail to see how economic collapse in this country is going to help
the poor. 
> |> That is what we are going to eventually get if we don't raise taxes
and cut
> |> spending enough to balance the budget.  A tax hike on gas has the
added benefit
> |> of reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
> |> 
> |> We can't keep voting for those who promise us "something for
nothing" unless we
> |> want to see our country become a piece of fecal material. 
Eventually we have
> |> to decide we are going to pay for the government spending we demand
from our
> |> lawmakers.
> |> 
> |> Perot understands this.  So do his followers. 
> |> 
> 
> Thank You!
> 
> Also don't listen to the biased "olds"...I mean news media. Ross is 
> 
> asking for TEN (10) CENTS PER YEAR FOR FIVE (5) YEARS. NOT 50 CENTS !!!
> 
> ROCKO

  When he was answering questions from reporters , after he announced he was 
going to run for the presidency again he said he was planning on using the
revenue generated by the gas tax to help rebuild the infrastructure. 
  It may not be a perfect plan but it seems like a few peole might drive a 
little less & people would start buying cars that get a little better gas 
mileage. This should help curb air polution a little, put people to work
building roads
decrease our dependency on oil, help improve our trade deficit by not
importing 
as much oil & make alternative sources of fuel more attractive. 


Mark Nass
From: clifton9220@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Poll of Perot Supporters
Date: 6 Oct 92 11:29:08 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <168786FF3.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com>, JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
> Just heard the results of a poll of Perot's early supporters.
>   80% of them no longer trust Perot.
> 
> What makes this unusual is that the psychological pressure due to
> cognitive dissonance reduction would be very strong NOT to
> change one's opinion about Perot after publically supporting him.
> People typically do not "go out on a limb" for anything or anyone,
> subjecting themselves to possible public embarrassment and then
> admit they were wrong about it/him.  The fact that 80% of these people
> have switched their views of Perot is very surprising, if true.

Very true.  Even more interesting is that they are going out on a limb with
anyone else.  No one can predict exactly what will happen.  Anyone who promises
things with a set budget doesn't think of the unexpected to happen( ie the
hurricane, earthquake, etc), and to promise otherwise is just political
retoric.
> 
> I wonder about Perot's mandate from "you. . .the owners of this
> country.  If they say 'it's a dirty job but somebody's got to do
> it, why then we'll join the fight."  Sounds to me like they didn't
> say it at all.  Ross Perot might just have set up the appearance of
> a groundswell (e.g., paid volunteers, investing $16 million of his own
> money, the "unbiased" 1-800- number).

Perot explained the other day that those he paid were not what he considered
volunteers but instead workers.  Every campaign pays its workers.  It sounds to
me like he was just covering his options.
> 

> I cannot wait for the debates.  I saw Stockdale on TV last night and he
> was horrible.  He did not answer one question and seemed to be lost
> about any details - even of the economic plan.

Quayle, gore, ... need I say more.
                                         

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
Subject: Re: Now what?
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 17:19:51 GMT

In article <910427m.7.717099690@ace.acadiau.ca>, 910427m@ace.acadiau.ca (JASON MATTHEW MCDONALD) writes:
>
>I heard that he will throw his hat in the ring just to get some commercials 
>on the networks, as they will not put him on unless he's a candidate.

I have a hard time imaging a better criterion for candidacy than being on the ballot
in all 50 states.

-- 
Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)           For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick.
Martin Marietta Energy Systems     For every Bill Gates there is a Richard
Workstation Support                Stallman.                     --Paul Graham
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: breinhar@access.digex.com (Robert B. Reinhardt)
Subject: Re: 1-800-925-1300
Keywords: Ditto
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:04:36 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.193330.3479@wuecl.wustl.edu> gl1@cec1.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon) writes:
>In article <dougn.717866427@convex.convex.com> dougn@convex.com (Douglas Nieb) writes:
>>In <1992Sep30.141734.24557@wuecl.wustl.edu> gl1@cec2.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon) writes:
>>
>>>  The problem is that a computer answers the number and says something to the
>>>effect of "Thank you for showing your support of Ross Perot.  Your vote has
>>>been counted....*CLICK".  You don't have a chance to say anything !
>>
>>>  Just another example of how Perot doesn't want to hear anything bad about 
>>>himself.
>>
>>>Greg
>>
>>As was clearly stated several times during the Larry King show, only people
>>who wanted to SUPPORT him were told to call.  Those who didn't want to 
>>support him should have listened and not called the number.
>>
>>Doug
>
>   Thank you for exactly making my point... Perot doesn't want to hear anything
>bad about himself.  I wonder what will happen if he by some terrible twist of
>fate gets elected and then gets nothing accomplished.  I can see two 
>possibilities... 1) He'll resign or
>		 2) He'll impose censorship on the media to prevent bad
> 			things from being said about him.
>
>Greg
>

I think you're missing the point.  What Perot and his state coordinators
were trying to determine is what % of his original supporters, still
supported him.  I'll say again, there is no easy way to do this.  But,
please limit the focus of the flame to the question at hand and stop
making up what you think he(they) meant by it.

The phone call was to him afterall, not to Congress.

Rob R
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Subject: Perot drives Limbaugh NUTS!!!
Keywords: perot
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:15:33 GMT

I am sitting here listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio.
He is going crazy over what happened last night on the Larry
King Live show.  Looks like the arch-Republicans are getting
a little scared :^)

Mike

Mike Rowland, Aerosol Research Branch, MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: pcb2@watson.ibm.com (Wayout-Layout)
Subject: Re: Ross for What??
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 12:40:20 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <ztjzdlk@rpi.edu>, D. writes:
> 
> Look at all the pressure people are putting on him to run.  Having a reluctant
> president may not be such a good idea.  
>
 
  George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were also 2 men that were reluctant to
  become president. They would have preferred their Virginia farms to the White
  House. Maby their is something to be said for someone whos a little recluctant.

-- 


    Mike Jackyra       
    
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: RUN Ross RUN
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 01:43:52 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
: Well, He's baaacckk!  Ross is in the race. He just made the announcement
: at the news conference.

Yes, but for how long?  How soon will he wimp out again?

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92



Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: kde@boi.hp.com (Keith Emmen)
Subject: Re: RUN Ross RUN
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 20:28:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1scd1 PL4

sidnag@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (siddhartha.nag) writes:
> 
> Anyway, here's the slick one, he atleast thought he could play: He quit the
> race in July, just when his past was being investigated (a la US-media style),
> and all the skeletons in his closet were coming out, and his poll numbers 
> began to wane. He figured he would come in at the very end so that the 
> media would not have time to investigate any further into his past, and by
> riding on his "renewed" crest of popularity, he could crack the elections !  
> 
> Any comments on the above hypothesis ?

Yep.

   With Ross spending money like it's going out of style on the election, 
it should be obvious that he is planning something.  He worked his tail 
off to get on all the ballots.  With Ross on the fringes making threats 
about jumping back in, I'd bet the farm that the DemoPublicans and the
press have been working *very* hard to dig up dirt on him.  You surely
don't believe that B/C et al believed Perot when he said he was out.


Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye)
Subject: Perot news conference
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 00:44:00 GMT

Perot will hold a news conference Thursday, October 1st at 4PM EST.
CNN should carry it.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Subject: WHERE IS STRATOCASTER???
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 16:44:10 GMT

Title says it all...

mike

Mike Rowland, Aerosol Research Branch, MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Subject: Re: HEIGHT
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 20:25:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.181422.19203@leland.Stanford.EDU> motta@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nazare Motta) writes:
>Emmet Kilgariff writes:
>
>>Nazare writes
>
>>Hey Mike, I'm REALLY impressed with your maturity...
>>How tall are you? Got a Napoleon complex???
>
>>Is anybody offended by this obviously bigoted remark to height-challenged
>people?	:-)
>
>Dear Emmet
>
>I'm just 5'1" and I'M NOT OFFENDED!
>Mike was sounding very immature, calling people ASSHOLES and telling
>them to grow up. I was telling myself: "He is too immature to be 
>talking about "maturity", maybe he is talking about height. Or because
>he is really tall or because he is little and has a Napoleon complex.
>Sorry you didn't get it, but follow my example. Why have a complex 
>yourself????
>

	Dear Nazare,
	I wasn't offended, either. That's why I put the sideways smiley 
( looks like ":-)") at the end of the one-line post, along with using such
stilted P.C. language. I guess people are right, sarcasm easily gets lost
over the net. Anyway, I'm sorry you didn't get it. 

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: bend over...
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:56:17 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <1992Sep26.023258.24798@access.digex.com>, breinhar@access.digex.com (Robert B. Reinhardt) writes:
> 
> To me, Bush and Clinton, (Repub. & Democ.) are just two sides to a
> different coin (the demopublican gov't)...at least with Perot there
> is a chance there will be a third facet to American politics.  Even
> if that doesn't make things better, it ought to wake up some people
> who have been sleeping through life.
> 
     Here is some useless trivia -- did you know that the US had a
Vice President who was a hybrid between George Bush and Bill
Clinton in both name and party?  Yes, George Clinton, who
represented the Democratic-Republican party, was Vice President
from 1805 to 1812.
     More seriously, I really like what Andre Marrou said about
Bush and Clinton (even though I am not a Marrou supporter):
Bush is a right-wing socialist and Clinton is a left-wing
socialist.

     C. Perttunen 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:1671 alt.politics.elections:14615 talk.politics.misc:48544
From: breinhar@access.digex.com (Robert B. Reinhardt)
Subject: Re: Perot's Idle Time
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 22:58:17 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.160932.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>
>     Maybe it's just me, but don't you think old Ross really needs
>to find himself a hobby?  Golf, tennis, biking -- anything but
>playing these games with the Presidential election.    

Playing games?

What should he do?  *Play* politics as usual by the Demopublican
rule book.  I THINK NOT!


Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Subject: 1-800-bend over STUPIDITY!!!
Keywords: perot
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 17:04:00 GMT

_You people_ who want to call the 800-number just to screw up the
count are a bunch of *** ASSHOLES ***.  While you jerks are
playing your silly games with a legitimate political activity,
other people are actively trying to do what they think is the
right thing for the country.  It looks to me that maybe we have
too many under/uneducated adolescents that (unfortuately)
know how to read and write but have no clue as to when to 
keep their unwanted and unproductive opinions to themselves!

_You people_ are part of the problem--GROW UP!!!


Mike Rowland

Mike Rowland, Aerosol Research Branch, MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
From: falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Perot is a joke
Date: 25 Sep 92 00:05:49 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <1992Sep24.234822.1368@cnsvax.uwec.edu>, skeelssj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
> What, support Perot?  If Bush wants to become King George I, Perot seems to be
> pushing for the title Der Fueher. 

  WHOA, there.  To make that comment, you'd need to remember Bush's speech from
the convention.  He'll veto anything that goes over HIS limits.  He'll set up
HIS OWN policies with no opposition from Congress.  He won't allow it.

  ... and he won't have to worry about re-election this time.

> Sorry, but a hard core military attack on
> the drug trade is the last thing thathis country needs.

  OK, so what do you see Bush doing in other countries??  Hmmmmmmm...

> Lets look at the real
> alternatives, not some Republican with splashes of Democrat painted over his
> image.  The Liberatarian canidate Andre Marrou is the only one who seems not to
> be scared of by the status quo.

  One problem:  Marrou is a non-factor.

  Accept it.

  Debbie Gibson will make the White House before Marrou.

  Or is it that Marrou is the only one you aren't scared by...

> The withdrawl of the Federal government from
> most sectors of society and the economy is the only thing that will get this
> country back to where it was (the land of liberty and freedom for all?).  The
> U.S. economic strength has declined relative to the rest of the world, yet it's
> total strength has grow.  Have a look at why we were the supreme economic
> power after WWII, the European economies were destroyed, we didn't have
> competition.

  With that, we need to change our strategies, drastically.  And we need
someone not influenced by the Republocrats to do something about it.  Perot,
though he has seen Nixon and the like, has a plan.  Read it.  It's painful, but
it has a much better chance at working than the other winnable candidates'
plans.

>  In order for the U.S. to regain its position of relative strength
> you better hope for a major earthquake to hit all of Europe or other wise hope
> for some man made destruction of the same scale.

  Or a drastic change in US trade and economic policy.

