HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: What? Bill Clinton plays golf?
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Bill Clinton's Hair
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:08:04 GMT

coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com (Don Coolidge) writes: >
jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes: >|>

>|> I can't believe what I saw on TV the other night - Bill Clinton playing
>|> golf? From what I read on this newsgroup I thought that golf was the 
>|> province only of rich Republicans who lorded it over their poorer 
>|> brethren. Amazing, after 4 years of hearing liberals attack Quayle for
>|> playing golf at country clubs, here we have Clinton playing golf at 
>|> a country club. Well, will wonders never cease!
>
>If you really thought we (OK, they :^) were criticizing golf itself, 
>you weren't reading carefully enough. And if you didn't, why go for 
>indefensible cheap shots?
>
>(Ah! I just noticed the return email address; it's not your usual
>one. Maddi, have you been having a bit of fun with us? :^)

No, but I claim full responsibility for the Robert Davis posts.
I can't believe you took *him* seriously.  :-)

-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: tom@uts.cc.wayne.edu (Thomas Richard Stevenson)
Subject: Re: My Theory
Organization: Wayne State Univ.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 23:58:53 GMT

myrab@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (myra.bronstein) writes:

>In article <1992Nov12.210339.14611@netcom.com>, madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:
>> Have you all noticed that certain newbies to this group seem to
>> cycle in and out, while other perennials arrive just as they leave?
>> Last week, Robert Davis answered every post.  This week, silence
>> from Mr. Davis, but Kurt Ludwick has mysteriously returned.
>> 
>> From this we can only conclude one thing.
>> 
>> There cannot possibly be that many RNC zombies who bought the party
>> line without questioning it.  Therefore, they simply rotate their
>> identities in a failed attempt to inflate their paltry membership.
>> 
>> Consider:
>> 
>> Kurt Ludwick and Robert Davis are the same poster.
>> John Switzer and huang from Canada are the same poster.
>> Both Switzers are the same poster.
>> 
>> You see, there are never more than 2 die-hard Limbots posting
>> to the group at any one time.  The names change, but the
>> arguments are always the same.  "Reagonomics worked!" "Hillary
>> is a fascist!"  "Clinton is a draft-dodger who smoked pot!"
>> "Dan Quayle is a man of integrity!"  And, like members of a 
>> religion that no longer fits the times, they repeat their mantras
>> all the more loudly and often, to drown out the evidence all
>> around them.
>> 
>> Do not attack these people.  They are fairly close to the
>> Kool-Aid ingestion stage, because they have been found out.
>> Show them understanding, tolerance, and respect.
>> 
>> But never waver from the truth that Dan Quayle is better qualified
>> for putting than politics.  Keeping them too far from reality will
>> hurt them more in the long run.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
>> Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

>I propose that they are all sharing a brain.
>Being small, it's very portable.
>Apparently, when it's one person's turn to possess the brain,
>it's the other person's turn to post.

>Myra

I just don't understand why all the name calling (on both sides).
Why can't both groups grow up?
-- 
     ____  __   __       Tom@UTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
      /   /_/  /_        Thomas_Richard_Stevenson@MTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
     /.  /\ . __/.       Tom@CMS.CC.Wayne.Edu
                         UserTom@WayneMTS.Bitnet
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke)
Subject: Re: at the risk of sounding repetitive...
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:18:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.211120.21130@panix.com> tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) writes:
>Clinton had something like 45% of the popular vote, Perot 19%, and Bush 
>most of the remaining 36%.  How do you figure 36 to be a larger number
>than 47?
>
>Or is this merely the cry of denial from a Bushaholic?

I think Robert Davis is just having fun with us... nobody could really be
that stupid!  It's probably just a pseudo-personality, like BIFF.
-- 
SICKNESS IS HEALTH
MADNESS IS WISDOM                  | hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
DRINKING IS STRENGTH               | WWIVNet 1@2750  WWIVLink 1@12754
Xref: sparky alt.fan.dan-quayle:6303 alt.tv.tiny-toon:4910
From: jberger@novell.com (John Berger)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.tv.tiny-toon
Subject: Animated Dan Quayle sighting
Summary: Dan Quayle makes guest appearance
Keywords: Dan Quayle Washingtoon Tiny Toon
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:30:53 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc.

Animated Dan Quayle Sighting on Tiny Toon Adventures
====================================================

Did any one else see yesterday's (11/4) episode of Tiny Toon Adventures 
(Washingtoon)?  Great JDQ sighting, and what a way to mix two of my 
favorite newsgroups (alt.fan.dan-quayle, and alt.tv.tiny-toons).
No wonder it was held until after the election!

I was rolling on the floor, and had to rewind the tape to catch all of the 
jokes!  We saw Danny's room at the White House (OK, it's not really there, 
but you have to give SOME artistic license), which was filled with posters 
from the Indy 500, a race-car bed, elephant & Ronnie Reagan dolls, an 
American eagle sculpture, a Hoosiers sign, and a basketball hoop (didn't 
see any golf clubs, though).  He was so excited about having Buster & Babs 
Bunny (no relation) in his room, that he was rolling on the bed laughing 
(my pose too!).  

Some of the dialogue:
JDQ: "Wanna come up and see my room?  I've got lots of neat stuff!  Wanna see
my Desert Storm action figures?" (in march a line of burly infantrymen, 
followed by several acrbatic seals).  "Navy SEALS.  Neat, huh?"

B&BB:"We want to meet the President."  JDQ:"Oh, me too.  Do you know him?" 
B&BB: (sarcastic aside to the camera) "The future, folks."  
JDQ: "George went to sleep-away camp at Camp David."
BB: "We'd love to hang here all day, but byeee (extra e's added?)"

Cut to Camp David, quick shot of Nixon & Carter playing poker in their
swimming trunks, GHWB fly-fishing in the swimming pool: "Gonna catch a fish,
gonna do it...".  Other guest spots by Ron & Nancy, Barbara Bush, Ted 
Kennedy, and Barbara Walters.

Later scene in the Senate, JDQ presides (banging the gavel backwards).  

B&BB: "Thanks for everything.  If you ever need help with your Tooniness
(the humorous characteristic that allows toons to get insulted, beaten up,
blown up, smashed with anvils, and still keep grinning like a deer in the
headlights), give us a call."  
JDQ:  "Thanks, I will, in 1996...."

Questions:

1.  Is Dan really a toon fan, and was the media elite supressing this 
information until after the election to keep from influencing the 
Weekly Reader poll?

2.  Will he be back in 1996, with Babs Bunny as his running mate, and Plucky
Duck as his campaign advisor?

3.  Is JDQ really a toon (this would explain how he can make all of these
gaffes, get flamed for spelling, and still keep grinning)?

====================================================================

John Berger                =8^)       My opinions, not Novell's
internet: jberger @ novell.com
From: train@gvls2.gvl.unisys.com (Herbert Rutledge)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: at the risk of sounding repetitive...
Keywords: Flame, attraction of moths to
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:08:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Paramax Systems Corporation, Paoli PA

In article <1deaepINN5n3@castor.hahnemann.edu>, weinhous@castor.hahnemann.edu 
(Martin S. Weinhous Ph.D.) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov6.060050.14746@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> rdavis@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
|> (Robert Davis) writes:
|> >No, I'm a realist who's ancestors were amongst this nation's founding
|> >fathers.
|> 
|> ><stuff deleted>
|> >[more stuff deleted] 
|> ><stuff deleted>
|> 
|> The aforementioned Robert D. Davis has been added to my kill file. I
|> have no time to waste on his completely absurd noise. Further, I would
|> suggest that we all ignore him - perhaps he will just go away.
|> 
|> Quayle an intellignet _gentleman_ - not on this planet!
|>           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> Martin S. Weinhous, Ph.D.		weinhous@radonc.hahnemann.edu


  Well, I just checked a biographic index for any "Davis" that could,
  by any conceivable stretch of the imagination, be regarded as a
  "founding father."  The only entry that fit the bill was Jefferson
  Davis.  So there could be a genetic factor at work here:  he also
  backed a lost cause.

  After observing Mr. Davis' atrocious grammar and spelling, I could
  only conclude that the Johns Hopkins University runs an affirmative
  action program similar to the one that helped get Dan Quayle into
  Indiana University.

  

-- 
 _________________________________________________________________________
|                                 |                                       |
| Herbert Rutledge, aka Train     |                                       |
| Paramax Systems Corporation     | "To post is human; to flame, divine." |
| Valley Forge Labs, M/S GVL-3    |                                       |
| P.O. Box 517, Paoli, PA  19301  |                     ---Alexander Pope |
| Internet: train@.gvl.unisys.com |                                       |
|_________________________________|_______________________________________|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Maybe we won't miss Dan so much...
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 07:32:13 CST
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

asurpren@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (aimee surprenant) writes:

> Hey, did you hear that Al and Tipper got lost in the woods
> in Virginia yesterday?
>
> Maybe we won't miss Dan so much!
>
> -Aimee

Yeah, Al, Tipper, and 30-40 SS agents lost in the woods.  How romantic!  It's
the kind of thing that makes even a liberal like me kinda want to start
a.f.a-g!




|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: cah@pavonis.JPL.NASA.gov (Allen Halsell)
Subject: Re: 1996 GOP Veep Choice (Was: Re: Complete this sentence)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:45:06 GMT

In article <Nov.12.00.05.37.1992.28850@andromeda.rutgers.edu>, detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:
> cah@tyr.JPL.NASA.gov (Allen Halsell) writes:
> 
> >In article <1992Nov11.190041.6137@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>, gsmith@clio.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:
> >> In article <D2150056.ia91fg@erics.infoserv.com> erics@infoserv.com
> >> writes:
> 
> >As a second point, wasn't Powell born in Jamaica?  I could be wrong,
> >but if so this would certainly disqualify him from the Presidency
> >(and therefore the Veep-ship).
> 
> To my knowledge, his parents were born there, but he was born in
> New York.
> 
> I think the success in winning the White House back in 1996 will be
> in picking a running mate who is either a minority or a woman, not as
> a token gesture or a political ploy but a serious acceptance by an
> American political party that there is a change in the face of America
> which must be addressed.

Thanks for the correction.  I'd just like to point out that it's
difficult to make the assertion that "we picked X because of so-and-so"
when X even _appears_ to be a token.  Look at Geraldine Ferraro.
If your response is along the lines of, "Well, she was unqualified"
then I think that helps to make my point.  If the minority or woman
doesn't have broad popular support then it will look like a gesture.

In fact the phrase "a change in the face of America" leads me to
believe that it really is a gesture.  The only thing this brings to mind
is "a change in the color of the face of America."  Serious acceptance
of racial division in the US will only come about when action is
proposed, not when certain people are nominated for office.  It's
tempting to think that nominating African-Americans, Latinos or women
will bring those voters over, but none of those groups are stupid.
People vote for those who they believe represent their interests the
best; if Republicans convince minorities that they will work in their
best interests, they will win votes.  Tokenism won't work.

BTW, I'm not trying to be condescnding here; these groups have really
degenerated.  I _do_ see your point, and I'm just offering my opinion.
I've learned a lot as a Democrat in the last 12 years by observing
what the American people really want.  I think that others can learn
this too when they are the "minority party" (in the other sense).
Being voted out of power is _incredibly_ educational -- don't waste it.

*********************************************************************
the only thing that speaks the truth is the eloquence of passing time
               the spoken word is a jacket too tight
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: After 4 years, a good nights sleep...
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 11:42:35 CST
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

Terri Buchman <buchman@osf.org> writes:

> There could be as many as five Supreme Court appointments coming up:
> Chief Justice Rehnquist  (bad back and other health probs.)

I wonder about Rhenquist, though.  He's as much an ideologue as Blackmun, and
might want to try to hold out before giving up.  Of course, life's too short
for politics when you've got health problems, IMHO.




|Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us|
|Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (REAL LIFE?!?!  HA!!)
Subject: Re: Bush eats it!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:10:00 GMT

Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>In article <JuaPTB3w165w@unkaphaed.UUCP>, popec@unkaphaed.UUCP (William C.
>Barwell) says:

>Here are two entirely contradictory statements:

>>Now America has a fighting chance.
>>Tax the churches.

Surely you're not suggesting that churches are integral to the operation of
the U.S. government or the well-being of the people.  If I remember correctly,
a document was published about  this roughly 200 years ago called the "Bill of
Rights."  At least, I've heard rumors to that effect.  In it, there is a
guarantee, I've been told, that the government will not deny the people the
right to worship whomever they choose, and another guarantee not to force 
people to worship anybody or anything.

May I just add here that the Church deserves to be taxed as much as any other
business?  It is one of the most successfully self-contained businesses the
world has ever known.  You see, first the Church gives out its only manu-
factured good at no charge to you, as much as you care to take.  The 
manufactured good?  It goes under the trade name "Guilt (TM)".  Then, the 
Church, after knowingly giving you the moral equivalent of toxic waste, serves
as a giant waste-disposal service, pretending to put the Guilt (TM) someplace
safe where it won't hurt anybody.

Wish I could drum up a racket like that and still be able to sleep at night...
-- 
Michael T. Chaffee        |******BOYCOTT COLORADO******|  ______    
mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu | Professional Slapthologist |  \    /     HATE
Member, Universal Life Church, Sect of Loons           |   \  /  can never be
Annoyance Theatre Platinum Member |     Evil Genius    |    \/  a FAMILY VALUE
From: erics@infoserv.com (Eric S. Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: If Marilyn has only one life to live...
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 08:30:47 PDT
Organization: Reigning Cats and Dogs
Reply-To: erics@infoserv.com
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu (Kurt Ludwick) writes:

> train@gvls2.gvl.unisys.com (Herbert Rutledge) says:

> >  Well, I paid as much attention as anyone laughing hysterically  possibly
> >  could.  Marilyn veritably foamed at the mouth as she fulminated against the
> >  '60s.  It was definitely the funniest speech of the entire convention.
> >  Sample:  "Not all of us dodged the draft."  Remember, this is from Marilyn

> I'm sorry, you're right.  I'm a fool.  How HATEFUL she is!  She's a FASCIST!

Now you're catching on! There's hope for you yet!

-----
Eric Smith
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
From: michael@albert.bu.edu (Michael Chaplin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Bell-weather areas (was Re: Weekly Reader wrong! Who else?)
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:52:38 GMT
	<MICHAEL.92Nov4220256@albert.bu.edu> <1da60nINN39s@uwm.edu>
Organization: Boston University
In-reply-to: pape@miller.cs.uwm.edu's message of 5 Nov 92 03:56:07 GMT


Well, I stand corrected on the NH primary-
thanks dineen and patrick-

chaplin.
--
=========================================================================
Michael A. Chaplin           If you want *their* opinions, ask *them*.
michael@albert.bu.edu ....The Einstein Papers Project, Boston, Mass., USA
chaplin@husc.harvard.edu ....Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re: Aren't we forgetting something?
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:21:36 GMT

In article <D2150056.i6bslf@erics.infoserv.com> erics@infoserv.com writes:
>
>liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu) writes:
>
>> It won't be long now until Pete Wilson, Bob Dole, Jack Kemp, Tom Kean,
>> William Welds start to clean house remove the God-Fearing people
>> from the leadership and revitalize the party to be what it should be -- 
>> fiscally conservative, helping big businesses(which have its pros and cons)
>> but moderate-liberal on social issues, and cut the mud slinging and
>> do some real work!  
>
>What you fail to realize is that people like these (who we'll pretend
>for the moment are "moderate-liberal" on social issues; the truth is
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
or they don't really care that much about it, interested in other things
rather than having a moral outrage and waging a religious war, which is
good enough for me, they are entitled to their own opinions and moral
standards.  
 
>somewhat different), cannot rise to positions of power in the Republican
>party without the support of the party's right wing. That's one of the
>things that happened to Bush; he had to kowtow to the right so much
>in order to secure his base that he lost most of the support of moderate
>Democrats who had voted Republican since 1980. Those people now see
>the Democrats as the best party to look out for their interests.
>

I believe they are smart enough to do that, get rid of Pat Robertson et al.
but at the same time pay lip service, throw some non-issues like prayers 
at school to the God-fearing to get their votes but do little in reality 
satisfy them(hell, like they will notice the difference)   The "liberal
pinko-democrats" were never good at attract the redneck vote, so there's
little competition.  It's not like Mario Cuomo can attact votes from
them.  ;->   

I think it's good to keep a viable Republican party to watch the democrats,
otherwise, in case the demos screw up you might found yourself under
one of the crazy right El Presidente.    

>-----
>Eric Smith
>erics@infoserv.com
>CI$: 70262,3610
>
>
From: erics@infoserv.com (Eric S. Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: at the risk of sounding repetitive...
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 18:01:31 PDT
Organization: Reigning Cats and Dogs
Reply-To: erics@infoserv.com
Distribution: usa
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:

> 1) Define the "set of family values" you believe the Republican party
> espouses. (For the sake of discussion)

Well since this *is* alt.fan.dan-quayle:

  Don't forget about the importance of the family. It begins with
  the family. We're not going to redefine the family. Everybody knows the
  definition of the family. [Meaningful pause] A child. [Meaningful pause] A
  mother. [Meaningful pause] A father. There are other arrangements of the
  family, but that is a family and family values.
			-- Dan Quayle, 8/27/88

-----
Eric Smith
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
From: coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com (Don Coolidge)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: What? Bill Clinton plays golf?
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:45:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: fddi-speaker.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1992Nov11.002049.1743@netcom.com>, jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
|> I can't believe what I saw on TV the other night - Bill Clinton playing
|> golf? From what I read on this newsgroup I thought that golf was the 
|> province only of rich Republicans who lorded it over their poorer 
|> brethren. Amazing, after 4 years of hearing liberals attack Quayle for
|> playing golf at country clubs, here we have Clinton playing golf at 
|> a country club. Well, will wonders never cease!

Now, John, you know that's not the point...some of my best friends
play golf. (I, myself, consider it a particularly vicious mental
aberration, but I keep my opinions to myself...oops!)

Nobody attacked Quayle just for playing golf. He was (roundly and 
justly!) attacked for playing it regularly at a country club that 
excludes persons of African descent. The correlation between the 
membership of such clubs and the set of white male Republicans is 
far too monotonic to be mere coincidence. 

(This golftalk later drifted into commentary on his generally silly
patrician attitude towards and obsession with the sport, but that's
far less important than the other.)

I have no idea at what country club Clinton played golf, but if it
was one of the above sort, I'd land on him as hard as I possibly could
for doing so. On the other hand, given Clinton's public record with 
respect to minorities, I'd be shocked shitless if the club were
exclusionary in any way. 

If you really thought we (OK, they :^) were criticizing golf itself, 
you weren't reading carefully enough. And if you didn't, why go for 
indefensible cheap shots?

(Ah! I just noticed the return email address; it's not your usual
one. Maddi, have you been having a bit of fun with us? :^)

- Don Coolidge

(BTW, coming to the party? Whoever you are...:^)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Have some respect
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 18:02:56 GMT

In article <92Nov13.121503est.24@orasis.vis.toronto.edu> liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu) writes:
>
>You are right, Arsenio, Jay Leno, David Letterman and the Saturday Night
>Live crowd now have to find something real funny to say besides doing
>the Danster routine every time.  

There's an article in the current _Newsweek_ on Dana Carvey and his
future prospects with a Clinton Administration.



In fiscal year 1991, the government agencies classified as secret a
total of 7,107,017 documents.  This marks the first time that the
total number of reported classification decisions in a year is a
palindrome.		-- 1991 Information Security Oversight Office
Xref: sparky alt.fan.dan-quayle:6294 alt.politics.bush:13179 alt.politics.clinton:15830