HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 09:41:00 EST
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Bill Clinton at Drew University
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

In article <tfilt345002@drew.edu>, macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU> writes:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:05:00 EST linda said:
>>>I do know the 2nd party was a GOP member and was from New Mexico.
>>
>>
>>that's pete domenici, republican from new mexico
>
> Bingo!  Throw that lady a man from the balcony.
>
to err is human... the two guys names (my wrong name, Kat's right)
are similar, so I made a mistake.

    -Joe
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:36:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Perot--in, out, what?

Jean Kirkpatrick, please.  I happen to have a lot of respect for the lady
and hope she would tell him something in her own way.

                                        Chris Morrison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:14:24 CDT
From:         Sue Clark <SACLARK@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Playing Poker

Hello to all,

I guess the list was not so much quiet yesterday, but there must be a
tremendous back log.
__________________________________________________________________________
Anyone know James Stockwell?????  Perot not only just re-entered the race,
but picked him as his VP.
__________________________________________________________________________

I am sorry, I will respond to this wonderful debate conversation tomorrow,
but the time has flown and I will have to run to the bus.

Bye, until tomorrow Roger and Carl.

Sue Clark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 13:07:10 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: New Energy Bill

Hi, Sue:
>Yes, the idea of deregulating this is indeed very frightening to me.  When
>I see the confusion and chaos still going on since the deregulation of the
>telephone company, i.e., the break-up of Ma Bell in 1981 our phone bill has
>risen 70% and has included such new entries as 'occupational tax' and the
>cover-all statement as 'new basic charges' and 'telephone line insurance'.

Personally, although my phone bill has been steadily increasing, I find
both local and long-distance phone companies easier to deal with than any
of my other utilities.  I don't know if that's because of deregulation or
in spite of it :)

>The deregulaiton of the airline industry seems chaotic as well.  I do not
>fly like some people here at the UNMC do, but they tell me their horror stories
>also.     Are you a flyer?  I would like to here personel air-war stories.

Got a year or two?  I only fly 1-3 times per year, but the majority of
flights seem to involve some level of hassle (ranging from completing a 10-
minute concourse change at O'Hare only to have the plane sit on the runway
for 45 minutes past departure time to cancellations, missed connections,
etc.).  I don't mind when it's an honest no-fault type problem, but the
problems I've experienced often seem to stem from mis-management of various
types.  Add to that the general unhelpfulness of at least some airline
personnel (some are wonderful, but they're in the minority), and you can
see why I drive whenever I can :)

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:08:16 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Recent Democratic Administrations

Macphil,
You have to remember that you're dealing with someone (me) who REALLY
thinks that "modern" is anything that happened since about 1450, and
"recent" is anything that happened since the turn of the century. I had
to restrain myself from posting growth under Woodrow Wilson.

Jamie
And now, for some statistics about Ancient Democratic Economics....
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 10:57:49 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: i think i've been reverse-discriminated
              25 Sep 1992 23:02:32 CDT from <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>

Dave,
  Thanks for feeling that you can tell us.
  If I may interject a little advice here (I've been through the same
type of situation):  be as nice to her as you possibly can.  Kindness is
the best (and sweetest) form of revenge possible.

Evelyn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 07:01:23 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Challenges

In the same way that Bush is challenging Clinton to debate,
I hereby challenge Missy that we stop using the word "Hint"
on POLITICS.

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: RIGEORGE
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:31:46 -0400
From:         Rick George <RIGEORGE@VASSAR.BITNET>
Subject:      Al D'Amato versus Bob Abrams

Marist poll out today has Bob Abrams leading Al D'Amato 46% to 41%
in their race for New York's Senate seat.  I still think that D'Amato
will win when the real poll is done in November, but I was surprised
that Abrams is leading at this point.

D'Amato has been campaigning like he's never heard of George Bush,
Abrams would have you think that he's Bill Clinton's cousin.

And somewhat parenthetically, Gerry Ferraro has been making some
campagin appearances for Bill Clinton but has offered absolutely
no support for Bob Abrams.  This will never happen (or will it?), but
I wonder if she has considered supporting D'Amato.  She obviously
is very cheesed off at Abrams and she and Al are not without their
similarities.  From her last two forays, she can't think that she's
got a lot waiting for her down the road as a political candidate for
the Democrats.  Wouldn't that be something:  Ed Koch and Gerry
Ferraro endorsing Al D'Amato!

...Rick
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:54:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: HR 1674

        Thank you very much for the book suggestion, Missy.  I was trying
to suggest that but I am very tired and coming down with something.  It
is a very good book and I recommend it to everyone.

                                        Chris Morrison
                                        CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet

PS-- I guess NSA doesn't just advertize in Foreign Affairs like the CIA
does for analysts.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 07:10:15 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: "No Cost" Family Leave Bill
              28 Sep 1992 15:18:34 -0700 from <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>

From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>

>>> If family leave works, biz that don't have it will suffer and biz that
>>> do will benefit.  That's what "works" means.

>>> If we think that biz should have policies that don't work, we should
>>> pay for them.

>> Your arguments might have more force if they weren't also equally
>> valid against the minimum wage, child labor laws, wage-hour laws,
>> workplace safety laws, unemployment insurance and lots of other things
>> that everybody takes for granted.

> "takes for granted" doesn't mean "good" and whether or not those
> things are "good" doesn't tell us anything about the "goodness" of the
> Proposed family leave bill is.

But it tells us a lot about the fallacy of your argument,
the one that says: "If family leave works, biz that
don't have it will suffer and biz that do will benefit."

> -andy

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 27 Sep 1992 17:18:00 EDT
From:         DFIELD1@ITHACA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Bob Roberts

Missy,

I guess I was lucky. It's showing at an "arthouse" cinema here, so it was
only $3.50 and the only noise was everyone laughing.

Derrick Field
dfield@ithaca
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 1 Oct 1992 04:12:24 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Dave's dilemma

A few days late due to the impending insertion of a life into
my personality...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From:         "Dr. Gizmo" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>

Dave,

Marry her!  It looks like it might have worked for Clinton.  When
Hillary becomes president, he can help.

---Robert

"Abortion has saved us from looking at a lot of childish art"
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Forgetting momentarily that Robert said this, I will reply. I think
I mentioned her imminent marriage as part of my earlier post. Ignoring
that for a moment, she is an English Education major in a small land-
grant university. I would be willing to bet that she'll end up as a
teacher in a school district that spans three counties and hundreds
of miles somewhere west-river, eventually squirting out 2.5 kids or
whatever the average is these days, advising the yearbook staff full
of future State students going for MRS degrees and 2.5 kids.

Meanwhile, I'll end up an editor or a reporter somewhere, bald and
with thick glasses, found passed out in the bathroom when my bleeding
ulcers act up. I'll have no social life but I'll at least be near a
good record store.

OPC: I saw Clinton on Sunday. I froze. He was late. He stole directly
from Gore's script for the first third of his speech. However, 10-15
thousand people came to hear him speak in republican South Dakota.

I see the end of an era coming in Nov.

Dave
t9aa@sdsumus.bitnet
"I saw a stranger with your hair
 I tried to make her give it back..."
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 12:04:54 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Virtual elections

Chris:

Thanks for the endorsement.

Gee.  I thought "unpredictable voter" was redundant, anyway!

--Missy P 2 B
From: PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET (Jamie)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Education and money
Date: 27 Sep 92 00:30:45 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

>From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

>Michael:
>
>I respectfully disagree with your assessment of professors' workloads.
>I know several tenured professors who a) do not keep up in the field,
>b) have no committee assignments and only rarely show up at faculty
>meetings, c) wrote their lectures 20 years ago, and have not changed
>them, and d) complain that they don't make enough money.

I know several lawyers who are partners in law firms who (a) do no
litigation or advising, (b) do not keep up in the field, (c) do no
pro bono work, and (d) complain that they don't make enough money.

So what's the point? That each profession has some members who make
more money than others who work harder?

>In addition, I know of no other profession in which preformance is considered
>to include years of education or prior work.

Well, not computed explicitly. But isn't it true that part of the
reason that doctors make so much money is that they spend so much
time in med school? For example.

>Finally, I would argue that "keeping up in the field" is not unique to
>professors.  Most businessmen find it necessary to read the literature
>produced in their particular field, and, to my knowledge, while the
>price of a subscription to a particular journal may be paid by the
>business, the individual is expected to do the reading on their own
>(unpaid) time.

Most businessmen don't get paid by the hour. Most teachers don't
get paid by the hour. They don't punch a time clock. How can you
tell whether they are using unpaid time or paid time? That sounds
like a pointless distinction to me. If a job requires me to put it
lots of "unpaid time," I'm going to want to be paid more for my
"paid time" than I would for a job that requires less "unpaid time."

>I am not saying that professors do not deserve to make good money.  However,
>I would like to point out that, in comparison to elementary and secondary
>school teachers (who are in class most of the day, 5 days a week), the
>time college teachers actually spend teaching render them far better paid
>than their compatriots at the lower educational levels.

No doubt.
But most college teachers are being paid for more than just teaching.

Jamie
From: SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET (linda)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: RE: Virtual election comment ...
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:39:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

>How can a candidate for Virtual President abandon the race, and the sure
>"debate" we'll have in mid-October, and expect to have a chance on Election
>Day?

well, perot did it and now he's back.


> I propose an e-mail "debate" - wherein we
>allow either a non-candidate or the proposed logic czar to pose three
>questions for all the tickets, and all seven, or nine, or ten tickets (I've
>lost track due to the invisibility of most of the candidates) offer answers,
>either jointly, or responses from all candidates.

the E tickEt thinks this is acceptable. wE request tho', that we limit answers
to a certain number of lines so as not to clog up email.

what abt. rebuttals???


>Lastly, I would offer a
>thought. I noticed the other day a candidate for another ticket about they
>being "first" at several things during this campaign. I would offer in
>rebuttal that the DuNcaN/ValeNtiN ticket is here most every day, offering
>solid reasonable commentary on a huge range of issues, and this ticket
>demonstrates by far the best analysis of the events going on the world, \
>and what could be done about and with those events, than all the other
>tickets in the race combined. I urge you to recall that come debate time,
>if our challenge is accepted, and on 3 November, Election Day. VMS


but have the N's spoken out on the bEEr issuE?
where do they stand with respect to vowEls?
there's also the haunting issue of their attempt at having the dead represent
the living. is abby still pulling those ectoplasmic strings?

yes, wE'll recall these issues and more come debate time.
wE are looking forward to the debates, wE are ready.

in the mean time, the E-tickEt offers the amErican pEoplE a hearty toast
with the traditional friday night bEEr. and this being october, the month
devoted to octobErfEst, no ticket does it better than E.

linda suE saboE
From: ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: soylent green is made of people! soylent green is made of
              people!
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:30:50 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

yeah.  soylent green.  one of leigh taylor-young's finer performances.
the scene with edward g. robinson watchin' a herd of sheep runnin' around
in an unmolested new zealand with pop classical in the background is not
to be missed.  not to mention the fact that charlton heston shows us 37
ways *not* to wear an ascot.

one quick political question...not to get us started on this particular
topic again...but why does denmark's "no" vote on the maastricht treaty, like,
not count?  will britain's "no" vote not count, either?

i gave up watching larry king when he started playing cute phone games, like
the one he did with al gore and tipper, who posed as an anonymous caller.
duh.  how cute.  pardon me while i change the channel...better yet, turn off
the darn show altogether and read a book.

off to a nutritious lunch of soylents blue and yellow,
                                         * * *anneliese
From: STUSTITH@EKU.BITNET (If I Were A President,
              There Would Be 2 States: Sanity and California!)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Jefferson's new party affiliation
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:43:46 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Jefferson would not be a Republican or a Democrat, he would be tired for
inciting a riot and public disturbance! He would be so fed up with the
current system that he would be writing and giving serious consideration
to a new government!!! He would say "It is time for the government to change
because the government has lost touch with the people of this nation! I
think(key word because no one else uses it today) it is time for change!
Not just a small change in healthcare or something stupid like income tax
but a major overhaul of the entire system. Including the bureacracy and
all it's subordinates/connections, the CIA, and many other of the BS
areas of government! We will rip out the vast majority of statutes and
start again from scratch. We will also start giving some more management
authority to the states because it is too big for one group to handle alone.
the regions of the country are as diverse as France and Germany and there
and this nation is losing all the respect I could have had for this nation.
It's time to break the nation up into chunks or just the states and start
rethinking our approach. And then we need to keep government out of the affairs
of people. Not the BS republican stuff which governs the CIA and the military
or the democrats which want to expand government by leaps and bounds! We
don't need to expand government, we need to shrink government!"
  Jefferson said "That government is best which governs least!" The problem
is that both parties live by the completely different ideas! The both are more
interested in preserving they're jobs instead of preserving our well being!
That is the sign that government is too big! I think some of you should
give serious contemplation to the actual meaning of Jefferson's works
and see how many of the grievances in the Declaation of independance would work
against our government!!!!




              john Stith
              stustith@eku
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 2 Oct 1992 11:46:40 -0400
From:         "If I Were A President,
              There Would Be 2 States: Sanity and California!"
              <STUSTITH@EKU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Jefferson's new party affiliation

gee.... slaves ... hmmmmmm sounds just a little self righteous!
john
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 07:43:05 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Rush

> Can you see the hysteria as things improve in Arkansas?  "Hey, everybody,
> we did it!  We're NUMBER FORTY-NINE!!!!!!!"  [sounds of wild cheering,
> revelry, and champagne being unscrewed.]

Or, they could say, "We are number 2 in *low* education standards,"
and SOME people would fall for it.

--KAT :-)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 25 Sep 1992 21:56:36 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: HR 1674

Evelyn & Rick:

This banning scanners thing has been in the works for quite some time.
As I recall, they thought it up right about the time they invented
personal portable phones, (which are still experimental and which require
publicly posted transmission boxes throughout the area in which they are
used.)  The result of the two put together essentially is this:  the
police can hear anything you say over the air, but you can't hear
anything they might say.

Sounds dangerous to me.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 28 Sep 1992 12:29:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: The yokes on you!

>Hey linda, sucking eggs with a couple of beers on Friday's ain't all bad.
>Put down your "slim jims" and "beer nuts" and try it sometime!

roger,
yuck!
my norwegian grandfather used to stick a hole in an egg and suck out the
contents for breakfast. still gives me the queasies (shiver).

and i don't eat slim jims because i'm a vegetarian. and i don't like beer
nuts.

i take my beer straight, man. :)
but i'm not a fanatic. sometimes i add a little pizza.

HAPPY MONDAY EVERYBODY!

- linda (who is this guy "rush". is he someone on a cable station?)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 20:40:50 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Education and money

>From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>

>I thought it was "those who can, do, those who can't, teach, and those
>who can't teach, administrate"

ARGH! "administer." "administrate" is a horrible word.

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 23:36:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Perot--in, out, what?

        It's about the only thing that dates me.

        Trouble is, more that I think about it, the more convinced I am
that Will Stockdale's naivite is at least honest and I'm not sure about
Ross Perot's after that 800 number poll scam of his, to name just one
example.

                                        Chris Morrison
                                        CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1992 00:11:20 -0400
From:         "If I Were A President,
              There Would Be 2 States: Sanity and California!"
              <STUSTITH@EKU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: We, The Persons

I must say that i whole heartedly agree with your statement...
people don't say what they mean anymore! George Carlin had some interesting
comments about this situation on an HBO special a couple of years ago1
maybe if society would learn to use more words with negative connotations
then it would be better off!!


         john Stith
        stustith@eku
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 5 Oct 1992 11:23:07 CDT
From:         Sue Clark <SACLARK@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: New Tax Scheme

> What we need is a flat tax on all income from all sources.

The trouble with this idea though, raises the same questions when Jerry
Brown proposed the idea.  He wanted a 13% flat tax across the board, however,
you have  people with incomes less than $25,000 that pay 12% in 1991, as one
of my parents did, would lose out more.  Yet, those with high incomes would
have their tax lowered considerably.

The figures I heard were from NBC was the incomes over $100,000 paid 22% in
federal income tax.  This was during Jerry Brown's campaign.  Dropping the tax
on this income bracket seems to shift to the lesser incomes paying more.

That was the argument concerning this flat tax problem.

I have heard nothing about it since and would like to know if more had been
said on this idea.

Sue Clark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU