HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Subject: Re: 1-800-bend over STUPIDITY!!!
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:15:47 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.181001.24661@ornl.gov>, de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
> Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
> Path: news.larc.nasa.gov!darwin.sura.net!utkcs2!ornl!ORNL.GOV!de5
> From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
> Subject: Re: 1-800-bend over STUPIDITY!!!
> Message-ID: <1992Oct1.181001.24661@ornl.gov>
> Sender: usenet@ornl.gov (News poster)
> Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
> References:  <BvGCqp.G2n@news.larc.nasa.gov>
> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:10:01 GMT
> Lines: 25
> 
> In article <BvGCqp.G2n@news.larc.nasa.gov>, rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov 
> (Michael W. Rowland) writes:
> >_You people_ who want to call the 800-number just to screw up the
> >count are a bunch of *** ASSHOLES ***.
> 
> While I'd never advocate such an action, I must point out that the
> susceptability of this method to exactly these kinds of techniques is a 
valid
> criticism.  Face it, this phone poll doesn't mean a thing, and we shouldn't
> pretend that it does.
> 
> >While you jerks are playing your silly games with a legitimate political
> >activity...
> 
> Legitimate, yes.  Well thought out, no.  Robust, no.  Meaningful, no.  If 
this
> kind of blantantly worthless, poorly thought out "poll" tells us anything
> about how Perot works or how his Electronic Town Hall would work, then we
> ought to consider ourselves forwarned.
> 
> >_You people_ are part of the problem--GROW UP!!!
> 
> You're taking yourself and this so-called poll too seriously.  Lighten up.
> 
> -- 
> 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

You make valid points...I had too much caffine that day.
Got to stop shooting from the hip!
Thanks for the reality check!

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: cah@tyr.JPL.NASA.gov (Allen Halsell)
Subject: Re: Views on Debate Just Passed
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:12:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct11.232208.8076@ac.dal.ca>, whare@ac.dal.ca writes:
>
> 	P.S.-Clinton attacked Bush's views on patriotism by saying
> 	that Bush's father even agreed with Clinton's opinions.
> 	Bush should've respomded by saying that since Clinton's dad
> 	was an alcoholic his point on family views held little water.

Yeah, this woulda been a real howler.  Fer shure.

*********************************************************************
the only thing that speaks the truth is the eloquence of passing time
               the spoken word is a jacket too tight
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: edmondse@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: Re: Is Perot serious?
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:32:02 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.163701.25548@ee.rochester.edu>, streb@ee.rochester.edu (Chuck S.) writes:
>>Again I will ask how much of the VP's job is debate?  How much of a
>>Presidents job is debate?  None except in an election year.
>>
>>Doug
> Doug , and I ask You who Is the Chairman of the Senate?
> 
> Chuck

Chuck, I guess you're saying it really doesn't matter if the leader of the
Senate cannot say anything. Afterall, Quayle hasn't been able to take his foot
out of his mouth during his tenure. 

As Adm Stockdale, on one of the morning network shows, said quoting Shakespeare 
"There is now a plague on both houses".



> 
> 
> -- 
> ===========================================================__________=========
> =                                                       ' /----------\  ' 
> =  There's no place like internet!!!                            |        '  
> =                                                    '          |    '      
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: Debate
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:41:38 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.034059.10275@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> walker@superman.jsc.nasa.gov (Doug Walker) writes:
>Well the first of the three presidential debates is now over.  I really think
>Perot hit a home run here.  Whike the other two candidates filled the airwaves 
>with meaningless retoric, he was able to answer the questions in a meaningful
>and thoughtful way.
>

I thought so too. Last night, after the debate, I was listening to a radio
call in show here in Washington and the vast majority of the people who 
called in thought that Perot came ahead in the debate. In fact, most of the
people were not even Perot supporters but felt that they might be more 
inclined to vote for him after listening to the debate. 

>
>I cannot wait for the next 30 minute Perot spot.  He had some strong things to
>say tonight about how to fix the problems which he addressed in the first 30
>minute spot.  
>

Does anyone know when the next 30 minute spot will be aired?

John
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:2208 alt.politics.clinton:10621 alt.politics.bush:9301
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: C-SPAN POST-DEBATE POLL
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:12:21 GMT
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: zorba7.larc.nasa.gov

In article <1992Oct14.041811.26790@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, 
dtiberio@csws18.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
> In article <Bw2Dt0.46K@news.larc.nasa.gov> rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov 
> (Michael W. Rowland) writes:
> 
> >I noticed the same thing, so I began a tally.  As it turns out,
> >callers were in favor of Perot by a 2:1 margin over either
> >Bush or Clinton.  Roughly 25 calls were for Perot while Clinton
> >and Bush got about 10 a piece.  Marou got 2 and 5 or 6 were
> >still undecided...interesting...
> >
> >Does this say something about C-SPAN watchers or does it say
> >something else?
> >
> 
> 	Sure, Perot used his financial influence to buy high-speed dialing
> telephones for his supporters, and they were able to dial in much quicker.
> As some might say...
> 
> 	Obviously the above was a joke; typical response by a Bush/Quayl
> supporter.
> 

BEEP!  WRONG ANSWER...I am 100% for Perot!  Don't be paranoid!

Mike Rowland

Mike Rowland, Aerosol Research Branch, MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
From: holland@geop.ubc.ca (Stephen Holland)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: VOTE FOR ONE OF THE THREE CANDIDATES PA
Date: 11 Oct 1992 20:21:47 GMT
Organization: Geophysics & Astronomy, U.B.C. Vancouver, Canada
Distribution: world
Reply-To: holland@geop.ubc.ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: nukta.astro.ubc.ca

In article 1b8gahINNah@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu, bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:
>
>HELL NO!  The debates will not be legitimate unless they include
>ALL FOUR nationwide candidates!
> 
>This really sucks!


Forgive a question from an ignorant Canadian but.....

"FOUR nationwide candidates"?????
We up here in the frozen north know of Bush, Clinton, and Perot but who is
number four???

Is it another independent that is being ignored by the media?  Or do you only
have one fringe party!?!?!?!?!?

Considering the three "big name" candidates are all such fools it would be nice
to see a few more "third" parties putting up candidates.

steve holland  (the man with no diacritics)


Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: walker@superman.jsc.nasa.gov (Doug Walker)
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Followup-To: alt.politics.perot
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:06:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.172953.4190@kodak.kodak.com> bryant@neural.Kodak.COM (Steve Bryant) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.155808.12192@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, walker@superboy.jsc.nasa.gov (Doug Walker) writes:
>
>>I do not think that public appearences will be much of the VP's job in a
>>Perot administration.
>>
>>Doug
>>
>
>Interesting concept. A leader that doesn`t make public appearances.
>A leader MUST make public appearances to shape public opinion.
>I.E. the bully pulpit that  Mr. Perot keeps refering to.

I should clarify.  I do not think that attending media circus events
will be much of the VP's job in a Perot administration.  I do not think
participating in debates will be much of the VP's job in a Perot
administration.

I do think we need someone who knows how to take swift and immediate
action.  There is a saying in the military "A bad decision is better
than no decision".  The politicians these days do not know the meaning
of making a decision that is good for the country.  What gets them
re-elected?  Is it representing the people of their district? No.  IKt
is representing the PAC that contributes to their re-election campaign.

Doug
From: bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Debate Qualifications
Date: 16 Oct 1992 05:55:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


>Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: kauffman@slab.unt.edu (DON KAUFFMAN)
Subject: Debate Qualifications
Date: Thu Oct 15 21:46:51 1992

(Dave Sill) writes:
>I agree with most everything Mr. Pye said, but would like to make a couple
>comments.
>
>In article <1992Oct15.034634.3426@netcom.com>, mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye)
w:
>>
>>In most Presidential elections, people complain about having to 
>>choose the lesser of two evils. Well, this year at least there is a 
>>third choice,
>
>It's been a *long* time since there weren't at three choices.  Unfortunately,
>people seem unable to even consider a candidate outside the political
>establishment--the McCandidates proposed by the two major parties.  Perot's
>big contribution to this race is that his incredible personal wealth makes
>him impossible to ignore.
>
>If our only lesson learned from this experience is that Republicans,
>Democrats, and billionaires can run for president, we will have learned much
>less than we could have.
>
>All "third" parties are not populated by communists and extremists.
>
>>In the final analysis, I'd rather have two honest men, who have 
>>little to gain other than the satisfaction of having done the right 
>>thing, working night and day on solving the problems of this country 
>>from a fresh perspective, than putting two old-guard politicians back 
>>in the White House that are still more interested in rhetoric than 
>>solutions.
>Everything you said there applies equally well to Andre Marrou and Nancy
Lord.
>
>-- 
>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

I was wondering how many ballots in the 50 states
these other candidates are on.

Also, is that some sort of qualification for
appearing in the debates?

Thanks
------------------------------------------------

Andre Marrou and Nancy Lord are the *only* other candidates who are on all
50 state ballots plus DC.  They have met *every* objective criteria put forth
by the Debate Commission.  The *only* difference between Marrou/Lord and 
Perot/Stockdale is that Perot has a lot of money.  If you think personal
wealth is an appropriate measure of political legitimacy, then what was
done is fine.  If you don't think that money confers wisdom, then you have
a problem.
From: JJB133@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: WAKE UP CALL ON STOCKDALE
Date: 15 Oct 92 01:27:43 GMT
Organization: Penn State University


    AAAARRRRGGGHH!


    I am so SICK of all the "he is a nice man, but" comments on Adm.
Stockdale.   I have confidence that he can handle a crisis decision
better than the other two.    A REAL crisis is making command decisions
while in enemy captivity.   On Dano's scale, being "tested by fire"
means dealing with a crisis in Manila while the President was in
Malta with top advisors (he must mean Bill Kristol, the rest of the
NSC was at the summit) and making a recommendation.   Adm. Stockdale
had no cushy White House Situation Room to make life/death decisions.
He had a cold cell at the Hanoi Hilton as his study.   Dan would crack
under that pressure, but, by golly the Danster is great on TV, right?

   I FULLY recommend everyone who thinks Stockdale is somewhat daffy
to go to the video store/library and check out the entire series of
 "I, Claudius" for a refresher course in substance over style.

  For those who are unfamiliar with the story...

    In the 1st Century A.D. Claudius was a member of the royal family who
had a bad stammer and a club foot (sound familiar?).   He was dismissed as
an idiot and was allowed a lot of freedom to pursue whatever interested him.
His interest was Roman history and he wrote extensive chronicles of the time.
His disability hid a brilliant mind.

   His disability also saved his life.   Under the rule of his nephew, the
depraved Emperor Caligula, he survived because Claudius's deformities amused
the Emperor and made Claudius appear less threatening.   During the chaos
following the coup-de-etat that toppled Caligula, Claudius survived by pure
luck when the Praetorian Guard, realizing that if the entire royal family
was put to the sword they would be out of a job, declared Claudius Emperor
and protected him in their barracks until the fighting died down.

 While many in the Roman Senate dismissed Claudius as an idiot and buffoon,
he nevertheless took command of the ruin that Caligula had left and started
to "clean out the barn". Claudius took an empire mired in debt from Caligula's
wasteful and decadent spending (sound familiar) and set Rome on
the path to a sound financial footing.    He instituted many long overdue
building projects to revitalize the Empire's infrastructure.   He even
managed to expand the empire, completing the conquest of Britain.

    So get a grip troops!     Stockdale's less than stellar skill is
no hindrance to leadership, only the perception of what we have come
to expect in a Veep.    Even Emperor Claudius would have been declared
not of Presidential timber by the pundits

James J. Berthelot
Worthington campus, Penn State
Scranton, Pa                           The usual disclaimer....
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: kenw@teal.csn.org (Ken Waletzki)
Subject: RESULTS OF PRE-DEBATE POLL FOR PRESIDENT for USENET ers
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:23:27 GMT

RESULTS OF POLL OF USENET VOTERS PRIOR TO YESTERDAY'S DEBATE!

First, a total of 84 people responded and a few were critical that I
did not include other candidates and that I did not have a ballot 
for foriegn policy, and so forth.  

This is not a scientific poll, nor was it intended to be, but here are 
the results:

Total Responses:                   84
Total Qualified Responses:         80 (Jokers and votes for anyone other
                                       Bush, Clinton, and Perot removed from
                                       poll have been removed from this poll)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

				BUSH	CLINTON		PEROT
                         -----------------------------------------------
Overall for president: 		24%	33%		43%

Education: 			16%	44%		40%

Economic:			21%	29%		50%

Leadership:			30%	38%		32%

Trustworthy:			24%	18%		58%

Patriotism:			37%	28%		35%

Addresses Real Problems:	14%	34%		52%
------------------------------------------------------------
Of the people responding 98% were male 2% female and the rest
were somewhere in between.  24 of the 80 read Perot's book,
United We Stand, 14 read Clinton's Puting People Firts, and I got
some shit from a few on the question: "Read Bush's Lips?"  I 
agree that did sound biased, but I'm not aware that he is promoting
a plan in print to the general public.

REMEMBER THIS IS NOT A SCIENTIFC STUDY!!!!  DON'T TAKE IT AS SUCH!

Frankly, with the number of people voting Perot, I'm wondering
if my posting of the poll made it to all sites with alt.politics.clinton,
and alt.politics.bush.

My personal belief is that the Perot people are more enthusiastic about
their man.

-- 
Ken Waletzki Consulting, 2525 Arapahoe #E4-107, Boulder, Colorado  80302
303-494-8953, email kenw@csn.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: drice@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Keith Rice)
Subject: Re: Let's Hear it For Stockdale! (was Re: Stockdale's Style)
Organization: University of North Texas
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:59:43 GMT

In <1992Oct15.200041.10275@athena.mit.edu> cid@athena.mit.edu (Derek H Cedillo) writes:

>YEAH!  Thanks for pointing that out anne.
>I just wish the common people would look past public appearances
>and look at the thoughts and issues at hand.  Just
>because he has a hearing aid and stutters a bit doesnt make hima fool.
>I think the guy was fabulous.  But I know that the general public
>probably wont, they are just interestedin who looked better.
>Oh, well, Let's try to eductate them!!!

It's true that hearing aids and stuttering do not make someone a fool.
But from my point of view Stockdale looked like a fool.  His stammering
appeared to be the by-product of unpreparedness.  I think that Perot
could have easily found someone else to be his running mate.

--
_____________________________
__-----____--___--__-----____	D. Keith Rice
__--__--___--__--___--__--___	University of North Texas
__--___--__--_--____--___--__	Department of Computer Science
__--___--__----_____--__--___	Denton, Texas, USA
__--___--__--_--____--_--____
__--__--___--__--___--__--___	drice@ponder.csci.unt.edu
__-----____--___--__--___--__
_____________________________
From: f435@cs.utexas.edu (Fall Class Account)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Some Helpful Hints for Perot!
Followup-To: alt.politics.perot
Date: 13 Oct 1992 09:36:32 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: priddy.cs.utexas.edu

I agree with Mr. Drake's assesment of the media's bias against Perot.  I watched
the debate on CNN, and on their nifty real-time voter approval graphs they
had three labels: Bush, Clinton, and Swing.  They didn't bother to specifically
denote the Perot voters like they did for the other candidates!  And in their
smug analysis afterwards they didn't give him near the attention that they gave
Clinton.

And has anyone seen the latest issue of Newsweek (the one with Perot's picture
on the front, with the words "Ego Trip" superimposed)?  Pure Perot-bashing.
The articles are mainly negative towards him, and they interview only former
Perot handlers who are pissed at Perot for kicking them out of his campaign
back before he decided to run for office officially.

My personal opionion?  The press knows that Perot is contemptuous of their
tabloid journalism and catering to negative campaigning, and are engaging in
petty tit-for-tat.
	
		-Wade (One more Texan for Perot! YEEEEEEE-HAAAWWWWWW!)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: RESULTS OF PRE-DEBATE POLL FOR PRESIDENT for USENET ers
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Distribution: usa
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:42:59 GMT
X-Posted-From: eng-nxt10.cso.uiuc.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

kenw@teal.csn.org (Ken Waletzki) writes:
: This is not a scientific poll, nor was it intended to be, but here are 
: the results:
: 
: Total Responses:                   84
: Total Qualified Responses:         80 (Jokers and votes for anyone other
:                                        Bush, Clinton, and Perot removed from
:                                        poll have been removed from this poll)

I think it's safe to say that it's nowhere near realistic.  You've
excluded all the other people who are running for president!

: My personal belief is that the Perot people are more enthusiastic about
: their man.

--
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
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: The truth about that crazy aunt in the attic
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 21:10:12 GMT

In article <1687BACFD.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com> JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
>Let's see now.  "Consider this (campaign commercial) the first town meeting."
>Stated with a straight face by Ross Perot.  Somehow, I thought he'd at least
>try to give the ILLUSION of two way discussions.  Nope.  Ross' hired
>economist (who now supports Clinton, you figure that one out) makes up
>an economic plan, Perot presents his graphs about what is wrong with
>America based on this crap, with no input from "you people".  That is his
>idea of a town meeting.  Good work by a maniacal billionaire eccentric.
>

Leaving aside your personal attitude about Ross Perot, what kind of "crap"
did you find in his talk? The only "crap" that I saw in his talk/presentation
is the state of the U.S economy and how big of a trouble we are all in. 
It is beyond me that someone can watch a half hour program on the dismal 
state of the U.S. economy and then get infuriated about trivialities like
"eccentric billionaire, two way discussions, ..." etc. The fact still remains
that Ross Perot is the only candidate who is bringing this issue to the
forefront of the discussions. Bush is ignoring it, while Clinton is making
grand promises that sound very appealing to the ear. I am not sure that Ross
Perot will make a good president, but if it is going to take an "eccentric 
billionaire" to point out our deep financial problems, so be it. 

To make an analogy:

We are all on the deck of a slowly sinking ship and all that we are doing
is criticising this crazy zillionaire in first class who keeps poping out of his
cabin yelling "the ship is sinking and we have to do something fast."
Meanwhile, the crew (professional politicians) is giving us empty promises
and nice words, saying everything is going to be ok.

I would hate to see the end of this story.

John


Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot