HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jlohrmann@igc.apc.org
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Date: 18 Dec 92 09:32 PST
Subject: Clinton Text: Statement On NAFTA
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1483600064:000:2632
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!jlohrmann    Dec 18 09:32:00 1992


From: <jlohrmann>
Subject: Clinton Text: Statement On NAFTA


Posted by: The Office of teh President-Elect
date:      December 17, 1992

SUBJECT: Statement on Nafta

     Statement by President-elect Clinton on the Signing of NAFTA

  Today, the leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico take
an important step toward the economic integration of North America.

  In signing the North American Free Trade Agreement President
Bush, President Salinas and Prime Minister Mulroney bring our nations
closer to the goal of free trade and economic prosperity.

  I want to reaffirm my support for this agreement and underscore
my commitment to work with the American people and our neighbors to
the north and south to ensure NAFTA is properly implemented.  The goal
of free trade is one I support but NAFTA is only one piece of the
strategy necessary to ensure that we move wisely toward an integrated
region.

  If implemented as part of a comprehensive economic growth strategy,
NAFTA will create the largest market in the world, spur more American
jobs and promote growth in Mexico and Canada.  Our economy will benefit
from eliminating Mexico's higher tariffs, from reducing barriers to
trade in services and by better protecting intellectual property rights.

  A successful NAFTA, however, must be coupled with a plan to protect
our environment and to prepare our entire workforce to compete in the
global economy.  During the campaign, I laid out in detail the three
supplemental agreements we must have before proceeding with the 
implementing legislation, involving the environment, workers and
special safeguards for unexpected surges in imports.  I also indicated
five areas the United States can address unilaterally as we move to
implement NAFTA. These areas include worker assistance, the environment, farmers, greater public participation
and closing loopholes for foreign workers.  I believe these steps do
not require renegotiation of NAFTA.

  I intend to work closely with the governments of Mexico and
Canada as well as with the leadership in Congress to ensure these
important goals are met.  I believe they are achievable and essential
to advancing our common goal of prosperity for all the people of our 
nations.  I look forward to early meetings with President Salinas and 
with Prime Minister Mulroney to move this process forward.

			-30-30-30



Distribution:
  Clinton Foreign >internet:c-foreign-distr@campaign92.org
  Clinton News >internet:c-news-distr@campaign92.org
  Clinton Economy >internet:clinton-economy-distr@campaign92.org
  Clinton Volunteers >internet:clinton-volunteers@campaign92.org



Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:64885 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10473 alt.politics.bush:14759
From: dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Democrat Wars? (was Re: Democrat == Loony Left???)
Date: 18 Dec 92 22:44:12 GMT
Distribution: usa, world

In article <1992Dec18.033914.20709@pony.Ingres.COM>, garrett@Ingres.COM (MMMMM...ESSENCE OF GELFLING) writes:
} Clarification here. Eisenhower was the first one to send "advisors"
} to Vietnam.

Sorry.  The first advisors were sent in mid-1950.  That puts it in Harry
Truman's amdinstration.
--
David Olson   dlo@druwa.ATT.COM
"Keep in mind that I am speaking from Cambridge Massachusetts, which is
 about as far out as you can get."  Robert Reich, economic advisor to
 Bill Clinton, on "This Week with David Brinkley" 11/08/92
From: cn566@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jeremy W. Burgeson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,rec.humor
Subject: Re: Arkansas and Bakersfield jokes?
Date: 12 Dec 1992 21:51:02 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Nothing that is funny is in good taste to everyone.  If it was, it
wouldn't be funny.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: Boycotts, Boycotts, Boycotts....
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:35:47 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <1992Dec15.003610.28723@ils.nwu.edu>, hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu ( BOB HOOKER) writes:
> I really don't understand this conservative dislike for boycotts.  Firstly
> a boycott is a perfectly fine way for groups to gain their ends via the
> free market without having to pass laws.  In that way the use of boycotts
> promote  free enterprise and limit the expansion of government powers.  In
> a free market economy the consumer has a right to decide what they are
> going to consume on what ever grounds they want. 

     I agree with your analysis of the power and utility of the boycott;
however, I disagree with your opinion that conservatives dislike *all* 
boycotts.  
 
> In fact,  the effectiveness of many boycotts recently, and the failure of
> some really stupid ones,  shows the growing reliance that many liberals
> feel on carrying out their policies in the economic rather then political
> section of the economy.

     It's the "really stupid ones" of which you write that conservatives
dislike.  I classify the Cramer boycott as being a stupid one.  Even 
though my political bias is conservative, I enjoy reading posts on
talk.politics.misc and alt.rush-limbaugh that span the entire political
spectrum.  Some people actually feel that some opposing viewpoints
are threatening in that they may persuade Net neophytes.  They forget
to recognize both the cross-examinatory nature of the Net and the fact
that a name is associated with each post.  I had one person who would
reply to about half of my posts in alt.politics.clinton with the line
"King George has no principle, no character and no clue" along with some
insult towards me.  After about a month of this, I just ignored the
guy.  There was not need for a boycott.
     Another "really stupid one" is Rev. Jackson's proposed boycott of 
the 1993 opening day of Major League Baseball (*all* opening day games) 
because of Marge Schott's alleged use of ethnic slurs.  A reasonable
person would have started by asking her to publicly apologize to those 
people she allegedly offended.  But Rev. Jackson's first step is to
threaten to punish all of Major League Baseball.  After a few years
of seeing Jackson's problem solving tactics, I no longer take any of
his positions very seriously.  However, I would never want to try to 
silence the guy -- his knee-jerk overreactions only help to consolidate 
his opposition.  Similarly, if Cramer's posts are dangerously radical, 
then the "anti-homophobes" (for lack of a better term) should embrace
him; they have an enemy about which they can organize their effort.

     C. Perttunen
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: HERE IT IS! (from ..YOU ARE CLUELESS...) 1 OF 3
Date: 20 Dec 92 17:07:38 GMT
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN

pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
>Well I was wrong. I made 3 posts. The first dates 10/27/92...
...
>1. How many parents of 17+yr old children will welcome a man, who not only
>dodged the draft, but demonstrated against his own country on COMMUNIST SOIL?

England was COMMUNIST in the last Sixties!?  Boy, is my education lacking!
I would have sworn that England was a constitutional monarchy at the time...

Could it be that Clueless Boy is confusing Clinton's demonstrations against
US involvement in Viet Nam while in college in England with Clinton's tourist
trip to the USSR around the same time?  Naaa...

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy
From: chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask)
Subject: Re: Death of America
Reply-To: chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask)
Organization: Me, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 21:59:34 GMT

>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>
>>anyone who thinks there is no way they can be taxed much worse than they
>>are now, you are wrong. ontario has 15% sales tax. the marginal income
>>tax rate is over 50%. and people just don't give a damn (oh they do,
>>but they don't do anything about it). canada has a debt problem even
>>worse than the US's, and they don't have to spend a huge chunk of
>>their budget on the military. the price of gasoline is over 50% 
>>built-in tax. people don't even pay attention to it any more.
>
As someone else mentioned, the tax is really 8% provincial, 7% GST.  The
GST is a VAT and replaces hidden taxes, etc...  Also, all of the
industrialized nations have acknowledged the need for VATs; as a matter of
fact, you cannot join the EEC without one.

Oh, gas should be taxed heavily, use of gas causes enormous goverment
expenditures.  compare gas taxes in any country that is doing well (ask
Ross Perot), and you will find that the exception is the US, not Canada.
>
>>you think america's manufacturing base has eroded? in the past few
>>years, canada has seen its productivity go down and its labor costs
>>go up, compared even to the US. *not* compared to japan or the world
>>average. i heard an estimate that ontario has lost over 20% of its
>>manufacturing jobs just in the past two years. that's ok, they're
>>going to a "service economy". right.  sound familiar?
>

Tough times had by all, mate.  But look around you, Canadians still have a
higher standard of living (PPPHHHTTT!), fewer health problems, lower infant
mortality, and a more favourable world opinion (was it the US which was
voted "Best place in the world to live"?  No, that's right, that was
Canada, the US ranked sixth.)

Get a life, and stop crying.

-chris blask


	-whine on, harvest moon...
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: gtao@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Greg )
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:04:13 GMT

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

>Actually, if the Pentagon thought there'd be real resistance, I don't
>think they would have told the media where the landing would take
>place.  As said a few times, the military has gotten extremely good at
>controling the media, as the Gulf War, Panama, Grenada, etc. attest.
>To think that they'd fail to think through their press handling would
>be to indulge in a bit of inconsistency, to say the least.

>The landing would have been the height of US popularity in Somalia,
>and would have been a fair opportunity for the Pentagon to get some
>good PR (what better than Marines coming to save starving children?),
>or to set up a situation when the press may get out of hand and
>embarrass themselves.  There would be an excuse to corral them up and
>shut them up in case there's another hot war.

A little cynical, are we?  I mean, if ANYbody has gotten good at
controlling opinions, it's the MEDIA.  It's really sad to see just
how powerful the media's influence has become.  I'm beginning to
wonder what groups have the most pull in the media. 

Seriously, I'm sure that even IF the Pentagon did let the press know 
the whereabouts of the landing, that's no excuse for recklessness on 
the part of the media.  I'd be willing to bet that they were advised
against doing just the sort of thing they did.


*******************************************************************************
* Gregory Tao                      | E-mail to:  gt38091@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu     * 
* Univ. of IL at Urbana-Champaign  |        OR      gtao@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu     *
* Department of Computer Science   |        OR      gtao@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu     *
* --------------------------------------------------------------------------- *
*                                                                             *
*  	``Change, suddenly, is everywhere we look, sweeping empires and       *
*    ideologies before it, shaping a new era even as we watch. Such moments   *
*    are rare. Today we stand at such a moment.''                             * 
*                                                                             *
* --------------------------------------------------------------------------- *
* DISCLAIMER:  My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of CCSO or the    *
*              University of Illinois.					      *
*******************************************************************************

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs
From: leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker)
Subject: Bo Gritz
Date: 15 Dec 92 05:08:42 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Dec14.143529.9759@news.acns.nwu.edu> dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier) writes:
>In article <1185@bug.UUCP> stevef@bug.UUCP (Steven R Fordyce) writes:
>>Who is Bo Gritz and what has he to do with this?
>>
>Bo Gritz is a true American patriot who is being denounced as a fascist by
>the Free Shit Brigades (tm) before his message of personal responsibility
>and self reliance can catch on.  I sincerely hopes he weathers the storm.

Bo Gritz is an idiot who uses a 2000-year-old work of fiction as a
brain substitute to avoid having to support his bigotry with reasoned
argument.  While I, as a Libertarian, fully endorse the ideas of
personal responsibility and self reliance, Mr. Gritz's idea of
self-reliance is that people should let chruches (and only good old
Christian ones at that) run their lives instead of making their own
choices.  It scares me that almost 100,000 people voted for him.

-- 
Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,tx.politics
From: pswanson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Paul Swanson)
Subject: Re: The collapse of communism and the role of the U.S.
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:24:05 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.145234.12980@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

[most of discussion deleted]
>
>No, you seem to be missing the gist of my opinion, which is that what
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^
>we would have gotten would NOT have been a Soviet collapse, and
>certainly not this early.  What we would have got is a somewhat more
>benign (but only somewhat) Soviet Empire which would have been much
>more robust than what we've seen and which would be hurting us
>severely in international affairs (since most third-party countries
>will throw their support with where the strength is.   See any good
>book on geo-politics under 'Finlandization'.
>
This point pretty much sums up the discussion.  Since we can't go back
and change history we'll never know what the results of a different
course of action would have been starting after Stalin died.  Its really
a matter of opinion and if its Fred McCall's opinion versus George
Kennan's opinion I don't think there is any doubt whose carries more
weight.  This is why I presented Mr. Kennan's opinion since my own
personal opinion is probably worth less than Fred's.

Paul.

P. S. For those who are not aware Mr. Kennan is basically the father of
our post WWII Soviet policy.  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Boycotts, Boycotts, Boycotts....
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 16:53:26 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Dec18.205639.4969@ils.nwu.edu> hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu ( BOB HOOKER) writes:
]
]In article <1992Dec15.093547.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu>,
]cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
]> 
]> In article <1992Dec15.003610.28723@ils.nwu.edu>, hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu ( BOB HOOKER) writes:
]> > I really don't understand this conservative dislike for boycotts.  Firstly
]> > a boycott is a perfectly fine way for groups to gain their ends via the
]> > free market without having to pass laws.  In that way the use of boycotts
]> > promote  free enterprise and limit the expansion of government powers.  In
]> > a free market economy the consumer has a right to decide what they are
]> > going to consume on what ever grounds they want. 
]> 
]>      I agree with your analysis of the power and utility of the boycott;
]> however, I disagree with your opinion that conservatives dislike *all* 
]> boycotts.  
]
]I would site the recent editorial in conservative US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT
]a world report and some of Rush Limbaugh's confussed comments as cases of
]anti-boycott feeling for the sake of anti-boycott feeling.  The US NEWS
]article even went as far as attacking boycotts for making economic
]purchases political.  Strange,  that in a Capitalists Democaracy people
]should be against politics getting envolved in economics.

It is funny that you consider US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT to be conservative.
Every since it was sold, it has been getting more and more liberal.

I have never read a general condemntation of boycotts in the several 
conservative publications I subscribe to. Remember, Rush Limbaugh may
be conservative, but he doesn't necessarily represent conservative
thinking on every issue.

My feelings on boycotts.... I boycott every movie that Hanoi Jane and
some of the other Hollywood left is in. I boycott some products of
sponsors of TV shows that I think are excessive.

However, since the Political Correctness Police are now boycotting
on so many issues, the PC person may soon find it impossible to
purchase anything or travel anywhere (except Santa Monica, CA). I
think that would be great!

If the gays want to boycott Colorado for its electorate's choice to
prohibit laws that accord special privilege on the basis of sexual 
preference (yes, that is what it did), let them.
-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
- - "May you have the wealth of a Republican, and the sexual prowess - -
- -  of a Democrat." - Johnny Carson's joke writers
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Droopy)
Subject: Re: I WAS RIGHT!!! YOU ARE CLUELESS!!!!
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:07:38 GMT

Mr Ritter still hasnt answered the charges that he is making this up.
At least two people have said they looked through old posts and couldnt
find the flames he refered to in his original posting. A request to
Mr Ritter, put up or shut up.
============================================================================
BRI FARENELL				Hate is not a family value.
FARENEBT@CRAFT.CAMP.CLARKSON.EDU	Get involved (or shut up)
CLARKSON '95				 
A pro-life, PC-hating, liberal card-carrying member of the ACLU
===========================================================================
"Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse
 to see it tried on him personally." 	---Abraham Lincoln


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)
Subject: Re: Gay Child Molesters (Re: Youth Info Needed)
Reply-To: cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 00:07:37 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc

As quoted from <143744@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> by wbs@mred.llnl.gov (William B. Schaefer IV):

> With self-righteousness that Pat Robertson would be proud of:

You're a hell of a runner up.  At least Robertson isn't an appologist for
child rape.  You know somebody's out in the weeds when they can make Pat
Robertson look good.... :(

> The NAMBLA discussion was one of opinion and perspective. No actions were
> advocated nor discussed.  Phil, you advocate a violent and illegal act.  Who
> is the villan here?
> 
So a similar discussion of the elimination of the Jews would meet with similar
approval from you?  Shooting a child molestor in the act is hardly an illegal
act.  The law allows a third party to take such defensive action on behalf of
another as would be permitted in his or her own behalf.  Are you saying that
Phil couldn't shoot somebody who was trying to rape him?

> And the light of knowledge continues:
> 
> >Ugh, let's get this straight. NAMBLA members want to fuck little
> >children.
> 
> How do you know?  Do you just *assume* this because "age of consent" is
> mentioned?  The only one mentioning sexual acts was you...
> 
What OTHER purpose is there behind ELIMINATING age of consent?  I'll bet you
wouldn't attribute an ulterior motive to the Aryan Nations lobbying for a
constitutional amendment excluding Jews from the provisions of the murder
laws either, would you?

> >... They use the word consent, but does offering a lollipop to
> >a 5-year old so you can touch their "pee-pee" constitute consent?
> 
> You create a hypothetical situation and then condem someone for it.  Please!
> We are not 5-year olds here, so let's not use schoolyard logic!
> 
Funny how THEY won't deny it.  How come YOU do?  Have you heard the term 
"useful fool"?

>        <Comparison of NAMBLA to Nazis>
> 
> ACK!  Nazis adovated specific violent acts against people.  These acts
> occured and were obscene!  Any comparison of group that merely presents an
> alternate opinion (no matter how distasteful you may find it) to the Nazis
> is absurd.
> 
RAPE isn't a violent act?  So if the American Nazi Party "merely advocated"
rendering Jews, you wouldn't have problem with it because it would only be
an "alternate opinion"?

> >Come on now...  do you REALLY not know what NAMBLA is about???
> 
> Do you?
> 
A damned sight better than YOU appear to.

> Phil, you are wrong and you are a bigot.  Now be quite, I have work to do.
> 
You are wrong, a dupe and an appologist for child rapists.  And what does this
"work" constitute?  Are CHILDREN involved?


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------  

"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?" 
------------------------------------------------------------------  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Bleeding-Heart Libertarianism (was Legalizing drugs)
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 06:44:15 GMT

In article <PA146008.556.724089241@utkvm1.utk.edu> PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
}       Private charity out of the United States isn't going to feed, clothe, 
}house, and educate the world.  We'll be doing great if and when we manage to 
}feed, clothe, house, and educate our country.  But very few of anybody's 
}government social programs feed, et al. people outside the country.

Foreign aid programs feed dictators all over the world!  What do you mean?
I found Live Aid most instructive: the food bought rotted on the docks
so that the marxists in power could stay in.  As Rush Limbaugh said with
the half of his brain that isn't tied behind his back, what we suffer
from most on this planet is the unequal distribution of capitalism.


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott)
Subject: Re: Macroeconomics 601
Summary:  That's right -- this ain't Kansas
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords:  It's the denial zone.
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 19:47:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.072841.8275@netcom.com>, 
nbh@netcom.com (N.B. Hedd) writes...

>The Republicans are saying "I told you so" about the recent
>uptick in the economy. They STILL don't get it: the reason
>the economy is getting better is because they've been driven
>from office, and their loss is everyone else's gain.

Republicans don't matter anymore -- forget 'em.

But...  1. You're wrong.
	2. There's an "uptick" due to christmas.
	3. There's an "bump" due to all the compulsive
	   overspenders (43 million of them) getting
	   there candidate elected -- and they used 
	   credit mostly.


 -=   What goes up, gets sucked down, as the black hole of the combined   =-
-= Federal, State & Local Government AND Private Debt continues collapsing =-