HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Harel Barzilai <harelb@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Date: 31 Aug 92 14:48 PDT
Subject: Re: Harel posts a particularly clum
Nf-ID: #R:wqtpbd2t@csv.warwick.ac.uk:2078241208:cdp:1640500019:000:958
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!harelb    Aug 31 14:48:00 1992


Within about a week I will start posting the _The Decline of America_
series which will cover among other things health care and which
will include infant mortality, child poverty rates, AIDS cases,
and other indicators which show in what sense "We're Number One" is
quite true. Of course, according to the establishment party line,
these are *minor* issues, of "special interests" (the majority
of the population, as it happens) who cares if most Americans are
either uninsured or underinsured or are one serious illness away
from financial ruin when the other 18 of the Western Industrial
contries provide universal care to their citizens, we're talking
about not Special Interests (middle and working class, women,
minorities, children, elderly, labor, environmentalists, etc,
in fact, the vast majority of the population) but *important*
stuff like the "National Interest"(TM), namely, the interests
of Big Biz corporations and the super wealthy.

Harel

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Subject: Re: Corporal Clinton's Lie Keeps Growing
Organization: Wayne State University, C&IT
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 12:39:58 GMT

And yet another data point. Remember how Quayle supposedly used family
influence to get into the Guard? Bob Woodward's book debunked this,
even though it's still quoted. But this morning's news disclosed that
Clinton's uncle attempted to use his influence with the draft board
to delay Clinton's induction.
 
Dream on...
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: rcollins@encore.com (Roger Collins)
Subject: Re: Educational Spending (was: "Family Values" -- Clinton Continues to Miss Op
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 21:40:35 GMT
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation

sdavis@laforge.ksc.nasa.gov (Steve Davis) writes:
>  Did it ever occur to anyone that if we increased educational spending, with  
>the bulk of the increase going to teachers' salaries, that the profession would  
>attract more qualified individuals, and enable those already teaching to enroll  
>in more continuing education courses?

I love the idea, but it just doesn't work in the union-controlled,
bureaucratic public school system.  If my child had an enthusiastic,
successful 25-year-old teacher that received raving reviews from
parents, do you think this teacher would get his/her fair market value
(top of the pay scale) from the public school system?  No, seniority is
the major criteria for pay.  Would this teacher get rewarded if parents
had school choice?  More probably.

A better example might be to look at what it takes to fire a teacher.
A teacher has to do something virtually criminal to get fired in a public
school.  How long do you think a "competitive" school would take to fire
a ineffective teacher?

I think that good teachers should be paid very well.  I think good
administrators should be paid very well, also.  The question is who can
and should determine their fair pay, a government monopoly or a free
market?
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush
From: ddaye@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David C Daye)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 20:14:30 GMT

In article <bgarfink.714944439@silver> bgarfink@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (beth diane garfinkel) writes:
>In <1992Aug27.151340.9052@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> ack@dgp.toronto.edu (Andrew Brownbill) writes:
>
>>I just want to get this right. Unwanted teen pregnancies are caused by people
>>who want to get pregnant. 
>
>Read _Unfinished Business_ by Maggie Scarf; she discusses the subtleties
>of teen pregnancies in depth.  It may seem like a paradox, but it is
>often true that teenage girls become pregnant because they want to,
>without having thought the whole thing through.
>
>-- 
>"Hold stick near center of its length.  Moisten pointed end in mouth.
>Insert in tooth space, blunt end next to gum. Use gentle in-out motion."

It is often true that the abortion debate is not appropriate for 
ALT.FAN.DAN-QUAYLE.

------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: GOP violates Constitution
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:27:45 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <17uk8uINNdoo@agate.berkeley.edu> bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Bradley K. Sherman) writes:
]
]Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America states:
]  ...
]    The senators and representatives beforementioned, and the members
]  of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial
]  officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall
]  be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this constitution; but
]  no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any
]  office or public trust under the United States
]
]The Republican Convention was treasonous.  Bush's continued embrace
]with the religious right is dangerous to the survival of the union.
]That Buchanan was not denounced for his viciousness and small-
]mindedness is sufficient proof that parlous forces are being unleashed
]by the GOP.

What crap. The religious test rule applies to laws passed by government,
not the private doings of political parties. Buchanan is IMHO a little
off base (especially for his attacks on gays) but certainly no more so than
the kulturekampf democrats.
]
]The defections of conservatives such as George Will and William
]Safire show the execrable orthodoxy of Houston.  Even the snarling
]Robert Novak is having problems stomaching this exclusionary and anti-
]democratic trend.  Other thoughtful conservatives should think long
]and hard about endorsing a Republican party that would allow the
]spectre of religious strife to haunt our nation.

As if the democrats aren't stirring up a lot of that strife themselves.
]----
]    --Brad Sherman (bks@alfa.berkeley.edu)
                              ^^^^^^^^

Berkeley... I was out there a couple of weeks ago. Just as looney as it
was the last time I was there (1968).


-- 
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
- - "May you have the wealth of a Republican, and the sexual prowess - -
- -  of a Democrat." - Johnny Carson's joke writers
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Was Clinton a Moral Draft Dodger? (was Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT)
Date: 2 Sep 92 22:49:51 GMT
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA

Keywords: 

In article <182hojINNiik@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon) writes:
]
]In a previous article, john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) says:
]>
]>]I believe a fair number of people ENLISTED in the army to avoid going
]>]to Vietnam: the military prefered to send draftees over there, and if
]>]you entered the army willingly, they'd send you to, say, Europe.
]>]
]>If so, these folks were mighty dumb, because the army would happily
]>have sent them to Vietnam. After all, sending motivated (ie, volunteer)
]>troops to VN would seem a GOOD thing to them. Also, volunteers
]>were for a longer enlistment (3 years min) and as such were more
]>cost effective to send to specialist training. VN needed LOTS
]>of specialists.
]
]You don't know what you're talking about. The previous contributor is
]correct. I have a cousin who enlisted for exactly that reason. He went
]to Europe. As a matter of fact, he's still working for the US military

I see... your cousin got lucky and now I don't know what I am talking
about. I almost enlisted in the army in 1966, and I got the word that they
could not guarantee me ANYTHING. As I later found out during my tour in
the Navy, the military at that time would never guarantee anything to
anyone. There are lots of people who were sweet talked by recruiters
into joining the army to avoid Vietnam, who ended up going there
right after boot camp.

Once you are sworn in to the military, you serve at THEIR pleasure, doing
whatever THEY want, wherever THEY want it. Sounds like you have never
experienced the military.

So, there is MY direct experience. What's yours? Or, is it perhaps YOU
who don't know what you are talking about.

-- 
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
 - - Tree Hugger's Nightmare: Mt. Graham Red Squirrel Stew ...
 - - Have you ever tried looking at the stars through a squirrel? - - -
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:12083 talk.politics.misc:43079
From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Bradley K. Sherman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: GOP violates Constitution
Date: 1 Sep 1992 05:12:46 GMT
Organization: United States of America
NNTP-Posting-Host: alfa.berkeley.edu

In article <16855327.PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:

>>  ...
>>  no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any
>>  office or public trust under the United States
>>  ...

>     When you tool up your flame-thrower, it's proper form to
>make sure your facts are straight.  Your quote is from Article
>VII, not article VI.

In what alternate universe are you straightening out facts, Mr. Veal?
-----
    --Brad Sherman (bks@alfa.berkeley.edu)

  treason
    1: the betrayal of a trust:  Treachery
      --Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:12349 alt.rush-limbaugh:4254 talk.politics.misc:43591
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton leads new poll by 34 points
Keywords: yes
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:55:21 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <19.X92001@ramona.com> jwest@ramona.com (Jim Western) writes:
>Yep, it's:
>
>        Clinton         67%
>        Bush            33%
>
>I asked three people the following question:
>
>        Which presidential candidate has the longest name?
>

 Ok, Ok. Has anyone noticed that recently polls seem to be varying quite
drastically. Last night CNN had a poll which showed the following.
       Clinton  50%
       Bush     45%
 So with all the charges of media bias and the fact that the poll data is
being reported through the media, hows about conducting our own polls.
People around the country could call 50 households local to them and we
could total up the counts here. This should not be to expensive if the 
calls are local for the pollers. This would require honest reporting by
the users of the net. My local area is LA and its very liberal and should
go for Clinton. 40 miles away is Orange County a conservative stronghold.
Would any be interested in conducted an independent poll. I am very busy
but would not mind making 50 phone calls on a weekend for the poll. Just
talking about how to conduct accurate polling might enlighten us on how
hard it is to get an acurate poll for the nation.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: lazarus@wixer.cactus.org (Michael Lax)
Subject: Re: Government and Religion (was Re: Republican platform)
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 03:20:25 GMT

Regarding the pledge of allegience (what a *wonderful* name:-):
The words "(one nation) *UNDER GOD*..." were added to the pledge
sometime in the 30's or 40's.  I don't know when, but my mother
told me when she said the pledge as a little girl, the words weren't
there.  So much for "original intent."

=====================================================================
"For I can see that in the midst of death, Life persists; in the
midst of untruth, Truth persists; in the midst of darkness, Light
persists."

"An eye for an eye will blind the world."
                                      Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

"I'm here, I'm queer, get used to it."
                                                             ME!

lazarus@wixer.cactus.org
Michael Lax, 12514 Esplanade St., #B, Austin, TX  78727-4409
512.837.1596 (h), 512.836.9715 (fax)
From: Tom.Cavender@iphase.UUCP (Tom Cavender)
Sender: FredGate@iphase.UUCP
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: clinton's bravery
Date: 18 Aug 92  18:57:00 EST

-> How could you possibly know?  People who had TRUE moral objections to
-> the war left the country, went to jail, led the anti-war movement.
-> What they did right or wrong was to put their life on the line.
-> People who were looking out for NUMBER 1 went to school.  At least
-> Quayle went in if only halfass.  People lie to themselves.  They can
-> say I don't believe in this, I object to this and as long as they do
-> not have to prove it then you never know how true their belief is. How can you judge Clinton's motives, then?  And, I wouldn't call what Quayle did "going in halfass".  Quayle put his fingers on the line in the typing pool of the Indiana National Guard.  Fat chance of getting called up to head to Vietnam.

I respectfully think that you miss the point about Quayle.  The objection to Quayle in most people's minds, I think, is not that he dodged the draft.  Many young men did so during the Vietnam Conflict. The objection is that he dodged the draft, came back from the National Guard, and talked about how great 'Nam was.  There's real bravery for you.  And, to add insult to injury, Quayle consistently voted AGAINST any sort of veterans' benefits while in Congress.  Things like funding the storefront counseling c
enters for vets who suffered from post-traumatic depression syndrome, and other health and education benefits.

When it comes to doing things for vets of the war that he lionized as a young chickenhawk, Quayle didn't even get in halfass!!!

Pax,

<<<Tom Cavender>>>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "Free speech is life itself."
         --Salman Rushdie

 * Origin: Aether (1:112/2020)
20 
20
From: blayda@acsu.buffalo.edu (Danger)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: "STRONG FAMILY VALUES" (III) (1)
Date: 25 Aug 92 19:34:26 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <9208192139.AA01280@poly.math.cornell.edu> harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (Harel Barzilai) writes:
>
>We're Number One in percentage of population without health insurance.
>
>             ============================================
>                 Percentage of population covered by
>                  public health insurance, 1990(25)
>             ============================================
>
>                    COUNTRY      PERCENT  
>
>                    Australia      100    
>                    Canada         100    
>                    Denmark        100    
>                    Finland        100    
>                    Ireland        100    
>                    Italy          100    
>                    Japan          100    
>                    New Zealand    100    
>                    Netherands     100    
>                    Norway         100 
>                    Sweden         100
>                    United Kingdom 100  
>
>                    Austria         99  
>                    France          99  
>                    Switzerland     99  
>                    Spain           99  
>
>                    Belgium         98  
>
>                    Germany         92  
>
>
>                    United States   21  

Aren't most of these countries suffering economically under
greater than 50% of their income taxed with long lines for
mediocre service for medical needs?

-- 
************************************************************************
Thaddeus Krag Blayda blayda@acsu.buffalo.edu, v063j3h4@ubvms.buffalo.edu
# Caution : DANGER #  This Country is at critical mass.
Vote Libertarian in '92!  Vote Marrou/Lord!  Vote to have your freedom back.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR)
Subject: Re: Marriages that stay together Re: Responsibility: The Dirty Word (was Re: Insulted by...
Summary: 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 26 Aug 92 02:57:10 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.020451.5367@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, c60a-zg@volga.Berkeley.EDU (Mart writes...
>I believe one of the keys in a marriage that will stay together
>"till death do us part" are partners who come from strong, stable
>families.  
> 
[lots of true and well known stuff stuff deleted]
> 
This is all true, but what does it have to do with "alt.politics.elections"
or for that matter, politics in general?

-Garrett
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Grand Opening - Genis for U.S. Senate HQ
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: ca
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 18:59:04 GMT

         Grand Opening - Genis for U.S. Senate Headquarters

                Thursday, September 4, 1992, 7-9 pm
                         1806 Market Street
                      San Francisco, CA  94102

Building is near the corner of Octavia and Market.  This is a pie
shaped block with Waller hitting Octavia just past Market.  If
you're driving you can take Market to Octavia to Waller and drive to
the end of the block where Waller dead-ends into the U.C. Extension
parking lot on Laguna.  Parking there is $3.00 for the whole evening
and they're open until 11 pm.

In addition to June Genis, Mary Gingell, National Chair of the
Libertarian Party will also be speaking.  Wine and cheese will be
served.  A $5.00 donation is suggested to cover expenses.  For
further information contact Jerry Pico at 415-554-0388.

People outside the Bay Area who wish to obtain campaign information
can call 1-800-894-JUNE.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: guido@blink.att.com (Guido Bertocci)
Subject: Re: A challange to Clintonopiles
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 12:23:53 GMT

MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:

>I suppose we could argue from now until 1996 about how Clinton's policies
>will either drive us to perdition or be the second coming. His supporters
>in particular seem to have a glazed expression not unlike moonies talking
>about the Rev. Moon.
> 
>That aside, I wonder how many of the drum-beaters are willing to put their
>money where their mouths are? Since it's pretty clear that Clinton is
>going to be elected, let's make a wager on his economic performance. We'll
>use the "misery index" that Jimmy Carter was fond of. RIght now it's
>around 10, same as at the end of Ford's presidency. 3% inflation + 7%
						     ^^ 
						     This is not true.
>unadjusted unemployment.

Lets try again from the 1990 Statististical  Abstract
year	CPI	Unemployment
76       5.8     7.6
77       6.5     6.9
From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Doctor of Gonzo
Date: 4 Sep 92 08:58:58 GMT
Distribution: usa,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

In article <Bu1BFs.H8t@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kpbg3203@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Kestutis P. Boyev) writes:
>      Does Dr. Hunter S. Thompson still write about politics?
>      Has he got some kind of syndicated column that some people are 
>      reading but which has escaped my notice?  I know he put out a
>      book recently, but where is the razor-sharp commentary on 
>      current stuff like Bush v. Clinton?
> 
>      Does he still write?  Is he still alive?

About 3 or 5 years ago he had a syndicated column that evidently didn't
last very long.  Now he supplements his income, I hear, by speaking at college
campuses.

He's not so sharp nowadays.  _Fear and Loathing at the Republican
Convention_ is still your best HST source.
-- 
Greg "Mockingbird" Franklin      Interviewer: "Sir, how do you spell relief?"
f67700241@ccit.arizona.edu               Dan: "R-O-L-A-I-D-S-E."
From: dredish+@cs.cmu.edu (David Redish)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Keys to the election
Date: 28 Aug 92 17:14:45 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <16850CCC6.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:
>Uh, don't you think having Bill Clinton comment during the Republican
>Convention, as PBS did, was a little slanted?

PBS offered George Bush a chance to comment during the Democratic
Convention, but he turned them down.

david redish
From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Great Britain's View of Bush (Was:The Swedish view on Bush)
Date: 28 Aug 92 14:04:32 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

summers%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jim Summers) writes:

>In article <1992Aug24.140718.27714@ericsson.se> etxjdry@caddie.ericsson.se writes:

>THANK YOU!  Would other non-Americans care to report what their
>papers are saying?  In general, I would think that other countries
>would have less bias (either conserative or liberal), and its always
>nice to see what the world thinks of the Americal political dream. :)

I just returned from two weeks in Great Britain and was amazed at how
biased the television media was against Bush.  Not that I was offended,
but I was surprised.  They were much more biased against him than even
our own media sources.

For example, during coverage of the Republican convention, the tone of
the commentary went along the lines of "In an effort to pull his political
career out of the toilet, Bush said ____".  All the television and radio
stories that I heard sounded like that.  

Clinton was only referred to as Bush's opponent.  I didn't hear anything
about him other than that.

-- 
Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc