HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Subject: Re: HRP Cartoon
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:48:00 GMT

In article <168329C34.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.134616.23455@stortek.com>
>v042517@stortek.com (Vince Dugar) writes:
> 
>>I'm sorry (not really) if I don't use *your* reallity filter.  I don't
>>accept that the Democrats have stopped being Democrats or the Repupblicans
>>have stopped being republicans just because they are using the "c" word
>>(change).  HRP, it seemed was the first viable *choice* we've seen in a
>>long time -- I'm puzzled at the whole thing -- along with everyone else.
>>
>I suppose Perot was a choice in the sense that he represented another
>potential box on the ballot. But what did he promise in the teeny snippets
>that managed to escape from his campaign? Well, he did say that he thought
>taxes weren't too high, and that we needed an industrial policy and more
>restrictions on trade, banning imports.
> 
	His economic platform was just released yesterday. Too bad he 
didn't stay in the ring long enough to try and sell it- it makes
clinton's plan look like a fluff piece. There's alot of
meat in it, hardly "snippets", and little industrial policy. It did have
tax increases and massive spending cuts, however. 

	Perot can be criticized for alot of things he's done, including
the quitting. It's too bad, since the people working with him on his programs
(and probably ross himself) really wanted to make a difference and "fix 
things" (that's ross's buzz word, other candidates translate this as 
"change"). 
 


Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Reply-To: pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 13:53:44 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.184516.1064@Csli.Stanford.EDU> mmarx@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Matthew Marx) writes:
>Wait...doesn't anyone remember the debate? Maybe Clinton wasn't there.
>Oh well. Even so, I think there was more to Tsongas' downfall than
>image; his blunt honesty and somewhat radical programs (flat tax, et
>al) scared off many potential supporters 

Tsongas had a flat-tax proposal? I thought that this was from Jerry Brown,
not Tsongas...

>Matt Marx    mmarx@csli.stanford.edu    (415)725-1499


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: johnnyp@HALDI.LCS.MIT.EDU (John D. Piscitello)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on '92
Originator: johnnyp@HALDI.LCS.MIT.EDU
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 21:11:28 GMT


In article <archer.207@utkux1.utk.edu>, archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul28.145259.7340@advtech.uswest.com> jsalmi@lookout.it.uswc.uswest.com (John Salmi) writes:
|> 
|> >In article <16831BB14.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:
|> >>>
|> >>Does anyone really doubt that Clinton won over Tsongas because he was simply
|> >>more attractive and doesn't sound like Elmer Fudd? There were no issues
|> >>discussed in the primary. There were no debates. It was all image.
|> 
|> This isn't exactly true:  Clinton supported a middle-class tax cut, until he 
|> was safely out of the demo primaries.  Then he dropped it like it was rabid 
|> pit-bull scorpion with AIDS.

	That is incorrect - it is proposed in his economic plan which came out
after the primaries are over, and was mentioned in his acceptance speech.

	Issues were very big in the primary season. Tsongas talked about the
gas tax; Clinton talked about Tsongas' record on Isreal and Social Security
(though he distorted his record a bit), Brown talked about political contributions
and a flat tax; Harkin wanted a big infrastructure spending program; 
Kerry talked about national health insurance.

	Yes, there was plenty of bimbos and pot-smoking, too, but the candidates
spent plenty of time on the issues.

Johnny P.  . . .. .....  . . . .. .   . ...  . . .           .. ..........
MIT_LCS  .    . . . .         ..      .......  .....   . .........  .  ...

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on '92
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin TX
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 13:47:52 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.041531.10665@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.065104.17506@m2xenix.psg.com>, michaels@m2xenix.psg.com (Michael Sandy) writes:
>|> My heart bleeds for Tsongas. 
>Mine too.
>|> His ideas are being touted by everybody
>|> to some degree, including Perot who supports the gas tax.  
>
>The only reason that Clinton won out over Tsongas is that he was willing
>to put his campaign in deeper debt than Tsongas was.

Hmm. A willingness to go into debt to impress the voters ....

No wonder we have so much trouble with the Federal deficit. The
candidates learn their accounting on the campaign trail.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: v042517@stortek.com (Vince Dugar)
Subject: Re: HRP Cartoon
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.  Louisville, CO
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 13:46:16 GMT

>What really pisses me off is how people pass off as "fact" the skewed
>information that makes it through their reality filter.  Clinton
>has been talking about change since he announced his candidacy in 
>October, but do people with a predetermined agenda bother to watch
>full policy addresses on C-SPAN, or seek out other forms of first-
>hand information? No!

I'm sorry (not really) if I don't use *your* reallity filter.  I don't
accept that the Democrats have stopped being Democrats or the Repupblicans
have stopped being republicans just because they are using the "c" word
(change).  HRP, it seemed was the first viable *choice* we've seen in a
long time -- I'm puzzled at the whole thing -- along with everyone else.

>Of course you're going to believe that the
>political system is corrupt and ineffective, and that candidtes
>don't address the issues, if you let Dan Rather and the rest of
>the commercial media tell you what to think.  Both Bush ahnd
>Clinton and every other politician spends every day, all day,
>giving speeches and outlining positions and programs. But
>people growing up in the MTV generation (myself included) want
>the quick fix, the sound bite, the daily digest of what to
>think...


Talk about reality filters... network news from the big three... Makes
me pretty sick.

-- 
Vince Dugar                 | My comments in no way represent my employer.
Boulder, Colorado           | 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:307 alt.politics.clinton:936 alt.politics.perot:1119 talk.politics.misc:36258
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Thoughts on '92
Date: 28 Jul 92 05:09:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <16831BB14.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu>, MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:
|> >>The only reason that Clinton won out over Tsongas is that he was willing
|> >>to put his campaign in deeper debt than Tsongas was.
|> >
|> Does anyone really doubt that Clinton won over Tsongas because he was simply
|> more attractive and doesn't sound like Elmer Fudd? There were no issues
|> discussed in the primary. There were no debates. It was all image.

Interesting point.  Remember the group interview that the Dem candidates had
before the primaries with Peter Jennings?  Two things impressed me about
the meeting:

1.  Clinton sounded _great_ in 30 second intervals.

2.  Tsongas sounded _funny_ in 30 second intervals.

3.  However, when everybody started talking at once and things generally got
    out of hand, when Tsongas started talking, something about his manner
    got all the rest of them to shut up and listen.  None of the rest of the
    candidates were able to project authority like this.

    If you gave yourself 3 minutes to get used to his prosodic idiosyncracies 
    (ok, thats a fancy way of saying he sounded like Elmer Fudd) he sounded 
    much more impressive than Clinton, IMHO of course.  The only problem is
    that we don't give our candidates 3 minutes.  We give them 30 seconds.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on '92
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 04:15:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.065104.17506@m2xenix.psg.com>, michaels@m2xenix.psg.com (Michael Sandy) writes:
|> 
|> My heart bleeds for Tsongas. 

Mine too.

|> His ideas are being touted by everybody
|> to some degree, including Perot who supports the gas tax.  


The only reason that Clinton won out over Tsongas is that he was willing
to put his campaign in deeper debt than Tsongas was.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: jca@crash.cts.com (John C. Archambeau)
Subject: Re: Pro-choice VP?
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 03:03:48 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.185359.18406@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> cah@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Allen Halsell) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.183222.16991@infonode.ingr.com> dianne@dianne.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Dianne Ferrans ) writes:
>>
>>         "I understand that immediately after a rape that is
>>      reported, that a woman normally, in fact, can go to the
>>      hospital and have a D and C," Quayle said. "At that time that
>>      is before the forming of a life. That is not anything to do
>>      with abortion."
>
>I just can't fathom this.  How can people say that DQ is _not_ out of
>touch with real life?
>
>(1) I'm sure that the LAST thing a woman would want after a rape is
>to go into a hospital and have some stranger scrape out her uterus.
>How insensitive!  The very thought gives me chills.
>
>(2) Did Dan ever have the facts of life explained to him?  When does
>he think conception occurs?  Well, this line is getting me nowhere,
>I'm so stunned.

Dan tried to ask George, but George was busy playing golf.  So you can't
blame him for trying.  George did correct him on the spelling of
abortion, it's not spelled abortione.
--

     // JCA

 /*
 ** ARPA    : jadpc!thewall!jca@nosc.mil | The Mamas and the Papas are 
 ** INTERNET: jca@thewall.cts.com        | releasing a new single called
 **           jca@thewall.uucp           | 'California Nightmare.'
 ** UUCP    : nosc!jadpc!thewall!jca     |
 */
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: frederic@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Brian Frederick)
Subject: Thoughts on '92
Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 12:58:45 GMT


  I used to have hope.  I used to think that the American people 
could see through the BS when it really mattered, that when the 
situation got bad enough, they would do the right thing.  

  Now I see Tsongas pushed aside for having the integrity to 
discuss cutting entitlements and balancing the budget.  I see
Brown laughed at for suggesting serious cuts in military spending.  
I see Perot drop out, apparently because he recognized that the 
only way to fix the ailing economy is to take unpopular stances.
Raising taxes is political suiside, you see.  

  Does _anyone_ truely believe that either Bush or Clinton can turn 
the nation's economy around in only 4 years?  Neither has a serious 
plan to tackle the defecit.  Their entire platforms revolve around 
getting in (or staying in) the Oval Office.  That's winning the game.

  Do we elect people who are able to do the difficult job of running 
this country, making things work, getting things done?  No.  We elect 
the people who look nice and make us feel good.  They may not be able 
to do the job, but _what_ interviewing skills.  

  Yes, we put them there, again and again.  We complain, but we get 
used to it.  Governmental mediocrity and incompetence become the norm.  
'Politics' becomes a dirty word, 'politician' becomes a synonym for liar.  
'Leadership' becomes a hollow buzz-word - devoid of meaning.  Each party
blames the other for all problems and neither can see their own faults.  
It's like a bad divorce - perhaps it is.

  When the leader of Iraq lies to your face, do you get mad?  I hope so.
But, when the leader of the United States lies to your face, are you 
angry?  No.  You're used to it, it's a common event (especially in an 
election year).   

  Politicians can count on the voter's greed and self-interest. They say 
'people vote their pocketbooks'.  This is actually an understatement: 
people vote for ice cream, a popular cure for tummy-ache.  

  People are stupid.

  In '84  Reagan swept Mondale. It was called a landslide, yet only half 
the eligable voters turned out at the polls.  25% of our potential 
voters constitute a landslide.  

  I used to think the American people deserved better.  Now I think we 
get the government we deserve.  

  I used to have hope.  Now I'm resigned to 4 more years of incompetent
deceit, regardless who wins.

=brian

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: sethg@dcatlas.dot.gov (Seth Grimes)
Subject: Re: DEC deal with Bush
Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:34:28 GMT


It's no secret that DEC is going to lay off or offer departure incentives
to lots more people in the coming months, although I haven't heard the 30k
figure.  Just read the business section in the NY Times or the Wall St.
Journal.  Periodically, like every few weeks, you'll see articles on DEC.
Look back at the days around Olson's retirement announcement.

What makes you think Olson favors Bush anyway or would do something like
delay announcements at Bush's bidding, especially when the delays could
cost DEC millions of dollars or lead to further depression in DEC's stock
price?  What makes you think Bush has the power to deliver on contracts 
significant enough to make it worth DEC's while given congressional
oversight and government procurement practices?  Actually, I'd say that
latter suggestion, about Bush's alleged rumored promises, says more about
what you think about Bush, rightly or not.

Seth Grimes, dcatlas!sethg@uunet.uu.net
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:281 alt.politics.elections:9219
From: paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Voter Registration (WAS: George Bush opposes democracy.)
Date: 25 Jul 92 13:05:06 GMT
Organization: Taniwha Systems Design

In article <gdtxrmr@rpi.edu> jacksonk@fs4.cs.rpi.edu (Keith Jackson) writes:
>
>Wait a minute, I thought this was true, too.  That was until my broth-
>er,  who  did  not  register  to vote in order to avoid jury duty, was
>called up for jury duty.  Could this perhaps be a regional thing, i.e.
>certain  states/cities  select  potential  jury persons from different
>groups, not necessarily registered voters?  Or is there some law which
>prohibits a non-registered person from being called up?

I think that they probably use all sorts of lists to come up with jurors,
I get called every couple of years and not being a US citizen (and therefore
disenfranchized and not on the voter's rolls - in some states 'registered
aliens' are allowed to vote in some elections, just not here) have to decline
(I wouldn't mind serving - I think it's one of the obligations of living in
a society I'm just not allowed to) - lists like property tax rolls,
parking tickets, junk mail lists, electoral rolls, profesional organization's
membership lists, conference attendees, car registrations, tax returns, employer
tax withholding, business licenses etc etc are all available and I'm sure that
they use some or all of them.

Of course having an electorate that self-censors itself of people who don't
want to do public service may be an advantage .... :-)

	Paul


-- 
Paul Campbell    UUCP: ..!mtxinu!taniwha!paul     AppleLink: CAMPBELL.P

	"'Potato', not 'Potatoe'"
		Bart Simpson - on the blackboard 6/25/92
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: Re: Pro-choice VP?
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:54:43 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.141257.23256@wam.umd.edu>, pi@wam.umd.edu (Raymond L.
Gilbert) writes:
>     I saw that interview.... Wait a sec!  I thought Quayle (and Bush) was
> pro-life!  When LK asked him what he would do if his daughter got
> pregnant and she wanted an abortion, Quayle said he would support her
> in any _choice_ she made.  Sounds like a pro-choice VP to me! Did anyone
> else get this?

   To the fan.dan's; this is from alt.politics.bush.  Apparently Dan 
put his silver foot in his mouth[1] again on Larry King Live.

   Quayle seems to be a decent (tho stupid) person when he's not being
used as a tape-playback machine by the the republifacist wing of what used
to be a decent political party[2].

   I think Quayles complete disconnection from reality (he's insulated by
a good six foot layer of money and a half mile of ignorance) allows him to
be unaware of the suffering he advocates.  This in turn lets him be lead
doberman for the Undead Elephant's[3] current reelection campain.

   In any case I strongly support Dan Quayle as the VP nominee.  As noted
philosopher and political commentator Arsino Hall asked: "Is Dan Quayle secretly
working for Bill Clinton?".

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU

[1] Terminology due to Anne Richards.  Originally applied to George Herbert
Sushi-puking Walker No-New-Taxes Read-My-Flips Bush but later discovered to
have more general application.

[2]  Say what you will about 20th century Republicans, I remain a staunch
fan of Abraham Lincoln.

[3] Terminology due to David Brin at the annual alumni lecture to the science
fiction club at the California Institute of Technology in 1989.  If you don't
understand why a science fiction club has an alumni lecture, you don't
understand CalTech.

"If we're going to change this country we need to do more that just elect a new
president!"

-Dan Quayle.

Disclamer:  I'm a radical moderate to don't think this is an attack by liberals.
It's just an attack.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: BUSH-Ra
Followup-To: talk.bizarre
Organization: Texas Instruments, Inc
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 11:43:10 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.010521.11290@asuvax.eas.asu.edu> ra@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Starcap'n Ra) writes:
>mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>> That's nice, but why don't you try sending dozens of these by mail to
>> individual people
>
>     Instead of posting like *you* did, you silly
>hypocrite?

I tried mail.  You weren't amenable.  Since you stated that your
position was to continue to be as annoying as possible, even to the
point of causing inter-newsgroup 'flamewars', why, I just figured that
that was what you preferred.

>
>     But getting back to your question, sorry,
>but no.  We're getting swamped with scores of
>these Bush/Clinton articles.  I don't have time
>to individually write people for a week to ten
>days to two weeks or whenever the stupid thread
>dies, as meanwhile more and more people come out
>of the woodwork and respond to the thread and
>change its subject, etc.

Just like the folks you're deliberately annoying don't have time to
read dozens of your complaints.  So, just what do you think you have
accomplished so far?

>
>     This way everything is out in the open,
>there's a brief fuss, and then it's over.  Or
>people get upset and start a massive war.
>Whatever.  Either prospect is far more tolerable
>than wading through two more weeks of articles
>from alt.politics.bush and alt.politics.clinton,
>and even worse, articles that really should be
>posted to talk.abortion but are cluelessly
>posted to alt.politics.bush and
>alt.politics.clinton and hence wind up in
>talk.bizarre.

Ah, I see.  Better to try to trash things for everyone rather than
dealing with the problems like a grown-up.  Hey, I can dig it.

>
>> instead of you and you alone bombing another
>> newsgroup with them?
>
>     So far.  I'm just the first scout.  At least
>I've been polite, if somewhat annoying.  If I don't
>come back alive, the reinforcements come and then
>the shit *really* hits the fan.  By then I'll just
>be a pleasant memory and these will be the good
>old days.

Well, I hope everyone will remember who the 'first scout' was who
started it all, then.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:154 alt.politics.clinton:517 talk.bizarre:23072
From: bc@Apple.COM (bill coderre)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: AIDS and those damn democrats
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:34:47 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

|Gee, is all this cross-posting degrading the quality of
|talk.bizarre?  And if some of these postings don't belong
|there (ref. Tom Noyes [aka 'anonymous']), I'm at something
|of a loss to know what does.

I am afraid you are exactly correct.

mr HEINOUS
Hammer. Head. Explode.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: puccio@media.mit.edu (Jim Puccio)
Subject: Bush Waxing Wise on the Economy
Organization: M.I.T. Media Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 03:57:09 GMT

"I've had no indication from home, nor have we picked up any here that they
felt that the U.S. economy was going to move towards a recession."
  -- George Bush, 16-JUN-89

"The economy is moving in the right direction."
  -- George Bush, 4-OCT-91

"I don't want to buy into the predicate about another recession.  I don't feel
that way."
  -- George Bush, 25-OCT-91

"The economy's turned the corner, headed for recovery."
  -- George Bush, 31-OCT-91

"I'm not prepared to say we are in a recession."
  -- George Bush, 8-NOV-91

"It will not be a deep recession."
  -- George Bush, 4-JAN-92

"I've known that the economy is in free fall.  I hope I've known it.  Maybe I
haven't conveyed it as well as I should."
  -- George Bush, 15-JAN-92

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "This president is going to lead us out of the recovery.  It will happen."  |
|     -- Dan Quayle, 17-JAN-92                                                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,comp.sys.dec