HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Distribution: usa 
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:52:45 GMT
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 <bob1.727741398@cos> bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:

+>In <visser.727642809@convex.convex.com> visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) writes:



+>>	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.  

+>Oh sure, Ron Brown only made something like 3/4 of a million last year
+>so now he is taking this $144,000 a year job to make money. 

+>The only
+>thing I see going wrong, seriously wrong, in this country is an
+>internet full of chronic bitchers who can't offer one single
+>constructive criticism, who are sore losers, and plain damn useless.

	The only useless people I see around here are the party robots
who refuse to be critical of their own candidates ideas, mistakes or
actions.  Who have most of their political philosophy spoon-fed into
their brains by their party or its presedent.
	These sorts of people consider all criticism of their "man" as
being an evil "sore loser" conspiracy.  After all, Bill Clinton is a
good guy.  These bad things people say can't be true by definition.

	Mindless Chearleaders are useless to everyone except those 
currently in power.

	Constructive Criticism #1:

	Get on the phone with your local party hacks and convince then
	to tell Bill Clinton and his handlers that the deficit is a serious
	problem.  That lying to people and telling us that the deficit can
	be solved by growth is something they should not do. 

	Tell Bill that there is the political will outside washington to
	really do something about the deficit right now if he has the 
	courage to resist bad "ideas".  Some specific items to note:

		1.  Federal programs and spending cannot be expanded any
		more.  The Federal government cannot take on huge new 
		responsibilities until the deficit in the budget is 
		brough under control.  That means NO national health
		care plan, NO national service plan, NO sixty billion
		dollars of new federal economic "stimulus".

		2.  The deficit can only be controlled by a combination of
		tax increases and spending cuts.  We cannot spend more 
		deficit money to reduce the deficit as Clinton and his
		people are saying currently.

		3. The way by which social security and medicare are 
		currently being funded is unfair in that in both
		cases, the programs should be supported by the taxes
		raised in their name.  Social security surplus taxes
		should not go to reduce the deficit in the rest of the
		budget.  If Medicare cannot support itself from its tax,
		then its tax should be raised until medicare pays for itself.




Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: blh@uiboise.idbsu.edu (Broward L. Horne)
Subject: Clinton's Address!!!
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 16:03:18 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA08755; Sun, 24 Jan 93 17:07:58 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA22804; Sun, 24 Jan 93 17:07:56 -0800
X-Received: by uiboise.idbsu.edu
	(16.6/16.2) id AA04520; Sun, 24 Jan 93 16:03:18 -0700
X-To: alt.politics.clinton.usenet
X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25]


      Please, please forgive me!

      I was wrong.  I need Clinton's e-mail and snail addresses!

      I'm a supporter!
From: MMB3@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: History will judge
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:20:38 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

Paul Galvanek asked me when in my life time I had ever seen both the
Joint Chief of Staffs and its Chairman publicly oppose the policies of
its president.
  I have to say, in my life time never that I have been aware of.  I do
however recall President Truman having some problem with General MacArthur
after the second world war.  I do not remember MacArthur's title at that
time.  (Forgive me, I'm a psychology professor not a historian).  And you
know what happened?  Truman fired his ass.  Because, you see, Truman was
president of the United States of America and the Commander in Chief of
the military.  And so is Clinton.  It is unfortunate, that Powell et al
are making the same mistake private citizen Bush did in underestimating
Clinton.  Perhaps Bush would still be president if he hadn't.  But he did.
Now Clinton will do his best to get consensus on this issue.  And I surely
hope that he will.  Because I believe that on this issue Clinton is right
and the military est. is being unimaginative in solving this issue.
However, I can see Clinton abandoning it, if he can't get consensus because
he needs all his political capital to do other unpopular but necessary things
to get us out of debt.  And he may decide the timing for this is not right.
I don't think he will.  I hope he won't.  But I am going to WAIT and see
what happens.
   Now you say that Clinton's past is a disgrace.  There is so much to
choose from which part?  Now I am going to guess (and I know you are going
to say I am wrong) and say you are particularly upset that he did not
serve and gasp! demonstrated against the policies of his country.  He did.
But I shall remind you that this country was founded by people who understood
the necessity of demonstrating against your country when you believe the
policies are wrong.  It is one of our basic freedoms and responsibilities.
(Boston Tea Party as an example)
   Now putting the words Limbaugh and character in the same sentence is
hysterically funny.  Don't talk with me about Bush and his character.
This is a man who understood that Reaganonmics was voodoo, yet became
the lapdog vice president and continued those policies so now we are in
tres debt.  This is a man who sold his soul to the party's right wing
attempting to regulate my freedom to chose.  This is a man who sold out
on civil rights.
   Oh.  One more thing.  I don't want to be on a first name basis
with you Mr. Galvanek.   You can call me Dr. Brown.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:55:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.204342.3121@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
}In article <1jkblvINNg2q@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> Richard A. Mulac,
}ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu writes:
}> Another lie - it's day one and THERE IS NO ECONOMIC RECOVERY PLAN UP
}> ON THE HILL!  No more excuses!  Instead of wasting time paying off 
}> foreign lobbyists like Brown and admitted felons like Baird, you 
}> should be keeping the PROMISES YOU MADE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.  
}> This administration is already a joke and it's just started!  I even 
}> hear liberals on the local radio talk shows stating that they can't 
}> believe they were suckered into voting for such a liar.  I really 
}> feel sorry for all you people who defended Clinton in the past - you 
}> must feel so foolish now.  I can't wait to see the first Presidential
}> opinion polls.
}
}Jeeeeez!!!!! Clinton hasn't been president for two hours and you want
}a plan presented to the hill???? 


Why not?  That's what he said:
Interview on "Good Morning America" June 23, 1992
"...I'll have the bills ready the day after I'm inaugurated.  I'll send them to
Congress and we'll have a hundred-day period..."

Wanna bet on that one?


Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: casivils@lescsse.jsc.nasa.gov (craig sivils)
Subject: Re: Why can't the liberals just admit that public education has failed? (Re: The New Education President)
Organization: Lockheed Engineering and Sciences
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:49:08 GMT

In <77729@stanton.UUCP> alvin@stanton.UUCP (The Chipmunk) writes:


>I just thot I'd answer the question posed by the subject line.

>The question is, "Why can't liberals admit that public education has
>failed?"

>I have a statistic from the School Voucher advocates here in California.
>According to them, 1 out of 6 high school graduates are illiterate.

>Well, now that means that 5 out 6 are literate ... 84%!

>If I remember correctly, 84% is a B+, well above passing grade!

* If I were to open practice as a doctor and maintain a 1/6 failure rate on my
  operations, what do you think they would do to me?

* If there are three million parts in the shuttle and each one has a one in
  a million chance to fail per liftoff, what are the chances of a successful
  liftoff?  an aproximation will do. (99.9999999% is near perfect)

There are somethings in life that 5/6 isn't good enough.  I would think that
the rate of illiteracy among high school graduates would be one of those things.

                                   Craig Sivils.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21183 alt.politics.elections:25140 talk.politics.misc:69682
From: ltlfindhorn@igc.apc.org (Little Findhorn Farms)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: ON THE PULSE OF NEW DAY
Date: 23 Jan 93 12:55:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1588800083:000:333
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!ltlfindhorn    Jan 23 04:55:00 1993


Here in North Carolina we are very proud of Maya Angelou.
I am curious to know what the rest of the world thought of
her poem and her presentation on Wednesday, Jan 20.
I would appreciate your comments.
Other than that, I just want to say 
           simply, very simply,
            with hope---
                      GOOD MORNING!
From: stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: A Poll for Paul
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:31:54 GMT
Organization: Network Equipment Technologies, Inc.



As promised to Paul G. here is the latest nation wide poll concerning the
Clinton adminstration.

Poll was conduted by the Gallup org. on 1-21 & 22. 663 people were questioned
via phone from all over the country. Avaiable in the 2-1 edition of NEWSWEEK.
Margin of error +-4%.

How to feal about Pres. Clinton's overall performance to date?
61%---favorable
26%---unfavorable---this is where you fall Paul
13%--No opinion

Can gays serve effectively in the military?
72%---yes

Should Clinton lift ban restricting gays in military?
53%---No

Do you agree with the withdrawal of Z. Baird?
68%---Yes

Is Clinton more likely then Bush to pressure Japan to ease trade imbalance?
56%---Yes

Is Clinton more likely then Bush to pressure Israel to negotiate with Arabs?
52%---Yes

Is Clinton more likely then Bush to resume military action against Iraq?
50%---Yes

Is Clinton more likely then Bush to leave troops in Somalia intil U.N. aprroves
their withdrawal?
56%---Yes


Stan Knight
|Tune in same time next week for the latest poll|
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21535 alt.politics.elections:25271 talk.politics.misc:70481
From: fred@johnd.tamu.edu (Fred Seals 5-2298)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: School Choice, was Re: Chelsea, School
Date: 22 Jan 1993 14:03:28 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Distribution: world
Reply-To: fred@johnd.tamu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: johnd.tamu.edu


In article 2b5f73b5@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu, vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu () writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.045734.3521@news.columbia.edu>, dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina) writes:
>> It seems to me that vouchers would help in that schools would be able
>> to give more partial scholarships since the vouchers would foot part
>> of the bill...a school's financial aid pot would go much farther.
>> 
>> Thus the vouchers would be serving a greater purpose than just
>> defraying costs for the wealthy--they would be improving the chances
>> for many of attending a private or religious school.
>> 
>
>
>Certainly could!
>
>And that's the punchline. RELIGIOUS school! Why do you think that the
>Republiclone convention was so into government subsidies for private schools?
>Well, Liberty College and Oral Roberts Univ come to mind. Duh. With
>Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson (et. al.) writing policy its obvious.
>
>Why the hell should government support private colleges anyways? Just ask
>Pat and Jerry!
>
>-Garrett
>
>> 
>> 
>> David
>> dnm9@columbia.edu


Garrett I hate to break the news to you but you can get government aid 
to attend almost any university int he U.S.  Notre Dame comes to mind so
does Rice University.  Lets give poor and middle-class children a chance
to attend these schools by giving them vouchers to choose the best schools
in their area and not force them into the substandard public school systems.


fred

______________________________________________________________________

		Equal rights for the womb-bound.

    _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/  | 
   _/       _/         | The above opinions are my own. To my knowledge they
  _/_/_/   _/_/_/_/    | are not shared by my employer or my friends.
 _/             _/     | However, they should be.
_/       _/_/_/_/      | Fred Seals 409-845-2298






Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Subject: School Choice, was Re: Chelsea, Schools, PLUS: slander? Limba
Reply-To: dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 04:57:34 GMT

It seems to me that vouchers would help in that schools would be able
to give more partial scholarships since the vouchers would foot part
of the bill...a school's financial aid pot would go much farther.

Thus the vouchers would be serving a greater purpose than just
defraying costs for the wealthy--they would be improving the chances
for many of attending a private or religious school.



David
dnm9@columbia.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21412 alt.politics.bush:16412
From: csmith@cis.ohio-state.edu (craig edward smith)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Tolerance is not a virtue.
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:38:57 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
NNTP-Posting-Host: tortoise.cis.ohio-state.edu

In article <1993Jan26.124919.3584@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com.mrg.uswest.com> greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com (Greg Bradt aka The Lensman) writes:
>In article <1k2akeINNe2m@tortoise.cis.ohiostate.edu> craig edward smith,
>csmith@cis.ohiostate.edu writes:

>>Tolerance is not, in itself, a virtue.
>
>I think the sentiment, although not explicitly stated (for reasons of
>brevity... it is just a .sig file), is reasonably clear.  Webster's defines
>tolerance (in this context) as "being tolerant of others' beliefs,
>practices, etc."  I maintain that this =is= a virtue.  Of course, as with
>most virtues, it can be taken to absurd extremes.

Quite true, as I attempted to point out.

>To answer your question, we clearly should not "tolerate" unethical
>behavior, such as the imposition of a purely religious taboo on the society
>at large (i.e. "intolerance").

Who defines unethical? Since we cannot, according to most liberal pundits,
define right and wrong, what can we say is unethical?

I find an alarming amount of rhetoric which, with one breath, says that
there is no right and wrong and, with the next breath, define behaviors
that we can or cannot tolerate.  Is abortion ethical? Is sexual harrassment
unethical? Is a lack of sexual mores ethical?

Who decides? We cannot decide this permanently by majority rule (a lot of 
what liberals want the population to accept is not approved of by the
majority of Americans). Societal norms change.

I have very strong feelings as to what is right and wrong. I do not push
those views on others (If I did, I would be called a lot more names than
I am now). I do not, however, want anyone else telling me what I should or
should not tolerate.  And I resent the building of a society that considers
anything as okay except what I hold dear--sexual morality and personal
responsibility.

----
"The main flaw of Creation Theory is that it depends too much on conjecture
and miracles, and the main flaw of Evolution Theory is that it depends too
much on conjecture and miracles."
Craig Edward Smith (csmith@cis.ohio-state.edu)


P.S. If you think I am cutting out too much from the previous posts, I am
sorry. My news reader will not let me post unless I cut SOMETHING out.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21396 alt.politics.elections:25218 alt.politics.libertarian:3981 talk.politics.misc:70157
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: M. Python's Inauguration
Date: 22 Jan 93 04:47:08 EST
Followup-To: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <matt_wilkinson-210193084723@mac93.tpc.nwu.edu>, matt_wilkinson@plato.nwu.edu (Matthew W. Wilkinson) writes:
> In article <3796.448.uupcb@ehbbs.gwinnett.com>, 
> 
> Did the big foot come out of the sky and crush his limo??? Too bad it
> didn't.

Heeheeheeheehee :-D Sniff! Ha! I can't help it, I am laughing so hard I
am falling out of my seat! Good one Matt. Keep it up!

BEGIN SERIOUS SARCASM:

So which faction of the Republiclones are going to try an assasination?
I bet the Far Right Wing Religious Right does. Rush has declared a state of
emergency, to the effect that there really is no President now (Amerika is
held hostage, GASP!!). 

END SERIOUS SARCASM


There are millions of depressed losers who worship the devine wisdom
of RUSh. After all, as he stated on his show, he is the lone island in the
sea of liberal evil which is enveloping this nation (Ob America Held Hostage,
Day 1). So just how will you respond Matt? Will you be loyal to the end? Or
will you succumb to the evil liberal scourge which has taken Amerika back
into the Dark Ages?! Think about it if you can...

On a more serious note:

NAAH. You guys are too funny, I can't stop laughing...



>           __            ____ _____
>  |\/| /\ |  \  |\/|  /\   |    |
>  |  |/__\|__/  |  | /__\  |    |  Matthew W. Wilkinson 
>          _   _                    Northwestern University
>       [  x   x  ]                 Transporation Center
>            ..                     Information Systems Specialist

Thank God this idiot isn't a "specialist" on any of our systems over here!
           
>           
>         /_____/                   Matt_Wilkinson@PLATO.NWU.EDU
>           \|/                     voice 708.491.2229
> 
>       "What are you goofy?!?"
>          - Jimmy Shorts
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21263 alt.politics.elections:25177 talk.politics.misc:69825
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Date: 26 Jan 93 04:27:27 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
{ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan) writes:
{}athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:
{}>Dr. Norman J. LaFave wrote:
{}>> Jeeeeez!!!!! Clinton hasn't been president for two hours and you want
{}>> a plan presented to the hill???? ...
{}>
{}>But didn't he PROMISE to have a plan on day one to present to the Congress?
{}
{}No, he didn't, unless you are decimally challenged.  He promised to do his
{}best to have a medical insurance reform bill to present to Congress within
{}100 days of his inauguration.  That's ONE HUNDRED, not one.  That's "do his
{}best ... to present", not "present".  What you or the unspeakable Limbaurgher
{}promise those of the American people who are stupid enough to believe you or
{}him has nothing to do with anything Clinton ever said, is saying, or will
{}say.
{
{Wrong.
{
{FIRST 100-DAYS ECONOMIC PLAN:
{
{Clinton in interview on ABC's "Good Morning America", June 23, 1992
{"...I'll have the bills ready the day after I'm inaugurated.  I'll send them
{to congress, and we'll have a hundred-day period...It will be the most 
{productive in modern history."

Corroborrating quotation:
"My first priority would be to pass a jobs program, to introduce it on
the first day I was inaugurated."
	-- St. Louis MO Oct 11 92 [Rush Limbaugh Letter Promise #18]

-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	BSE in BME in 1993
"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
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21545 alt.president.clinton:1924 alt.politics.bush:16430
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Not a Middle-Class Tax!  A "Loophole"!!
Date: 28 Jan 93 00:25:24 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <RICKS.93Jan26175408@luke.luke.nrl.navy.mil>, ricks@luke.nrl.navy.mil (Richard Schumeyer) writes:
>>"'Every time Clinton said "I'm not going to raise taxes on the
>>middle class", he always added the phrase "to pay for my programs,"
>>said a chief political adviser to the President, who spoke on
>>condition of anonymiity.  'He never, never said just, "I will not
>>raise taxes on the middle class."  He always said "I will not raise
>>middle-class taxes to pay for my programs."'
> 
> I tried to point this out to people during the campaign since I thought it was
> obvious the way Clinton kept adding the phrase "...to pay for my programs."
> 
> Oh well.  I would rather have been wrong on this one than be able to say "I 
> told you so."
> --

I didn't vote for Clinton because I thought I would get a tax cut (eventually
it would be nice :) but because we need someone who is going to start
getting the $4G+ debt payed off. At the moment the interest on the debt
is absorbing 50% of the tax base and if the deficit isn't decreased eventually
the interest on the debt will absorb the entrie tax base of the country!

Think about it. The interest on the debt is roughly $250G per year. If
we were to balance the budget (no deficit), and pay an extra $200G per
year on the principle of the debt, it will take 10-20 years to break even!
Thanks to Reaganbush our economy is a mess not only for us, but for our
children as well... Reaganbush mortgaged our future away. If we don't
start to pay the bill off now it may never be possible.

-Garrett

> ------------------------
> Rick Schumeyer          
> Software Technology     
> ricks@luke.nrl.navy.mil 
> ------------------------
> Opinions mine only.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu (J. Morgan Morris)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 21:16:05 GMT

demon@desire.wright.edu (Not a Boomer) writes:

>In article <1993Jan27.194757.20464@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
>...
>> FACT: Arkansas went from 50th to 47th in manufacturing.

>	All the way up to 47th?  Wow.

I explained in another post that the improvement was a result of reforms,
and not due to chance. This is a tremendous improvement, given the conditions
in Arkansas. Wouldn't you like things to get better?


>...
>> FACT: The governors (Repub and Demo) voted Clinton to be the MOST
>> EFFECTIVE GOVERNOR in the country.

>	They did the same for Dukakis.

Bill Clinton is no Dukakis. I voted for Dukakis, but it was without 
enthusiasm. 

>Brett
>________________________________________________________________________________
>	"There's nothing so passionate as a vested interest disguised as an
>intellectual conviction."  Sean O'Casey in _The White Plague_ by Frank Herbert.
-- 

John Morgan Morris
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
Georgia State University
University Plaza
Atlanta, GA. 30303-3083

Internet: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu
Telephone: (404) 651-2253
FAX: (404) 651-2246