HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:56:42 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Sep30.015238.19372@b30.ingr.com>, pat@fitz.b30.ingr.com (Patrick
Fitzgerald) writes:

|>joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins) writes:
|>
|>
|>>Over 500,000 calls were logged in the first 30 minutes and over a million
|>>calls by this morning.
|>
|>I read in the paper that some people are upset, because they called the
|>number to tell him _not_ to run.  The number is just an automated counter,
|>so they inadvertently logged a "yes" vote.
|>
|>So take the above numbers with a grain of salt.

  Today's Wall Street Journal has an article detailing the "watering"
  Mr. "I'm at the command of my people" Perot has been doing of his
  grass roots. 

  Pretty interesting: paid "volunteers", $4 million spent in the
  month after he "withdrew" from the race, etc.  A former NY State
  coordinator for Perot refers to him as "H Ross Gepetto", pulling
  the strings from Texas.   

  This whole non-campaign campaign sounds like a slick, well funded
  first class con-job.   


---peter




Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14452 talk.politics.misc:48251
From: aphrael@cats.ucsc.edu (Robert Daniel West)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: I HEARD ROSS PEROT WILL BE BACK
Date: 28 Sep 1992 17:03:20 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: as215-ws-2.ucsc.edu


Projection: Perot will pick up about 15% of the vote in California,
do well in  Texas and Florida, and score abovee 7% in scattered midwest
states, but get less than 5% of the vote in the other states. The result
of this will be that Perot will pull enough votes away from Bush
in Florida to throw the state to Clinton; he will narrow the race
in California, though Clinton will still win; and he'll give Bush 
a great scare in Texas. In the other closely divided states, his 
presence will throw the states to Clinton, contributing to an
electoral college landslide.
.
From: filfeit@rael.Tymnet.COM (Fil Feit)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Comrade Clinton
Date: 6 Oct 92 12:18:03 GMT
Reply-To: filfeit@rael.Tymnet.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems

In article 11349@netcom.com, garyd@netcom.com (Gary Dietz) writes:
f free-thinking anarchist." - Charles Montgomery Burns |      are my own!    
>
>Now let me get this straight. . . 
>
>A brilliant young idealist goes abroad to a foreign land (even our enemy),
>and now, 20 years later, somebody is calling him a traitor?  (Okay, not
>this poster, but some other one earlier -- I think that Richard would 
>agree, if I get the point of his post).
>
>Now, if Clinton really DID go to the USSR to damage his own country,
>prove it with some facts.
>
>Just the fact that he DID go there makes me more apt to vote for him.
>I forget the quote, but there is someone who once said something like
>you have to know your enemy so you can know yourself.
>
Once again, this is just verbal diarrhea from "B-1" Bob Dornan, the
Congressman who decided that it was in the National Interest (tm) to
read the entire Gennifer Flowers transcript into the Congressional
Record.  He has, in interviews, stated that he made up all of his
KGB charges, but that it "could have happened".  The man is the
pride of Congress, because each Congressman can look at Dornan and
say, "there's someone worse than I".

--f2

--------------------------
  "He's crazy if he thinks we're going back again;
   He's crazy, anyway."
  --either Roger Daltry or Ross Perot's former supporters, I can't
    remember which
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: robart@agora.rain.com (Robert Barton)
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Organization: Organization
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 05:39:29 GMT

In article <1af5d2INNat8@eagle.natinst.com> chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz) writes:
>
>Not that its relevant to this discussion but I would like to see Perot
>run because throwing a wrench in the system might just be what it needs
>right now.  I couldn't support Perot for many reasons but if he wants
>to run then he should go for it.  I also think his non-candidacy (so far)
>has helped bring attention to other third party candidates.


  Perot is not a third-party candidate, he's a non-party candidate.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: 1-800-BEND-OVER
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 16:42:46 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.205938.1919@sbctri.sbc.com> asper@time.sbc.com (Alan E. Asper) writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.171722.8335@seas.gwu.edu> korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman) writes:
>>
>>What is this obsession with "bending over"???
>>
>Apparently you have never seen those Turkish prison movies on SpectraVision.
>

Apparently not!


Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Subject: Re: I HEARD ROSS PEROT WILL BE BACK
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:12:55 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.114345.9371@dscomsf.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
	[ advocating much harsher changes to US government taxes to put in in
		line with European numbers, the only one I'm concerned about is
		the following.]
>
>|>* Lower home mortgage interest deduction from $1 million to $250,000.
>
>Abolish it completely.
>
	
	Athough it may be a good idea on paper, in reality this would be 
a financial catastrophy. Most people, when they buy a home in the U.S., take
the tax deduction into account when they buy the house. This means, in my
case, I would've been willing to pay over 30% less for a house if there
was no deduction. I'm sure all other homeowners and potential homeowners
feel the same. Now, if the home mortgage decduction was eliminated, housing
prices would fall by over 30%. This is a big problem by itself, but the
it's made into a catastrophy because most homeowner only own 10-20%  of
their home, they've loaned money from the bank for the rest. If I spent
200K on a house, putting 20K down, and found out it went down in value
to 140K, but I still owed 180K, I would seriously consider forfeiting the
mortgage and letting the bank take the loss. If many people do this (very
likely), you'd have bank failures that made the S&L crisis look like small
potatoes. Most likely, this would end with a 30's style depression.
From: jdooley@maemaster.eng.uci.edu (John R. Dooley)
Subject: Re: Interesting Happenings on Larry King Live (STL)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 7 Oct 92 00:09:37 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <1992Oct6.050651.23783@wuecl.wustl.edu> gl1@cec2.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon) writes:
>   Just before the start of Larry King Live this evening, featuring an interview
>with Bill Clinton and Al Gore, the TCI Cablevision signal for CNN became 
>disrupted (it looked similar to the scrambling used on Pay-TV channels).
>
>   At 9 PM, just after the show ended, the signal returned to normal.
>
>   TCI Cablevision was not sure of the cause, at the last I heard.
>
>   Just makes you wonder...
>
>Greg

This is interesting, because last night on MacNeil-Lehrer, George
Stephanoupolis (sp?) and a Bush campaign aide were debating.  
Everytime GS tried to speak the signal between Little Rock and
the studio would go it.  Finally, they had to can the discussion.

Could this be another example of the conservative, Republican
media bias?   8-)

John D.
From: Gordon O. Perkins <gperkins@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Date: 03 Oct 92 23:00 PDT
Subject: Re: Bo Gritz info
Nf-ID: #R:2OCT199208290414@utrcv1:-2004078688:cdp:1728300001:000:361
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!gperkins    Oct  3 23:00:00 1992


Briefly, Gritz is a vicious anti-communist who hangs out with other 
anti-semites and racists st the Spotlight magazine and Populist Party.
The Populist Party's 1984 pres candidate was David Duke. Big Bo recently
was a featured mediator trying to talk some racist in Idaho out of 
some "confrontation" with the FBI. If you don't like fascism, ignore
Bo in 92. 

Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15261 alt.politics.clinton:8600 alt.politics.bush:7818
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Mr Bush or Pres. Bush?
Keywords: tweedle-dum, tweedel-dummer
Date: 6 Oct 92 13:01:15 GMT
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA

In article <1992Oct5.201402.26779@u.washington.edu>,
sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:

|>In article <1992Oct05.165519.4109@watson.ibm.com> born@scepter.raleigh.ibm.com
|>(Christopher J. Born) writes:

|>>Supposedly, the 
|>>media has come on board with this.  Has anybody noticed this 
|>>usage (blatantly) by the media?
|>
|>Nope. I've heard several newscasts today, and it's still
|>President Bush.  For four more weeks.

What you mean Bush's dicky heart is going to give out so soon?

Does the VP still step in for a deceased Prez even when the successor has been
elected?

President Dan Quayleee here we come !

--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d
From: bills@sequent.com (Bill Sears)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 23:39:32 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.211618.15622@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>You've got to admit, there some hypocrisy on the part of some pro-choice
>promoters- they say abortion is ok, then talk about the "tragedy" of the
>death penalty.

No more than you have to admit, there is some hypocrisy on the part of some
pro-life promoters- they lecture on the sanctity of all human life, then talk
about how justified it is that the serial killer got the electric chair.

I don't have any split feelings on this subject.  I believe that the mother
should have the choice to abort her pregnancy, and I believe that the death
penalty is an appropriate punishment for some crimes.

If you're going to equate two groups, at least make sure the groups can be
equated.  The word "some" should be avoided at all costs when attempting
to make a point.  After all,

    _Some_ Pro-choice promoters are hypocrites.
    _Some_ Pro-life promoters are hypocrites.
    _Some_ gun control opponents are murderers.
    _Some_ Republicans are bigots.
    _Some_ computer professionals are nerds.
    _Some_ heterosexual males are child molesters.
    _Some_ college students are drugged out junkies.
    _Some_ professors are wife beaters.

I trust I've made my point.  All of the above statements are true.  The
point is --- WHO CARES??!?!??!??

  bills
--
George Carlin on "Right-to-lifers":

    Isn't it strange that most of these "right-to-lifers" are also in favor
    of the death penalty? The only "right" they're interested in is _their_
    right to determine who lives or dies.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.perot
From: gl1@cec1.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon)
Subject: First Debate Site
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 01:14:20 GMT

    Chancellor William Danforth of Washington University announced this 
afternoon that Washington University will host the first Presidential Debate
next Sunday.

    It will be held in our fieldhouse (with maximum capacity ~4,000, but less 
for the debate due to press and stage, etc.).

    Now, I just hope I can get one of the few tickets that will be issued.

Greg

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: lyman@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Kenneth Casey)
Subject: Re: Mr Bush or Pres. Bush?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 00:18:04 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.181145.8884@Warren.MENTORG.COM> tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli) writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.191316.19376@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>>born@scepter.raleigh.ibm.com (Christopher J. Born) writes:
>>>Mr.  Bush or President Bush?  About 3-4 weeks ago in US News and 
>>>World Report's Washington Wispers column reported that the 
>>>Clinton campaign was putting out the word that they wanted to 
>>>stop referring to Bush as President Bush and start referring to 
>>>him as Mr. Bush, to help diminish his stature.  Supposedly, the 
>>>media has come on board with this.  Has anybody noticed this 
>>>usage (blatantly) by the media?
>>>
>>>If this is true, it is real sneaky!
>>
>>Wouldn't it be just like the Democrat Party to play subliminal semantic
>>games like this!
>
>Gimme a break.  Both sides play this kind of game all the time.  The
>Republicans are much better at it.  Maybe what you should be saying is,
>"Wow, the Democrats are finally learning to play like the big boys!"
>
>Tom
>
>-- 
>Tom Limoncelli -- tal@warren.mentorg.com (work) -- tal@plts.uucp (play)
>"I like Bill Clinton tremendously.  I know him from the governors' conferences.
>The Democrats nominated their best person, a very able fellow.  The country is
>well served by that choice." -Bush's re-election chair in NJ (Thomas Kean)






Talk about sneaky subliminal language... When did the Democratic 
Party change its name to the Democrat Party? What's that supposed to

highlight? Democrat=Bureaucrat? Well, sticks n stones. Doesn't matter now,
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15107 talk.politics.misc:49455
From: strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: The Clinton Letter
Date: 5 Oct 1992 00:36:14 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Does anyone know where I can find an etxt version of the controversial
letter Bill Clinton wrote during the Viet Nam war?  I was hoping to
find the entire thing on the Internet somewhere but I have thus far
only been able to find references to it. :-(

Stratocaster

-- 
	   Steve Davis (I'm a student, not a spokesperson!)
      strat@cis.ksu.edu - Kansas State University - Manhattan KS
				   
 The most important freedom in a democracy, is the freedom of CHOICE.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: Pro-choice
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:32:40 GMT

In article <Bv5IL2.FFI@agora.rain.com>,
robart@agora.rain.com (Robert Barton) writes:
>
>
>                      Bush   Clinton  Marrou
>Pro choice on:
>
>  abortion            no     yes      ?
>  education           yes    no       yes
>  trade               no     no       yes
>  drug use            no     no       yes
>  Social Security     no     no       yes

Marrou, like the LP platform, is pro-choice on abortion although he
is personally morally opposed to it.  There are a significant number
of Libertarians who share this opinion.  I notice that Clinton has
been stealing of late a phrase that has been used by these
libertarians for a long time:  Pro-choice, not pro-abortion.

/June
From: karner@apap4.pap.univie.ac.at
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: TV-panel discussions...WHEN???
Date: 23 Sep 92 16:25:15 GMT
Organization: Vienna University Computer Center


    Could someone tell me please how much TV-panel discussions between
    President Bush and Gov. Clinton are planned and WHEN will they take place?
    I'm not an american citizen but very interested in US-politics though.
    Thanks a lot for your help!
                                     Christoph




Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14853 talk.politics.misc:48954
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Date: 1 Oct 1992 20:32:50 GMT
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

N. Richard Caldwell) writes:
|> John Nagle):
|> > 
|> >       But there's no excuse for only accepting "yes" votes.
|> 
|> Nonsense, did the Democrats allow Republicans to vote "NO" on Clinton
|> at their convention?  The Republicans?  It doesn't make any difference 
|> how many people don't want Perot to run.  If a significant number of 
|> people want him in the race he should run.  I'd say that the 9-17% he's 
|> running in the polls now constitutes a significant number of people.
|> 
Nor did the Democrats allow the Republicans to vote YES for a secondary
candidate they thought it might be easier to beat.  Perot on the other
hand allowed Republicans or Democrats to fote YES for a secondary 
candidate that they though might help their candidate win through vote
dilution.  There is a very, very big difference.

As to your 9-17%, that number is the number of people who would vote for
him if he were a candidate.  That number could be smaller or larger than
the number that think he should be a candidate.  No data on this one.

Perot should be on the ballot because a) he wants to be and b) he has
collected enough signatures.  He doesn't even have to expect to win or
want to win.  It's why anyone would want to vote for him that amazes
me, but that isn't related to this discussion.
-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: vsg001@acad.drake.edu
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 07:57:04 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.033931.24538@u.washington.edu>, olshen@biostat.washington.edu (Adam Olshen) writes:
> In article <1992Oct1.210646.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
>> How can we look up to a President who was afraid to defend his country? 
> 
> Were we attacked?  If so, I missed it.
> 
> How do you know what arrangement he had with his wife.  Maybe his wife had
> affairs?  Maybe she did not care?  How can you judge their marraiage from
> the outside?
> 
>>How can we look up to a President who sees nothing but doom and
>>gloom in the American work place? 
> What does this mean?  
> 
> 
> You seem to be the gloom and doom man.  I walked down many streets today
> and none of them was controlled by drugs.  In fact, in 24 years, I have never
> walked down a street controlled by drugs.  I must hang out in the wrong 
> neighborhoods.  Drugs don't murder; people are the only objects that have
> the capability of murder.  Drugs lead to murder, but that is mostly the
> result of our inane drug laws.
> 
> Adam Olshen
> olshen@biostat.washington.edu

Hmm... Adam, buddy, I think you completely missed the point. You see, the
United States hasn't been invaded since the Spanish American war... what I was
talking about OBVIOUSLY is Clinton's DODGING OF THE DRAFT! In your 24 years, do
you remember Vietnam? That's right, we had a WAR in the sixties, that Mr.
Clinton seemed to have convienlently missed. That is what I was referring to.
As for his wedding, the "church scene" that I described is taken from the very
mouth of Mr. Clinton (well, not exactly) during a Democratic debate with the
other Democrats running for President. As for the drugs... man, you have lived
a sheltered life! I come from a small town in southern Wisconsin, not too far
from Chicago and Milwaukee... and I hate to shatter your world like this, but
there are drug rings out there, I've seen them pal. True, you make a point that 
for me to say that drugs run our streets is a bit pessimistic, but I'm not
running for President. The last person in the world to undermine the ability of
Americans should be the President, or anyone who wants to be the leader of a
nation. What sort of leader believes that his following is second rate? If Mr.
Clinton cannot believe in me or the abilites of the people of this nation then
I CANNOT believe in him. And nor should anyone else. I hope this helped. Try to
follow a little closer next time.
Here endith the lesson.
		--VSG001@acad.drake.edu (Vince Goddard-ARCH Conservative)
 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14803 talk.politics.misc:48860
From: falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:05:50 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <1ad7v3INN7ep@eagle.natinst.com>, chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz) writes:
> In article <1992Sep30.092137.1439@cnsvax.uwec.edu> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>>  Pat, stupid question of the month #4097:
>>
>>  Do you think that there are that many people that want Perot out??
>>
>>  Maybe on the USENET news, yes, but ....
> 
> Actually, yes.  I think there are lots and lots of people who want
> Perot out of the race.  

  I can name two:  George Bush and Bill Clinton.  Add their campaign staffs to
that...

> I know quite a few.  I don't know anybody
> who supports him (at least nobody that will admit it).  Perot has
> the potential to throw the election into the House of Representatives.
> Many people think this is a real bad idea.

  I don't.  I think that, if you are going to have the system, you must be
ready to accept the consequences.  You don't like that???????????

		CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  Personally, I think that much of any other system just serves to preserve the
Republocratic PUKE that we have to put up with.

  Bend over, Chris, and bend over a little more when the Republocrats want you
to.

						Mike Falkner
From: teague@acavax.lynchburg.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Tickets for Richmond pres. debate?
Date: 3 Oct 92 13:12:56 -0500
Organization: Lynchburg College


Can anyone tell me how to obtain tickets to the Oct. 15 presidential debate
in Richmond, VA?

Please reply via E-mail to teague@acavax.lynchburg.edu

Thanks.
---
Kipp
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Subject: Re: United We Stand And Deliver
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 17:15:21 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.172551.6843@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>In article <1992Sep25.213357.587@kpc.com>,
>emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:
>>In article <Bv5FKM.ELt@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>        b.t.w: voting libertarian won't stop Perot. You'd better vote
>>for someone who has a chance to win if you think he's trouble.
>
>Perot does not need to be stopped.  He is at most polling about 25%
>of the vote any where I've seen.  That at best makes him just
>another protest candidate like Marrou.  If you prefer Marrou to
>Perot but vote for Perot this will be interpreted by the pundits as
>a preference for Perot's positions, not preference for viability.
>Stop trying to play the election as though you were betting on a
>horse race.  Vote for what you want and send a message that can't be
>ignored.
>

	I agree. I may vote for Perot because a) I agree with a good
percentage of his positions and b) he has no chance of winning. God
help us if he were actually to win.