> Perot's business is big
> business, in office this would most certainly translate to big government. 
> What is needed is not an expansion of government, but a total slashing of the
> federal government.  The federal government has grown cancerous and in no way
> reflects the ideals of the for fathers that we so cherrish.  It is time for a
> new government, not the same government with different masks on.                                     
>                             Wake up.  Perot is a substitute, not an
> alternative.                                                                                  
>                                    S. Skeels

  Let's just say this, without Perot, Marrou will never see the White House, in
much of any capacity.

					Mike Falkner
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight)
Subject: Re: RUN Ross RUN
Organization: Network Equipment Technologies, Redwood City
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:17:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.203056.12120@asl.dl.nec.com> dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
>Well, He's baaacckk!  Ross is in the race. He just made the announcement
>at the news conference.

Why?
Latest Gallup poll published in "NEWSWEEK" shows ole Ross with a whopping
9% of the vote if election held today and 50% of Perot supporters from a
few months ago say, "Don't do it Ross!" Could it be ego? Naw not that.


Stan Knight
|"I may be the first person in history to have to declare myself a candidate|
|for president just so I can buy T.V. time."   ---H. R. Perot---            |
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo)
Subject: Paid Volunteers? (oxymoron?)
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 19:52:37 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

I listened to "Crossfire" and Robert Novak refers to the Perot
volunteers as "Paid Volunteers".

Is it true that the "volunteers" are paid?

If so, does this not exemplify the hypocrisy of the entire Perot campaign?

I've heard Ross Perot on Larry King Live saying that he is "inconsequential"
in the Perot campaign.  According to Perot, the "volunteers" are responsible for
everything.

This seems to me to be a bit of feigned modesty.

Is it true that some of the Perot "volunteers" quit their jobs to join
the Perot team?  (I love my country, but I don't love it that much.8)) 


-- 
Ralph Yozzo (yozzo@watson.ibm.com)  
From the beautiful and historic Mid-Hudson Valley area of NY state
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:1638 alt.politics.elections:14475 talk.politics.misc:48284
From: jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Media Appearances
Date: 28 Sep 92 20:24:56 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <2q!p4q_.mpye@netcom.com> mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye) writes:
>Perot will be on the Today Show (the first hour) both Monday 9/28 and
>Tuesday 9/29.  He'll also be on Larry King Live Monday 9/28.
>
>Commercials are scheduled to start Tuesday.

That's interesting, since Perot claims that he can't buy commercials until
he declares as a candidate, and is also claiming that he hasn't decided yet
whether to re-enter the race.

Any bets on whether Larry King will "convince" him to declare his candidacy
on the air tonight, "spontaneous"-ly?

Perot might make a lousy president, but he's certainly good at getting the
press to pay attention.  I've only seen one mention of the image problems
that he was developing at the time he withdrew, so his ruse apparently
worked.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: walker@superboy.jsc.nasa.gov (Doug Walker)
Subject: Re: What bothers me about Perot...
Reply-To: walker@superboy.jsc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 15:10:05 GMT

In article <92273.143255SML108@psuvm.psu.edu>, <SML108@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
|> Think about it, Perot manages to get the two campaigns to talk solely and
|> exclusively on the issues, but doesn't think the public deserves to see this.
|> What's wrong with this picture?
|> 
|> Scott

It was the Dems and Reps that did not whant the press. I think they were
afraid that in addressing the issues in a real way they would have had
to make statements that showed how bad things really are.  Then everyone
would have gotten mad at both parties and voted Perot.

Doug

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: RUN Ross RUN
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 13:59:53 GMT


Mr. Perot said recently, "I will not spend one minute answering questions
that are not directly relevant to the issues that concern the American
people."

Case in point, from his news conference announcing his candidacy:

   Q. Your opponents say the gas tax and the increased taxes on Social
      Security benefits and the income tax [inaudible] falls too heavily
      on the middle class, and the rich don't participate as much as the
      middle class does. How are you going to respond to that?

   A. Well, you'd expect your opponents to distort and twist and present,
      and I wouldn't dignify that answer -- I wouldn't dignify that answer
      with comment. I know exactly where that comes from. I know exactly
      where it comes from. He said it so many times --

At the risk of dignifying his answer with comment: what a creep. Not
to mention he seems to be afflicted with the Bush "syntax thing" 
difficulties.

No doubt the person who "said it so many times" is now under investigation.

---
Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com