HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mpolen@suntory.mips.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.news-media,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: CNN Anchor Admits Pro-Clinton Bias
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:11:02 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mips.com (Michael Polen)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mips.com

Gary Strand) writes:
|> mp> Michael Polen
|> 
|> mp> As with all "hollywood elite" concerns, media bias is a non issue.  If 
|> mp> people didn't agree with the bent of newscasters, they would watch some-
|> mp> thing else.
|> 
|>   Meaning what? That newscasters would therefore be forced to try to regain
|>   these non-viewers by changing their bias to accomodate the widest market?
|>   Has this happened? Can the major networks afford to tilt their news towards
|>   a smaller segment of the market and still be successful? 'Twould seem so.
|> 
??? Station management would say to the news directors "find some newscasters
with a more conservative leaning."  IT is amazing to me that everyone thinks
the profit motive works except when they don't like the results.

_________________________________________
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my
dog's, never my employer's.
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Whatever happened to....
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 92 22:32:07 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

<MMB3@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

> Someone somewhere asked why we never hear about Bush and his flag burning
> amendment.
>    The reason probably is that it is not an issue that discriminates the
> two candidates.  Clinton signed an Arkansas law against burning the flag.
> So Geo does not have the higher moral ground.
>    I, personally, am disappointed in Bill.  But I guess he and I can't
> agree on everything.  Guess no one is going to call him a card carrying
> member of the ACLU.  Gee, I am cynical.               Melissa Brown
>
> Clinton/Gore '92

None of GHWB's flag-waving tactics are working this year.  The closest thing in
this vein they've pulled is going to that police-car light manufacturing
company.  Bush standing in front of cop cars lights flashing red and blue.

Amazing that they're not pulling this stuff, in light of Clinton's problems
with the draft issue.  It goes to show that the Baker Boyz running the campaign
realize just how important the economy is to the electorate.  The symbols and
pseudo-patriotism of the GOP don't wash when put up against rising poverty
stats, rising unemployment, and a President the people really don't trust
anymore.



>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: ry@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (ryerson.schwark)
Subject: Re: Biblical Bullsh*t
Organization: UNIX System Laboratories, Summit, NJ
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:49:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.150715.27352@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY)) writes:
>
>I've been thinking about this lately, and the only New Testament Christian
>Bile^H^Hble references condemning homosexuality seem to have been written
>by Paul (Saul of Tarsus, taxman) IS this correct? You know what they say
>about Paul :)

They say that he was a pig that never even met Jesus, and except for the
fact that he was a pompous ass who made a big name for himself in the
earlier church because he was a good politician, he was a clueless dork.

Ry Schwark
ry@usl.com
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The blame game
Date: 11 Sep 92 07:00:13 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <BuDHsD.LsK@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:
> jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> 
> : You don't just point at the White House, say "So and so was President,
> : look at years <X> through <X + 3>" and say "So and so did such and
> : such."  Reagan entered the White House with the economy is bad shape
> : and getting worse.  He left the White House with the economy in good
> : shape and getting better.
> 
> By the same reasoning, the argument could be made that the Republicans
> are to blame for our current recession.  After all, who's been in the
> Oval Office, exerting pressure on the Fed and supposedly making
> policy decisions for the the past 11.67 years?
> 
> Seems to me it's about time for a change.

	Yeah!  You think we can get the Constitution restored so Reagan can
come back for another term?

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5221 talk.politics.misc:45197 alt.politics.bush:4962
From: tomster@wpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for president!"
Date: 13 Sep 92 22:06:49
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
	<lb1ivgINNns0@spim.mips.com>
	<1992Sep12.193012.25810@oakhill.sps.mot.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu
In-reply-to: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com's message of Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:30:12 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.193012.25810@oakhill.sps.mot.com> pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:


   In article <lb1ivgINNns0@spim.mips.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:
   >Jason Nadrowski) writes:
   >|> Chris you miss the point.  The liberal bias in media refers to Maria (I know
   >|> this one is totally misspelled) Shribert asking one of economic advisors
   >|> "how are you going to pay for this stupid plan!!!  There is no way!!!  HOW!!!"  and
   >|> then asking Clinton or Democrats..."This excelent plan of yours how did
   >|> you ever come up with it?"
   >
   >You mean the Maria Shriver that is a member of the Kennedy clan and

   ... is an NBC news reporter who was on the floor of the GOP convention
   asking, along with fellow liberal Andrea Mitchell, leading questions.
   Yes, that one.

   >the wife of Democratic VP candidate?  

   ... nope, she's wed to Arnie " Conan the Republican" S. (I dare
   not butcher the spelling of the last name).

I seem to remember a Sargent Shriver from way back long ago.  Is this the
Demo- V.P. candidate you speak of?  Seems to me they were never married,
though.  (isn't she his daughter?)
	I dunno.  Been a long time since I've really cared.

		---- tomster@wpi.wpi.edu
--
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\
|  The bleeding hearts and the artists  \ /  Words of Wisdom, Inc.            |
|  make their stand.  And when they've  / \  Thomas R. Dibble, esquire, C.E.O.|
|  given you their all, some stagger &  \ /  aka, The Tomster, Tomahawk, etc. |
|  fall,  after  all,  it's not  easy,  / \  send mail/ money to:             |
|  banging your heart against some mad  \ /  tomster@wpi.wpi.edu              |
|  bugger's wall. ---R. Waters, _Wall_  / \  (or don't send it at all)        |
\vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv/
From: sdbst5@gl.pitt.edu (Stephen D Brener)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: CNN/Crossfire
Date: 11 Sep 92 19:20:27 GMT
Organization: ACME Widget Company, Widget Falls, Southern North Dakota

In article <1992Aug31.134126.989@tamsun.tamu.edu> fred@johnd.tamu.edu (Fred Seals 5-2298) writes:
About Clinton and the draft:
>
>
>Thanks Rick.  I had forgotten where I heard this information on Willy.  My final and
>personal point on this matter is this;  I do not want someone who avoided service to 
>the country by lies and deceit having the power to send any American to war.
>

Do you equate being shipped off to Vietnam with service to the country?
If you do, then how specifically did being sent off to Vietnam serve the
(the meaning our, I presume) country?  Personally, I respect the guy for
having mind enough to think it through.

Steve
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jason@beta.ee.ufl.edu (Jason Nadrowski)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Nobel Laureates
Organization: EE Dept at UF
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 19:53:06 GMT


I have heard the Democrats say that there are between 4 to 12 economic Nobel
Laureates who support his plan.  When the Republican opposition requests
the names of these individuals, none are ever sited.  From this I believe
none exist!  The only possible explaination must be (if there are any
Laureates who support the plan) the Laureates explaining the quickest
way to economic destruction in the United States.

I fail to see how the restructure of health care (12% of GNP) within 100
days could be in any way helpful for the American economy.  If you can
not see DEPRESSION labeled on his plan, you must be near sighted!

jason
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher)
Subject: Re: alt.politics.clinton
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 05:38:19 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

matrix@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes:
:I'm curious, and want to find out how patriotic people are.  Bill Clinton
:dodge the draft.  I consider him a coward.  I just got out of the Marines and
:spent my time fighting for this country.  Why would I want to vote for a man
:that dodged the draft?

Perhaps because this person believed in his principles strongly enough
to refuse to participate in an action which would violate those principles.
I don't condone Bill's draft-dodging, mind you, but I respect his attempt
to refuse to take part in what he apparently saw as an unjust policy of
the Government.

:This is my question, are you really going to vote for this man?  A man that 
:runs from a fight.  What's going to happen if we end up in a war. (Which could
:very well happen with the state the world is in right now.)

I personally don't know who I will be voting for in November.  If I do vote
for Clinton (or Bush, for that matter), it will be because I see him as
the lesser of the evils.  I don't like either Bush or Clinton -- they both
carry too much of the stench commonly associated with politicians.  Odds
are, I will probably vote for Marrou rather than stoop so low to vote
for either Bush or Clinton.

However, perhaps this country could stand to have someone who dislike wars,
especially unjust wars or wars that are really none of our business, in
the Oval Office.  Sometime, someone is going to have to say that violence
is not the best solution to world problems.  Sooner or later, world
leaders are going to have to learn to talk, rather than let their armies
slaughter each other.

--
Michael Adams (aka StarWatcher) 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarWatcher@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi5467@wizvax.methuen.ma.us			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarWatcher                                     


Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5189 alt.rush-limbaugh:4712
From: tag@hermes.ecn.purdue.edu (Tony A. Gibbens)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton's Nobel Laureates
Date: 13 Sep 92 21:47:12 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Sep10.113604.27314@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>
>>It is true that a market is the most economically efficient way to do
>>things.  However, a market doesn't do everything, and this is where
>>government should be involved.  Would aspiring capitalists build
>>the US highway network?  Provide for our defense?  Fire departments,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I wouldn't use that as an example.  The government's (at all levels)
>handling of our highway system is the *worst*.  It is the epitome of
>why the government should not run things that should be efficient.  A
>private corporation would immediately start using all the best
>materials in order to make the road last as long as possible without

Really?, then why was the average American made car only made to last
about 5 to 6 years in the late 70's?  

>constant repairs, for instance.  Something the government can't seem
>to do because of all its beauracracy. 
> 
>That's not meant to take away from your point--the private sector
>*can't* do everything.  And a capitalist economy must have at least
>some government controls.  Anti-trust laws, just to name the most
>obvious.
>-- 
>
>Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
>jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 

To put it very quickly, there is NOTHING which insures that the market
will enforce a Corperation to be extremely efficient.  To survive, the 
Corperation will ensure that it makes a profit, but profit and efficiency
are not always the same thing.  


--
There are no absolutes, and even that's a maybe.
tag@ecn.purdue.edu (Tony A. Gibbens)
From: elwin@ai.mit.edu (Lee Campbell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: BUSH: Never Raise Taxes (maybe???)
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:26:28 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory


   Well Bush sure had a bizarre week! He has been coming out with a
"new" economic plan of sorts. I heard a sound bite on TV where he
said "I raised taxes once and it was a mistake. I will *never* raise
taxes again!" [crowd roars] Then 24 hours later we learn from Marlin
Fitzwater that this "wasn't a pledge." Well what *is* a pledge? Does
this strike anyone else as bizarre? Is there a plan behind this or
is Bush just desperate? Whose lips should we read?

   Then there's the 1% tax cut with spending cuts to be announced
*after* the election. What's this: a secret plan to fix the economy?
It reminds me of Nixon's secret plan to end the war! Why does this
plan have to be secret? Who shouldn't know about it? I want to know
*before* I vote what Bush is proposing. Frankly, I think if Bush had
a plan about what spending to cut, he would have announced it during
his state of the union speech, or during his convention speech. It
looks like he's just trying to buy time. I want to know what he plans
to cut!
						- Lee Campbell
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jason@beta.ee.ufl.edu (Jason Nadrowski)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Nobel Laureates
Organization: EE Dept at UF
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 21:35:23 GMT

>I think you mean _efficiently_.  The word _efficient_ is an adjective and,
>thus, can only modify a noun or a pronoun.  Certainly you did not mean for
>_efficient_ to modify _government_ (a noun) or _something_ (a pronoun), did
>you?  The word _efficiently_ is an adverb and, thus, can only modify a verb,
>an adjective, or another adverb.  Did you not intend for your modifier to
>apply to the verb _has_done_?  Here's what your sentence would look like if
>you has used the proper part of speech:
>
>When has the government ever done something efficiently?
>
>Incidently, your argument is hopelessly vague.  Your lack of cogency belies
>a lack of understanding of just what it is that Clinton does propose.

My grammar and spelling are not the best, but it conveys my meaning.
I'll try harder to look over what I write before I send it on its way.

If there is anything vague, it is Clinton.  He apeals to everyone yet
has no cohesive (sp?) structure.  Sure he has specifics here and there,
but in general there is a definite vagueness to him.  But that's 
politics.

My understanding for just what Clinton proposes is better
than you think.  When Clinton speaks he says (analogy time) "With me as
president I will make us more productive, I will make 2 + 2 = 5"
Sure that SOUNDS good, but there is just no way!

Perhaps you should analyze more of what comes out of Clinton's mouth.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher)
Subject: Re: Clinton blunder
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarWatcher@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:08:09 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

crb2@Ra.MsState.Edu (Chad R. Berthelson) writes:

: You (and the liberal media) need to check YOUR facts before you try
: and discredit a man that OBVIOUSLY knows more on the subject than
: EVEN YOU!!!

What, you mean that we shouldn't be able to poke fun at our incompetent
boob of a Vice President, who was only nominated so that Bush would
have no risk of being impeached for his alleged involvement in Iran-
Contra?

--
Michael Adams (aka StarWatcher) 		"I believe we are on an irrev-
Internet:  StarWatcher@uiuc.edu			ersible trend toward more free-
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			dom and democracy -- but that
Anonymous: wi5467@wizvax.methuen.ma.us		could change."
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarWatcher     	-- Dan Quayle	

Marrou/Lord in '92




Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5086 tx.politics:5149
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Plan
Date: 12 Sep 92 19:47:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin

In article <PETONIC.92Sep9185935@daisy.hal.com> petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic) writes:
>In article <1992Sep09.230151.21511@watson.ibm.com> john@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>>Well....yeah.  When did medical care become an inalienable right?
>
>Persuit of happiness, buddy.  Tough to do it if you're 6' under.
>Unless, of course, you're Hindu.

In my pursuit of happiness, I need a 486/50 w/32MB RAM and a 200MB
hard disk, and SVGA.  Should the gov't be required to finance this
for me also?  Right...

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson)
Subject: Re: Biblical Bullsh*t
Organization: Carleton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:16:20 GMT

In <SCOTTS.92Sep8171105@MORPHEUS.CIMDS.RI.CMU.EDU> scotts@CS.CMU.EDU (Scott Safier) writes:


>   If that's true, then how can it be that the New York Catholic Archdiocese 
>   was running hospices for AIDS patients and admitting AIDS patients to its
>   hospitals at a time when other major New York hospitals were turning them
>   away?

>Because AIDS is a _DISEASE_. It effects people regardless of sexual
>orientation.  

That doesn't answer the question. Why is a supposedly rabidly
homophobic group like the Catholics helping AIDS patients when other
hospitals will not?

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.polit
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for p
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:22:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.182647.27390@technology.com> richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.113614.29185@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey S Linder) writes:
>[stuff deleted]
>>Why is it an irrelevant issue?  Because Clinton supporters say it is?  If 
>>voters are concerned about Clinton's integrity than it should be an issue to 
>>Clinton.
>>
>>Commoner Jeff.
>
>If one party had a monopoly on integrity then it might be an issue. However,
>this is not the case. There is obviously an integrity gap with Bush over
>Iran-Contra.

It is _not_ obvious at all.  If there was anything obvious about this 
case then we would have had many convictions (which hasn't happened)
for the tens of millions that have been spent.  Prosecution of North
for a 13K security fence in response to Abu Nidal putting a contract 
out on him boarders on persecution. (see Insight of Aug 23).

>There is another one with the Norriega business when he was
>VP and when he was head of the CIA. Personally, I think that trying to predict
>what someone might do based on things they have already done is only a
>gamble. Who could have predicted the great commie basher Nixon would go to
>China or that he would break the law later? If Clinton tells a different story
>on his draft history, how is that any different than Bush telling a different
>story on why he signed the tax increase? Or for that matter, does anyone wonder
>if Bush knew what one of his sons was doing when he worked for a mafia type
>down in Florida?
>
Look, anybody can _say_ anything to get elected.  The real indicator of
how they really will react is by examining their past behavior.  Take the
Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas debate.  Both people had radically different
stories and no evidence to back them up.  So the only thing we can do is
to examine how they behaved in the past and the fact that Anita behaved
in an incongruous manner to which a sexually harrassed person would toward
the harrasser leads us to conclude that she is a liar.

Clinton has a very real history that indicates his character.  

e.g.  He was just as priveledged as Quayle, a Rhodes (sp?) scholar who
      wiggled out of the draft, and promised to join the ROTC when he
      returned (but didn't).

Please explain the duplicity in explanations which you claim Bush has
used to describe why he signed the tax increase.  If you are saying that
the fact that he did it even though he had said he wouldn't is equivalent
to the draft dodging issue then I submit that you are wrong.  One is a
personal decision and the other involves the common good (bad in this case).

Mike Best
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:4630 tx.politics:4977 alt.politics.bush:4543
From: richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Plan
Date: 9 Sep 92 19:22:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas

In article <58iEr*lY0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
[mucho stuff deleted]
>
>I'm still waiting for you to type in the entire budget document...
>
>
>                                                Jim Pritchett
Better watch out Jim! There might be somebody out there with the
Congressional Record on CD-ROM! ;-)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: doug@cc.ysu.edu (Doug Sewell)
Subject: Re: Family Values
Organization: Bush in 92 ? NOT!
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:08:26 GMT

wag5@quads.uchicago.edu (john peter wagner) writes:
: 
: 	So, I suppose you are ignorant of the story of the city
: which wanted to forcefully copulate with a Jewish family.  You are
: probably familiar with the name.  Angels escorted the Jewish family out
: of the city and God destroyed it.  There were no instances in the bible
: in which Jews went out of their way to kill or molest homosexuals.  That
: is what I said.  In your defensiveness you lend yourself to ignorance
: and fear.
: 
Lot was a nephew of Abraham (Gen 11:26-32).  I'm not sure whether he would 
be "Jewish" in the traditional sense, but that's beside the point.

The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were going to be destroyed anyway.  The
fact that the men of the city were going to attack the angels and/or Lot's
family was moot.  Ezek. 16:49-50 paints a picture of the sins of Sodom
(and homosexuality isn't listed among them).
--
Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
doug@cc.ysu.edu	   doug@ysub.bitnet	<internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug
"Recession: your friend loses his job.  Depression: you lose your job.
Recovery: Bush loses his job" - Bill Davidsen
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5340 talk.politics.misc:45356 alt.rush-limbaugh:4778