HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 04:57:28 GMT


Vince--
Glad to see another Conservative on here.  Now, I can't quote your posting,
but I like the comment about how the pro-abortion stance sounded bette
in original German.  I have been making the comparison between today's
pro-abortion attitudes and the eugenics practices of Nazi Germany.
I believe that is a valid comparison.

Simon

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7627 alt.fan.dan-quayle:4878
From: eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Where is Bush?
Date: 4 Oct 92 04:18:26 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange

In article <1992Oct2.191520.2812@netcom.com> hrlaser@netcom.com (H.R. Laser) writes:
>Speaking of bumper stickers.. each presidential election year since
>I can remember I've seen less and less stickers on cars in Calif.
>I remember zillions of them during the 64 Johnson/Goldwater battle,
>and had a Gene McCarthy "flower" sticker on my vw bug back in
>'68 (as did zillions of other college students).. but since then
>I've seen fewer and fewer. 
>
>Congress should appropriate a few billion dollars to study 
>this phenomena. :)

I can shed some light on the bumper sticker decline:  the suckers cost a
fortune to make and unless you get the most expensive ones, they won't come
off, so people don't want to put them on.  They make fewer bumper stickers
these days and they are the ones that will peel off when the campaign is
over.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Subject: Schoolchild on Net (was Re: ... Republican Cowardice)
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 17:32:06 GMT

In article <1992Oct4.013435.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
> ... "free speech" It ... happend ... handeld ... disturbence ... 
> ... Desert Strom....  Judging by your grasp of the English language, I'm
> willing to wager that you are either a sophomore or a freshman... [sic] or
> at least you should be.... aggrivate ... endith ...

Considering that the rules of English spelling and punctuation violated above
are taught before the 8th grade, one is irresistably drawn to the conclusion
that vsg001 is envious of his antagonist's grasp of the English language, as
the latter has shown a markedly greater familiarity with it than the former.

> ... Did anyone whine when the POW protesters chanted at a dinner
> when Bush was speaking? 

Bush did.


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244		--------------------+
| "Other sports exist only to keep you occupied until baseball season comes |
| around again."					- Dave Barry	    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7694 alt.politics.clinton:8421
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Comments on Republican Cowardice
Date: 5 Oct 92 04:14:11 EDT

In article <1992Oct4.051914.26556@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
> Garret- you throw the word "fascist" around when talking about Republicans,
> and yet you don't like it when someone calls Democrats "socialists".
> 

I don't have a problem with socialists. I have a problem with National
Socialists like your ilk.

> I don't think I'm a fascist, I mean, I don't see a brown shirt in my closet,

Just because you don't *think* you are fascist doesn't mean you aren't.

> nor do I wear a hooked cross or a double lightning bolt on my coat.
> 

Dude, I am sure you would have been first in line during the Nuremberg rallies
in the '30s given the chance. Giving the 'ol 'Sieg Heil' to Pat Robertson/Buch-
anan fits within your job description.

> So, therefore, I am not a fascist.

You vote extreme right wing Republican, therefore you *are* fascist.

> 
> Simon



Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Comments on Republican Cowardice
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 07:31:04 GMT


I'm not throwing any obscenities at Garrett, nothing would be acomplished by
that.

By the way---Like I've said before, I don't mind if someone disgrees with
me, just as long as they know why they belive they way they do.

I enjoy a good debate, and what I like to call "intelligent disagreement"

Simon
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli)
Subject: Bush's failing health
Organization: Not affiliated with any organization.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 21:47:29 GMT

I've been very concerned about Bush's failing health.

If you compare pictures of him from the last 12 years in 4 year
increments (I looked though old Time magazines at the library) after
each election he's really looking a lot worse.  The rate is
accellerating.

I called an old college friend who is a political advisor in D.C.
(well, actually he's in Virginia, just outside of D.C., but his firm
does most of their work for D.C.-based politicians).  He's conservative
and works for a conservative think-tank.  When in school we argued
constantly and never agreed politically.  However, we still call and
chit-chat now and then.

He claimed that the word in D.C. was that Bush's health is bad and it's
getting worse fast.  There was a time this spring when they weren't
sure if they were going to have to replace him with Baker on the
ticket.  This is why he didn't officially declare his candidacy until
relatively late in the game.  He also claimed that word has it that his
vomiting in Japan was actually a minor stroke.  It was the incident in
Japan that make the GOP start to consider running someone else.

Tom "Can you say PRESIDENT QUAYLE?" Limoncelli

-- 
Tom Limoncelli -- tal@warren.mentorg.com (work) -- tal@plts.uucp (play)
       Both candidates are offering economic packages, but only
          one candidate can leave us with a President Quayle.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7637 alt.politics.clinton:8357 alt.rush-limbaugh:6466
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Sunday, 4 Oct 1992 01:41:55 PST
From: <RAJA@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton may have been a traitor (Re: Slick Willy's Peace Movement)
Distribution: na
 <BvKDFC.Dxu@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Oct4.040806.2811@anasazi.com>

In article <1992Oct4.040806.2811@anasazi.com>, john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
says:
>
>Keywords:
>
>In article <BvKDFC.Dxu@news.cso.uiuc.edu> StarOwl@uiuc.edu writes:
>]Honest question, here: is Slick Willie planning to actually have our
>]planes *involved* in the Balkan conflict, or does he just approve
>]of using US military jets to escort US cargo planes flying in relief
>]supplies?
>
>Corporal Willie recently called for the use of US military force in the       .
>Balkans
>Apparently he was too busy with his soviet friends to study european
>history while he was at Oxford.
>
>...on the subject of Clinton in Moscow as part of the peace movement in
>1969...
>
>As far as I'm concerned, anyone had a right to protest the Vietnam war in the
>US (hell, I did it AFTER I got out of the military). However, if Clinton
>cooperated with the Soviets as part of that effort, he is not just a draft
>dodger, he is a traitor, by the most basic definition of the word. Since
>there appears to be some evidence for this (Dornan's claims, and Limbaugh's
>conversation with Clinton headquarters), I think this needs to be seriously
>investigated.
>
>Where the hell is our "investigative" press when we need them?
>
>--
>John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
>john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
>Get into Ham Radio today! Morse Code no longer needed! It's a hobby, a sport,
>a
>convenience, a technical challenge, a public service. Go
>rec.radio.amateur.misc

This is disgraceful, that is the most charutable thing one can say about it. In
 any case John, you and your friends Dornan and Limbaugh have no credibility wi
th any but the most rabid right-wingers. By the way compare these alleged activ
ities of Bill Clinton with the documented misbehaviour of GHWB in Irangate and
Iraqgate and then tell me WHO IS THE TRAITOR? Is'nt disrespect for the Constitu
tion one is sworn to uphold the worst form of treason.

Do not smear yourself with the brush of prejudice and blind bigotry.

rajagopalan.......Thanks for the first amendment
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Slick Willy's Peace Movement
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 01:06:01 GMT

In article <20728@plains.NoDak.edu> green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes:
>In article <1992Sep26.000155.25694@PacBell.COM> rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams) writes:
>>So what's your point?  Clinton's made no secret of his
>>involvement in the Peace Movement -- in fact, like most
>>Americans opposed to the War, he's proud of it.  The country
>>was split down the middle on the Vietnam War, and to many,
>>the draft evaders and deserters were heros who helped shorten
>>the war, and the Pentagon was a greater enemy than a nation
>>on the other side of the world who wanted their country back.
>>BTW, it was perfectly legal and commonplace for Americans, of
>>all political persuasions, to travel to the USSR in the 60s.
>>And Moscow had and has no monopoly on irresponsible arms-
>>trafficking.
>>
>>It serves no useful purpose to reopen the divisions of the
>>Vietnam era for cheap political purposes in 1992.  Americans
>>on both sides acted in good faith -- and bad faith.  It was a
>>great disaster and we *all* lost.  You're in school, sonny --
>>go take a history class and stop embarrassing yourself in
>>public.
>
>First of all, Pops, I'm not in school, and it's been one hell of a long
>time since anyone called me sonny.  I was in the Air Force from 62-66,
>so that qualifies me on two points - first I didn't bother to duck out,
>and second, it gives me a good starting point to discuss how people
>felt during the Viet Nam war.

My impression was that public opinion of the war changed, oh, around
1968, after Tet exposed LBJ's credibility gap.  The period in question
is, what, '69-'70?

>
>And just who do you know that considers a deserter or some one who
>took off to Norway a hero?  If there was such a political consensus
>about this, Boy Clinton would be bragging about it, instead of trying
>to hide from it.  The friends and relatives of the 57,000+ who died
>there might have a different opinion of "hero".  And Clinton makes a
>big deal out of being a Rhodes Scholar, but what if it was in name only,
>and all he did was use it and the money to further his anti-war
>protests?  I'm not opening the wounds of the war, I know there were
>various opinions about it.  I'm questioning the character of Slick.

University isn't all books.  The experience includes activities outside
of libraries, no?

And I think that in the American tradition, dissent is respected.

--
"I was trying to figure out which of my friends were hedgehogs, and which
were foxes...."
"Shakespeare wrote _King Lear_, NOT _King Leo_...."
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7604 alt.politics.clinton:8317 alt.rush-limbaugh:6438
From: a74k110@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (Chris Peterson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Slick Willy's Peace Movement
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 4 Oct 92 06:10:42 GMT
Reply-To: a74k110@phobos.ucc.umass.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4
X-Posted-From: phobos.ucc.umass.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <BvKDFC.Dxu@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl) writes...
>Honest question, here: is Slick Willie planning to actually have our
>planes *involved* in the Balkan conflict, or does he just approve
>of using US military jets to escort US cargo planes flying in relief
>supplies?
> 
>Not that any of that will cause me to vote for him....


 He just approves of airpower to protect humanitarian shipments, but of
course the rupublican propaganda machine loves to distort that.  
If I were Clinton I'd shoot anyone that called me "slick willie",
but then again I don't have the temperment to be a politician.  That term
is so utterly insulting, but then again it fits in with the republican 
sleaze mentality.

-Chris
From: psmith@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Paul Smith)
Subject: Re: I'm surprised!
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:39:06 GMT

In article <AVFRBB2C@cc.swarthmore.edu> mwertz1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Melanie Wertz) writes:
>For those of you that consider parental consent laws to be appropriate,
>consider the following scenarios:
>
>Your parents will disown you if they find out your pregnant.
>You would rather risk a back alley abortion than risk telling your parents.
>You would rather commit suicide than risk telling your parents.
>Your parents are physically abusive.
>Your father IS the father of your child.

I've been in this discussion on the net before, so I have to jump in...

(not shouting, just don't know how to do italics in ascii :-)

I DON'T CARE WHAT EXCEPTION SITUATIONS YOU COME WITH, YOU (and the STATE) 
DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO UNDERMINE *MY* PARENTAL AUTHORITY. *PERIOD*.

To do so would open (has opened?) up a bigger can of worms...

There are plenty of other ways to handle a exception situations: let
the child get help from the welfare dept, the courts or even the local
church, all of which should not undermine the parental authority,
but should mediate the situation to protect both of the children.

>Many of the biggest opponents of parental consent laws are parents of now
^^^^^
^^^^^^
>dead teenagers who had illegal abortions or committed suicide...

Gee, how many?? Really???
(Hint: Becky Bell's parents don't qualify, she never got an abortion)

>Your father IS the father of your child.

One extra comment on this last exceptional situation...  from what I have
seen, abortion on demand actually helps hide cases of incest because the
guilty father can just take the child for an abortion - no questions asked.
It seems to me that if the welfare state was consistent in their desire to
protect the health and welfare of our children then they would be asking why 
a minor even needs an abortion (what were the parents doing?), and not 
encouraging anonymous abortion-on-demand.  But of course, consistency is not 
synonymous with government.
-Paul
--
---
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7710 alt.politics.clinton:8448 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6286
From: ryba@ll.mit.edu (Marty Ryba)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Public Education (Was: Re: Family Leave)
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:27:54 GMT
Reply-To: ryba@ll.mit.edu (Marty Ryba)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Group 101, MIT Lincoln Lab.
Originator: ryba@ll.mit.edu (Marty Ryba)


In article <BvK8qz.L23@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
|> Correction.  The public schools *ARE* a dumping ground.   The well-off 
|> will always be able to privately school their children.  Why shouldn't
|> the less well-off get some of their own money back so they at least have
|> a shot at doing the same thing?  It's time families get a hand-up, not 
|> a hand-out :)  Empower them by giving them control over their own child's
|> destiny - don't just tell them they are only allowed to queue up at certain
|> low-class shops for their educational allotment.  The Soviet nomenklatura
|> would undoubtedly have said "Sure, a few of the marginal citizens will be
|> able to buy meat for the first time, but the poorest will be even worse off.
|> Better if they get no chance at all in our private shops.  Let's just give
|> them vouchers for the public stores they already use.  We must continue
|> to work at IMPROVING those public stores!!"  Capitalism, Soviet-style.
|> Don't change the system, don't even think about changing the system, just
|> work for seventy years to IMPROVE the system. 
|> 
|> A little competition will go a very long way toward destroying the government
|> education stores.  And that can be nothing but good for the country.

   Education is *not* a retail service, it is a NECESSITY!  I would much
rather spend $6-7K/year (slightly above current average) for the 12 years
of grade school than $30K/year for the approx. 50 years the "dumped"
person will spend in prison!  Plus, the educated person will get a *job*
and *pay* taxes.  My parents scraped to send me to parochial school, and
my education was better than even the well-funded public school's, partly
because of an environment that stressed education.  I think our $$ and
*effort* would be best expended in improving the state of public education
for all.  It was universal public education that helped build this country
into a world power (or does no one read de Toqueville anymore?).  School
choice is not a panacea, and I'm unconvinced of whether its supposed
benefits outweigh its costs.  I think ideas such as school-based management
and encourageing greater parent involvement (such as Clinton's requirements
for welfare parents to attend parent-teacher meetings) will have a greater
positive effect in the long run.

-- 
Dr. Marty Ryba                     |	Generation X:
Group 101 - Air Defense Techniques |
MIT Lincoln Laboratory             |  Too young to be cynical,
ryba@ll.mit.edu                    |		too old to be optimistic.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: machman@milton.u.washington.edu (The Machman)
Subject: Re: Bush Never Had to Fight an Unjust War
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:52:27 GMT

shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:

>The United States has never participated in an unjust war.
>Neither is the selective service system unjust.  The fundamental
>principle involved is that the citizens of a nation should
>be required to take action to preserve the security of that
>nation.  We got into Viet Nam because the President decided
>it was necessary for national security.  We entered every
>other war for the same reason.  
>
>There is no dilemma involved -- the only right choice is
>to obey the law.  (Or leave and never come back)  The
>only people who are qualified to be President are law-
>abiding citizens.
>
>Clinton broke the law, and is unqualified to be President.

What law did Clinton break?  On your argument, Bush is unqualified to
be President because of his probable involvement with the illegal schemes
of the Iran-Contra scandal.

>David Shackelford
>Desert Storm era Veteran

-- 
 /'''   The Machman     machman@milton.u.washington.edu    david c carroll
 c-OO                                                                      
    \                     "Big Science.  Hallelujah"
   -                                                                       
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Slick Willy's Peace Movement
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 16:56:57 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

a74k110@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (Chris Peterson) writes:

: If I were Clinton I'd shoot anyone that called me "slick willie",
: but then again I don't have the temperment to be a politician.  That term
: is so utterly insulting, but then again it fits in with the republican 
: sleaze mentality.

Although I use the term "Slick Willie" I am not a Republicone sleaze.  
Similarly, while I use the terms "Chicken George" and "Bushwacker," I 
do not qualify as a bleeding-heart Democrat.  I am an INDEPENDENT.
I will vote for the person who I feel will best represent my views
in the government, regardless of party membership.  I just use
those terms of endearment to show proper disrespect for the fools
running our government.

--
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
From: costin@CAM.ORG (Costin Rizan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: The essence of Clinton
Date: 4 Oct 92 16:57:24 GMT
Organization: Communications Accessibles Montreal, Quebec Canada

sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:


>We always hear when someone calls Quayle an idiot, but how often do we
>hear when someone calls Clinton a socialist??

	Clinton's plan is to give everyone a chance to succeed regardless of
social background. That's not socialism. That's what America is all about.
When you give soemone the chance to educate himself, the chance to get health
care even tough he does not have thousands of dollars in his bank account, that
person will be a a lot more productive and will give a lot more to society in
the long run. There is nothing more costly to a society than uneducated people
that stay on social insurance all their lives for lack of opportunities.
And let me tell you that with mounting international competition, the U.S.
can't afford to be a nation of high-school drop outs.

	On the other side, Dan Quayle proves his an idiot every time he opens
his mouth to say something that hasn't been prepared for him in advance. I've
got to tell you, I'm looking forward to the Gore/Quayle debate.

Later!

Costin
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.clinton
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: AIDS crisis
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:02:55 GMT

>AIDS is not God's way of punishing the homosexuals for their lifestyle.
>
>It's God's way of punishing the homosexuals for electing people like
>Willie Brown (San Francisco) and John Cullerton (Chicago) to office.

AIDS is not a punishment from God at all. It is a natural consequence
of ignoring the users manual. Sort of like jumping of a cliff. No punishment
but a lot of consequences.

				mike

BTW there are in this case consequences for the entire society.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7862 alt.politics.clinton:8659 alt.politics.elections:15317
From: kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Comrade Clinton
Date: 6 Oct 92 17:08:53 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

>   Seriously, if ANY of this story of Clinton going to Moscow during the
> height of the war is true, you can bet the Republicans are going to exploit
> it to the max.  For someone who was a Rhodes scholar and has stated that in
> his youth he wanted to remain politically viable, it would be the actions
> of a moron to go to the Soviet Union FOR ANY REASON during the height of
> the Vietnam war.  If these rumours are true, I'll laugh my *** off as he 
> slides down the polls faster than Dukakis did in '88.
>

	I thaught Clinton admitted to going to Moscow, but if he did, it
depends on why he went there. If he went there just for the hell of it, to
bum around, that is fine by me.

Ken
 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:6756 alt.politics.clinton:7297 alt.rush-limbaugh:5905