HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gplong@nyx.cs.du.edu (George Long)
Subject: Re: Taxing & Spending
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 17:44:03 GMT

In article <2181@blue.cis.pitt.edu> psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) write
:
>In article <1993Jan19.201734.28189@osf.org> buchman@osf.org (Terri Buchm
n) writes:
>>
>>I understand how you feel.  I felt the same way under Ronald
>>Reagan and George Bush.
>
>Sorry but you can't feel the same way, the circumstances are different. 
Under
>Reagan / Bush you still had a liberal, Democratic Congress to fight your

>battles and force Reagan and Bush to compromise on everything they wante
.
>Also under R/B you had a executive branch that believed in greater freed
m
>and power of the individual states, hence since you the individual has g
eater
>access and influence on you local elected reps. you theoretically had 
>more power to influence your government.
>
>I have no advocate in Washington anymore, none with any power or authori
y! 
>And the Clinton/Gore team promises that along with Congress they will us

>the power of the federal government to diminish to the greatest extent 
>possible my states (and my) ability to govern ourselves.  Unlike the 
>people that didn't vote for victorious Reagan and Bush, those of us 
>that disagree with Bill "Big Brother" Clinton, simply have no recourse
>for the next four years. 
>
>See Terri, a division of power, that's sort of why they created the thre

>branches of government and put assurances that states would have a say i

>the first place.  As of noon today though, that power all rest with an 
>elite few.
>
>PSG
>-- 
>Industrial Policy: Phrase suggesting a Soviet style of		| Time magazine 
>		   selective tax breaks and trade protection    |  Jan 18 1993
>		   Seldom used by the Clinton team.              ---------------
>Sector-Specific Strategies: Term used by the Clinton team.  Indsutrial P
licy.


I tried to figure out what Mr. Galvanek was trying to accomplish with
this patronizing, half-baked diatribe and I think I have some answers:


Those who disagree with Bill Clinton now "have no recourse to the law"?

Clinton promises to diminish "[our] ability to govern ourselves"?
o
The "power all rests with an elite few"?

From what Mr. Galvanek is saying, I suppose that there is no longer any
hope for conservative Republicans.  He is saying that there is nothing
that anyone can do ("no recourse to the law") now that Clinton is
president.  

I wish that people would take some responsibility for their lives and
not blame things so easily on the government.  

If you don't like things, change them.  Don't bitch about not having
an "advocate" in Washington.  That's a sorry excuse.

But hey, what do I know?

GPL
From: ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Being defined by one's family (Was Re: Read this if you are straight!)
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:35:48 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <cornell.728034688@vivaldi> nobody [sic] writes:
>I think a very essential element of a person's identity is his or
>her family.  Many people like to have pictures of their families,
>small gifts from spouse or children, etc. around them at work.
>As you pointed out, this is not necessarily accepted for everyone
>unfortunately.

Let's see, I have a plaque from a former employer (displayed to impress my
current one), a certificate from The Murphy Center, 2 calendars, a photograph
of roses, my Quality College button (to remind me to wear it to class), two
tribbles, 2 sickly potted plants, a jug labeled "Brilliant Ideas", an empty
clay pot, 5 coffee mugs, a mug warmer, a bottle of aspirin, two tins of tea,
and behind me the 2-page photo from Newsweek of a certain pair of running
mates jogging together.  No pictures of family or friends define me here.
Does this mean I'm sexually deviant (maybe I like to have sex with tribbles)
*or* a victim of employer sexual oppression?  Or could it possibly be that
(horrors!  maybe I *am* deviant!) sex has nothing to do with it?!  Could it
mean that I have enough self-confidence in my own identity to not need to de-
fine myself as an adjunct of other people, let alone feel required to prove
the existence of these other people by displaying their photographs?

What does a person do if s/he bases "a very essential element" of his/her
identity on someone else and that other person dies?  Does one weather the
resulting identity crisis by fixating on another person to replace the one
whom s/he lost?  Is this a healthy situation?  Would it not be better to have
a thorough understanding of one's individual, singular identity and only have
pictures and other artifacts of other people around because of their import-
ance in one's *life*, not because they define one's *self*?

And what does this have to do with alt.politics.clinton?


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   "With the force of ten billion butterfly sneezes"    - The Moody Blues    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: purwinto@rodan.acs.syr.EDU ()
Subject: PEACE: To whom it may concern
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 21:20:08 EST


-----start of forwarded msg

Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:36:40 EST
Reply-To: CFE Graduate Student List <CFEGRAD@SUVM.SYR.EDU>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was CFELIST@SUVM
From: FKELLE@SUVM.SYR.EDU
To: Multiple recipients of list CFEGRAD <CFEGRAD@SUVM.SYR.EDU>

Some of you may be interested, so I thought I would send this along to
the crowd and hope to catch a few possible participants.  Peace, I think
that's what this is about, Fay
_____________________________________________________________________________

To all supporters of peace and justice in former Yugoslavia:

Action for Peace in the Balkans, a multiethnic, San Francisco Bay
Area-based peace group, has organized a nationwide telegram hotline to
President Bill Clinton, urging him to seek a peaceful solution to this
conflict. The telegram reads:

"I oppose military intervention or lifting the arms embargo in the civil war 
in former Yugoslavia.  Such action will fuel the fighting, prolong civilian 
suffering, and lead to an even wider conflict in the region. Exercise 
evenhanded diplomacy and pressure the three warring sides in Bosnia and 
Hercegovina to negotiate a mutually acceptable political solution."

The procedure for using the hotline is as follows:

1. Call (800) 372-2626 (Western Union, Telegram Hotlines)

2. Ask for hotline no. 9337; it will be identified as "Peace in the
Balkans"; the recepient and begining of text will be confirmed (full text
also read on demand; however, note that within this hotline the text is not
alterable)

3. You will be asked for a name and address of the sender, as well as your
home phone number; a $6.95 charge will appear on your next telephone bill
(however, you can call from any phone)

4. You may (optionally) provide your name and address to the organizers.


We urge you to take part in and advertise broadly this action, which will
be taking place for a limited time after inauguration. Our new
administration's policy on this issue has apparently not been set yet, but
defining it is its highest foreign policy priority. This is why it is of
paramount importance to immediately  let them know that military
intervention is *not* a viable option. This message must be sent in a
clear, visible and organized way, and this action serves that purpose.
Certainly, other means of voicing your opinion on the subject remain
equally important as before. But we ask you to take this action seriously,
since only many thousands of telegrams can make a difference.


ACTION FOR PEACE IN THE BALKANS

-------end of forwarded msg
From: cobarruvias@asd2.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: DAY THREE: Either a lie or utter stupidity
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:38:48 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA/JSC

In article <1k2n7nINNa2u@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
(Richard A. Mulac) writes:
>
[alot of whining deleted]

Geez, get with the program. Stop whining. Do something constructive, like start
collecting signature for empeachment.


*****************************************************************
John R. Cobarruvias, Texas A&M Class of '78, 
NASA Johnson Space Center Houston Tx.
(713)483-9357

"And to think..................I hesitated" (Hellraiser II)
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
X-Xxdate: Thu, 28 Jan 93 08:39:29 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d15
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:43:21 GMT

In article <1k79peINNhv0@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> Broward Horne,
an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu writes:
>      YES!  It's time to finish the Doc off.

You couldn't finish off a plate of Linguini...

> 
>      Doc.  What do you think our financial system  is founded on?
>         ( think carefully, here.  you're allowed to use other 
>           sources.  And remember.  *I* am armed with the 
> 
>                 Rod of Reality!  )


I can't wait to hear this gem (not that it has anything to do with the
point he is responding to...).
> 
>     Man, I'm sure glad I was flying on 727s all those years.

HuH????

Norman

Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Senior Engineer
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company




When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jnomina@andy.bgsu.edu (A.P.K.)
Subject: Re: The Land of Make Believe
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 05:38:04 GMT

pbowden@missing.kludge.com (Pete Bowden) writes:
> Recently President William Jefferson (Blythe IV) Clinton made a visit to
> Mr. Roger's Neighborhood.  President Clinton made some comment that if
> more American neighborhoods were like Mr. Roger's neighborhood the 
> country would be a much nicer place.
> 
> Mr. Roger's gave President Clinton a Trolly car.  Does everyone here 
> remember back to Mr. Roger's TV Show???   The trolly was symbolic and
> the means by which Mr. Roger's could take all of his viewers to the land 
> of make believe.
> 
> Now, not only can President Clinton have a convenient means of getting 
> back and forth from reality to make believe, he can take as many 
> Americans as he can load onto the trolly with him.

Heh, heh!  Unfortunately, it looks as though President Blythe
will be dropping a lot of them off at the cleaners, and it's
probably a one way trip for the rest of those who dare to journey
to the land of make-believe with him.  ;)

Jim
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Date: 22 Jan 93 01:48:14 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1993Jan21.192342.29373@pwcs.stpaul.gov>, chrisl@stpaul.gov
(Chris A Lyman) wrote:

> Finally, remember how long it took for the Bush Administration to
> acknowledge that there is a recession.

Definition of recession: 2 quarters of downturn.  In Bush's presidency,
there were *only* 2 quarters of downturn.  The rest were <gasp> growth. 
Sorry.


##############################################################################
Rick Eames                         Internet:      athos@apple.com
Apple Computer, Inc.               CompuServe:    76666,2114
My Opionions are my own.           AmericaOnline: EamesR
"The Lord prefers common-looking people. That is why he makes so many of
them."  - Lincoln

"You just can't promise something like that just to get elected if you
 know there's a good chance that circumstances may overtake you."
	- Bill Clinton, East Lansing MI debate, Mon Oct 19 1992
##############################################################################
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: nfs@volkl (Norbert Schlenker)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Princeton University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:47:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.184835.3791@cbnewsc.cb.att.com> bermes@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Terry Bermes) writes:
>From article <1993Jan20.233552.24410@midway.uchicago.edu>, by dave@alex.uchicago.edu (Dave Griffith):
>> 
>> his first full day in office, let's see if he has something then.  It's 
>> not as though anyone will die if he breaks his promises.  Unless they're
>> Haitian, of course.
>
>	Actually many Haitians were likely to die if he immediately kept
>his promise.  Rickety make-shift boats plying the ocean and all of that.
>This was the point of holding off.  Seems reasonable to me.

Oh, balls.  Half the Coast Guard is parked around the island to prevent
the boats from sailing.  If Mr. Hillary had any balls, the Coast Guard
could be used just as easily to pull Haitians off their rickety boats
and ferry them to Florida.

Get a grip.  Mr. Hillary didn't tell the Haitians to stay put because
they would drown on the way to the U.S.  He told them to stay put because
he doesn't have a clue what he would do with them when they got here.

Norbert
nfs@cs.princeton.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: bermes@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Terry Bermes)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Organization: AT&T Looney Bin
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:23:31 GMT

From article <1993Jan26.234628.12099@irscscm.UUCP>, by sbutler@irscscm.UUCP (Susan Butler):
>>
> 
> 	Clinton knowingly violated the law when he became a draft
> 	dodger and now HE is in charge of enforcing those same
> 	laws--kinda scarey isn't it?
> 	The Vietnam Memorial Wall is full of names of people who
> 	were not COWARDS--and now we have one for our president.
> 
> 	I feel very, very sad for my country.


	Is it even slightly possible to understand the notion that many
people who avoided service in the Viet Nam War era did so out of a sincere
belief that the war was wrong?  It's just too easy to label everyone
"COWARDS" than it is to think about what was going on at the time.

	How do you know that any of those people whose names appear
on the Memorial Wall weren't "COWARDS"?  Seems to me that there is
a certain amount of courage necessary to buck the policies of the
United States government.  I would go so far as to say that some of
the war protesters were as courageous as some of those who served in
Viet Nam.

	By the way, how exactly did Bill Clinton violate the law and
why has noone prosecuted him over the years.?

terry
From: jbrown@vax.cns.muskingum.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: post
Date: 24 Jan 93 00:10:49 -0500
Organization: Muskingum College

 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21015 alt.politics.elections:25093 talk.politics.misc:69305
From: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: President Flip-Flop
Date: 22 Jan 1993 23:01:26 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


BWAAAAAAAAH!  At 4 PM Thursday Clinton is '100% behind his nominee'.  By
midnight he has her head chopped off!  What loyalty to his friends!

-- 
Richard Mulac                                       ck347@cleveland.freenet.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       1996 election countdown - 1383 more days         | These pontifications 
 until the Democrats are thrown out of the White House  |      are my own!
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: TRANSCRIPT OF CLINTON'S INAUGURATION SPEECH??
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:24:45 EST
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <1993Jan21.210648.5292@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
> Interesting speech, but didn't he forget the line that goes
> 
> 'Today America, tommorrow the world'  ?
> 
> 
> :-)
> 
> Simon
> 

Is that what Rush said tonight? Thanks for the update since I missed the
show (as I usually do :)

-Garrett
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The ubiquitous Robert Reich
Date: 21 Jan 93 20:46:58 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <1993Jan21.033936.23132@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <20JAN93.23071775@skyfox> hewitt@skyfox writes:
>>
>>Does any one know how tall Labor Secretary and Harvard University Economics
>>Lecturer Robert Reich is? After seeing him numerous times on CNN and other
>>networks from the waist up, he was featured on Frontline last night and I
>>swear he did not look more than four feet tall. I ask simply out of base
>>curiosity.
>
>He's under five feet, around 4' 11" or something like that.
I hear that for Halloween '93 he'll be going to the White House Halloween
party as Darth Vader....

:-)

Simon
From: butleri@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Will Zoe be charged?
Date: 24 Jan 93 21:25:48 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada


     I do have one question about Zoe. Is she going to be charged for
knowingly hiring illegal aliens, and failure to pay the Social Security
Tax? Or is she going to be allowed to get away with it?
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21305 alt.politics.elections:25188 talk.politics.misc:69959
From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:00:09 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1993Jan20.204342.3121@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:

+>Jeeeeez!!!!! Clinton hasn't been president for two hours and you want
+>a plan presented to the hill???? When was the last time a president
+>presented legislation two hours after inauguration???

	And perhaps you can tell us the last time a candidate went
around promising a "plan" the day after inaguration.  Clinton made
all sorts of promises that he had no intention of delivering.  And
now, after the election there is no shortage of people willing to 
excuse him anything.



+> I'll tell you
+>when..... never. Furthermore, an economic plan must be adjusted to the
+>dynamics of the economy. Do you expect that to be done in two
+>hours??? 

	Hell no!  Bill has been so busy over the past few months that
its not realistic to pretend the magic plan he kept talking about 
during the campaign would be ready.

	Besides, Bill has had other more important things on his mind 
like Bell Ringing and talking to Mr. Rogers.  If we are in such a crisis 
as Bill Clinton has been saying for the past few months, I would have
expected him to be working full-time on presenting his plan.  Rather
than doing that, he sets up five days of massive inaugration events.



+>You Repubs, with your colon firmly tied in a
+>knot are getting more ridiculous and further from reality
+>by the posting.

	Everyone who opposes Clinton is obviously a republican....because
no "careing" person would dare to oppose the reincartion of JFK.

	The people getting farther away from reality are the party hacks
like yourself who refuse to hold their candidates accountable.


>> 
>>                            PREDICTION
>> 
>> In one year an attempt will be made to hold a recall election for
>> the office of President of the United States.

+>Oh...yet another crystal ball.... Did you guys get a volume discount
+>on them? I'd suggest getting a refund.  :-/

	You dont need a crystal ball to tell you that things are going
deeply wrong.   Then again, Clinton convinced all the good party robots
that Ron Brown, career lobbyist was appointed to the commerce department
because of his deep desire for public service.  




Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: cobarruvias@asd2.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: U.S. should lift ban on queers 
Organization: NASA/JSC
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:39:08 GMT

After talking with a few others with military experience I've reluctantly have
changed my mind and support Clintons lifting of the ban on queers in the armed
forces. Although on the surface it seems like a policy which could devestate
the military, under the surface it shouldn't have any impact at all. My
reasoning is as follows:

1) The majority of the leaders fear a lack of displine towards their leaders in
the military because of the ban lift. But in reality the military is
responsible for one thing only, that is to provide defense to the US and to
KILL PEOPLE if necessary. And if an individual, queer, straight, or whatever
cannot lead his people in accomplishing the goal, then that person WILL not be
a leader. PERIOD. The military (as with all organizations) has ways of
"promoting" incompetent people to positions with little if any authority or
leadership responsibilities, like getting promoted from a platoon leader to
inventory officer. If being queer, or a bible thumper, or animal lover, or one
who wears strange undergarments,  renders you incompetent by your peers, then
you cannot lead. 

2) If a platoon doesnt want to follow a particular individual, for what ever
reason, that individual will not be allowed to lead. It doesnt matter what
reason the platoon has for not following, the fact is the goal will not be
accomplished and therefore the situation must be corrected.

3) The military doesnt gaurantee anyone a chance to lead, or be part of an
organization. If you cant do it, you will not be given the opportunity,
regardless of the reason. 

There are ways of "weeding out" individuals from the military ranks as well as
any formal organization. I've seen this happen a number of times in the
military as well as on the job. This is part of life. Lifting the ban on queers
will not stop this weeding out process. If coming out of the closet on wearing
strange undergarments, or having sex with animals, or any other reason causes
you to be weeded out, then shut the hell up or put the hell up.

So, to keep it short (I know, I'm too late) Lift the ban. Its only a formality
and will not stop the weeding out process. 


*****************************************************************
John R. Cobarruvias, Texas A&M Class of '78, 
NASA Johnson Space Center Houston Tx.
(713)483-9357

"And to think..................I hesitated" (Hellraiser II)
*****************************************************************

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21010 alt.politics.bush:16285 alt.politics.homosexuality:10106
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Date: 22 Jan 1993 22:36:37 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

barnesm@vavau.Corp.Sun.COM (Mark Barnes - SMCC/CTE) writes:
> It seems those silly humans are trying to define non-existant things like
> "right", "wrong", and "morality" again.  And some them are using their
> definitions, or those of others which have been written into some book,
> to justify their own likes, dislikes, prejudices, and preferences again.

Now this is amusing; some posters have said that it is religion that 
causes bigotry against gays; now the religion is just a justification 
for their own likes, dislikes, prejudices that they already have?  ;-)

Walter

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton