HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: George Bush on Larry King tonight: US Troops in Yugoslavia
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 04:00:57 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

myhui@bnr.ca (Michael Hui) writes:
: George Bush is harping on that stupid "will not send a single American
: soldier into Yugoslavia unless I am absolutely sure of a successful
: outcome." That's an exact quote from a few minutes ago on CNN.
: Canada, meanwhile, sends thousands of troops to UN missions all over
: the world, especially Yugoslavia, where we have one of the largest
: contingents, have lost a few soldiers' lives in the process, and we pay
: for all the costs.
: Meanwhile, the USA is behind in their UN payments, and here we have the
: president of the USA still sounding so reluctant to commit American
: troops to do their fair share on the world stage. It's downright embarassing.

I don't condone the US being behind in its UN dues.  What can I say?
The government owes just about everyone money.  Why should the US not
be in debt to the UN too?  :)  Actually I don't condone the US belonging
to the UN, but that's another story altogether.

However, as far as the "US doing its fair share" goes," well, the US has
done more than its "fair share" since the end of World War II.  The US sent
more than its "fair share" of troops to Viet Nam in that "police action."
The US did more than its "fair share" in the "defense" of its European
and Asian allies during the Cold War.  And the US certainly did
more than its "fair share" in George Bush's, er, the Gulf Conflict.

All this while Germany and Japan haven't had to spend a sizeable portion
of their national incomes on defending truth, justice, freedom, mom, 
capitalism, sushi, and apple strudel.

Is it too much to ask for the US to be "allowed" to sit this one out?

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92
From: rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: The lie Al "did not" Gore can not deny
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:08:46 GMT
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Originator: rja@mahogany126


In article <1992Oct14.232645.4817@desire.wright.edu>, demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
> 	Al Gore was indeed pro-life, then he switched to pro-choice.  After the
> debate (NBC?) waved a letter he wrote to someone who gave him a chunk of change
> saying how proud he was to be pro life.  Gag.
> 
> 	So much for that "did not" denial :).

Do you have to support anti-abortion legislation to be "pro-life"?

I'm pro-life and pro-choice...

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
From: foy@aero.org (Richard Foy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Debates
Date: 13 Oct 1992 22:29:06 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aerospace.aero.org

In article <5989@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) writes:
..
>
>>That's Bush's answer for everything.  Got a problem?  He'll give you 
>>a token tax cut.
>
>Wrong, that's been the liberals' answer to everything. Why do you think
>Bush and Republicans accuse Democrats of "tax and spend" policies?
>-- 
>Emil Thomas Chuck		eyc@acpub.duke.edu


Because it is good rhetoric if they can make it stick. It does stick with
many people who don't look at all of the facts.

Richard Foy  Redondo Beach, CA         Standard Disclaimer



Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10815 talk.politics.misc:52226
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: ==> Send a Card To Rich Bond?
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:25:39 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <92288.205853U56503@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
> I have had enough of the Republican Party's negative, personal
> attacks.  By waging such a campaign, you have shown little regard
> for the truth and little respect for the American people.
> 
> As I am sending this message to you, I am also informing you that
> I will vote for Bill Clinton/Al Gore.  The Democratic Party and its
> campaign aimed, not at preying on people's fears, but at building on
> people's hopes.

	Uh-huh.  This from the group that:

	Supports protectionist trade policies
	Votes against aid to developing countries
	Talks about "beating Japan/Germany" in the "trade war"
	Tells seniors that they'll be destitute if Bush wins
	Tells poor people that they'll lose their handouts if Bush wins
	Says the sky is falling (i.e., Al "did not" Gore's book)
	Promotes class warfare
	Promotes class envy
	Lied about Tsongas
	Lied about Willie Horton
	Lied about the draft
	Lied about Bush's relative economic performance
	....I could go on :)

	So it's just a weeeee bit hypocritcal of "you people" to be saying
that.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: dave@gergo.tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
Subject: Re: Cable TV Bill
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:03:00 GMT

In article <BvrH3A.8s8@oryx.com>, xdedcj@atom.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (dave c jarzabek) writes...
}I have been subscribing to Cable for about 10 years and,
}like most people, don't like the idea of having prices increased.
} 
}Now that the gov'ment has come to my rescue, I can look forward
}to cheep Cable, right?
} 
}I'm willing to bet anyone who wants to that my rates will increase
}for the same service now that the gov'ment has their fingers in it.
} 
}Any takers?

No, I don't believe the rates will increase because of the government.
Now, they probably WILL increase in many areas before the regulation goes
into effect -- here in Bryan/College Station, TCA Cable (the ones who made
national news by dropping MTV without asking the subscribers for opinions
just to inform the subscribers that MTV could be blocked) just sent out a
letter to all subscribers stating that they were raising the monthly cost
of 32-channel basic service (the only kind they have) from ~$17.50 to
~$19.50. Add to this the fact that they have no plans to survey the customers
to determine if there is sufficient interest in any alternative cable channels,
such as the Cartoon Network, the Sci-Fi Channel, any of the comedy networks,
etc. They claim that they can only add channels by dropping existing ones,
but make no attempts to ask the paying subscribers what they do or don't
watch of the current available channels. There are THREE local information
channels (which they used for the TripleCast), even though these two cities
are relatively small.
TCA has a monopoly here, and they are taking advantage of it. They also have
followed up on the Cable TV Association's national threats that the Cable
Bill would cause rates to increase by raising their rates before the bill
itself could prevent them from gouging the customers even more.
If your rates increase in the next few weeks, I'd blame the cable company,
not the government (on this one, at least). If your cable company claims
that they had to pay local broadcast stations for rebroadcast rights, then
complain to the bcast stations. 

 -                                                                     -
 - Dave Martin - Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M - 
 - DAVE@GERGA[GERGO,GERGI].TAMU.EDU - BROOKS@TAMVXOCN.BITNET - AOL:DBM -
 -                                                                     -
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Clinton's BS economic plan
X-Xxdate: Thu, 15 Oct 92 11:00:19 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:03:30 GMT

In article <Bw51Dy.5qq@news.cso.uiuc.edu> P. Ialamanna,
pa56680@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
>I'm getting really irritated at these Clinton supporters who claim that
>his tax increase won't affect the middle class. If I understand it
corectly,
>Clinton wants to raise tax on the top 2% of wage earners and not to the
>middle class. Okay fine, but what gets me is that middle class people
beleive....

I suggest you read the WHOLE plan (which has been posted on several
occasions)
before you spout off. 500 leading economists have endorsed this plan
because it
nurtures LONG-TERM growth and stability instead of pandering to the
quarterly
report mentality.

Did you really believe that fixing a problem as large as the economy was
going
to be easy and painless? Get real.

Norman

Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Senior Engineer
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company




When the going gets wierd, the wierd turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Magic Johnson (Was Re: Debates)
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 03:14:44 GMT

In article <5ondnip@Unify.Com> ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.060812.7647@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:
>>
>> ... Magic Johnson ... attended one meeting,
>
>This is a Bush-invented lie.  Magic Johnson attended twice as many commission
>meetings as the 3 people Bush appointed to the commission.  This is found in
>the commission meeting minutes and was reported on NPR yesterday.
>
>> then quit without giving details of why.
>
>This is another Bush-invented lie.  Magic Johnson quit with giving details of
>why to the commission, to President Bush, and to the press.  If you were in a
>country that has newspapers at the time, and had bothered to try to inform
>yourself instead of believing that The President Said It So It Must Be True,
>you'd know that.
>
>
>Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244		---------------------+
>|   "Technical work needs reviewing for the same reason that pencils need    |
>|   erasers."			- Daniel P. Freedman & Gerald M. Weinberg    |
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
You believe NPR?? Radio Socialiste National, National Proletariat Radio??
Geez, I'd believe anybody before believing NPR.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: Gee, why don't we default on the US debt!!!?
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1992 19:59:51 GMT

In article <21675@rpp386.lonestar.org>, jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> So far as I know, most of the debt is held in "long bonds" - the 30 year
> bond.  Even still, if interest rates are pushed up, the value of those
> shorter notes will fall and the government can buy back its own debt for
> pennies on the dollar.
 
No, at least half of the debt is short-term (expires within a year). 
That's a big issue in the Fed, whether they should buy short or long term
bonds.
 
And at the same time they'll have to issue new bonds with sky-high
interest rates.  Actually, some of the long term bonds wouldn't drop to
"pennies on the dollar".   Certainly 30-year bonds would drop, but they
wouldn't crater.  In the meantime, your high interest rates and inflation
would bring the economy to a halt.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Happy 17th Anniversary!
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:12:46 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

     Wasn't it a touching moment during the debate when Gov. Clinton 
(also known as "The Love Gov") "extemporaneously" acknowledged his 
and Ms. Rodham's 17th wedding anniversary -- even considering that 
up to 12 of those years were shared with Ms. Flowers?  (As a
disclaimer, I would like to add that I am not questioning
Gov. Clinton's patriotism with this post.)

     C. Perttunen
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:9032 tx.politics:5922
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
Subject: Re: Gee, why don't we default on the US debt!!!?
Date: 8 Oct 92 12:52:24 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Oct07.195951.26556@NeoSoft.com> hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen) writes:
>And at the same time they'll have to issue new bonds with sky-high
>interest rates.  Actually, some of the long term bonds wouldn't drop to
>"pennies on the dollar".   Certainly 30-year bonds would drop, but they
>wouldn't crater.  In the meantime, your high interest rates and inflation
>would bring the economy to a halt.

There is a simple mathematical relationship between bond price and bond
yield.  If interest rates go as high as you claim (they're at 20+ year
lows right now ...), bond prices will fall like rocks.  They have to in
order to produce a competitive yield.  That is, if I buy a 30 year bond
that is 3 years old, and its coupon rate is 7.5% (this is in 1995 when
your hypothetical inflation rate is 20%), the price of that bond will
fall to a value low enough such that the interest payment ($75 per
thousand) plus appreciation (from the current price to par) equals 20%.
The value of that bond is going to be on the order of $400 per thousand.
Throw in inflation and it's value falls even further because the $1,000
you'd get in 27 years is worth even less.

Other than issues such as "when is the interest rate going to fall?"
which will affect price (with 1996 being an election year, the answer
would be "next year"), that is the way it basically works.  It is the
only way that a $1,000 bond that was sold 3 years ago can produce 20%
interest.
-- 
John F. Haugh II           [  TSAKC  ]       UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151    [ DoF #17 ]            Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Magic Johnson (Was Re: Debates)
Date: 14 Oct 92 15:08:16 EST
Summary: Lies all around
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <5ondnip@Unify.Com>, ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan) writes:
> In article <1992Oct12.060812.7647@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:
>>
>> ... Magic Johnson ... attended one meeting, 
> 
> This is a Bush-invented lie.  Magic Johnson attended twice as many commission
> meetings as the 3 people Bush appointed to the commission.  This is found in
> the commission meeting minutes and was reported on NPR yesterday.

	It's not a lie, just incorrect.  Their source said one meeting.  Of
course "twice as many" isn't misleading at all, is it?  Even though the total
for Magic is...two.  Hoo-boy.  And you'd have something with the "Bush
appointed" thing--if the Bush appointees were complaining about the way things
were being run.

>> then quit without giving details of why.
> 
> This is another Bush-invented lie.  Magic Johnson quit with giving details of
> why to the commission, to President Bush, and to the press.  If you were in a
> country that has newspapers at the time, and had bothered to try to inform
> yourself instead of believing that The President Said It So It Must Be True,
> you'd know that.

	Magic said he didn't think enough was being done.  Despite the fact
that more has been done towards AIDS in six years than was done for polio in
40.
	Magic was just looking for an excuse.  He didn't want it to look like
he was supporting Bush.  At least he could have been honest about it.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice)
Subject: Re: On the first debate among the presidential candidates
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 18:07:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.065620.27314@Princeton.EDU>, 
niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes...

>The Presidency is *not* an on-the-job learning experience.

Considering how well the "experts" have done, perhaps it should be.

When will the big government centrists learn that a nation of
250 million can't be directed, guided, orchestrated, or otherwise
beneficially influenced by a cadre of political professionals?

There is *no* human capacity which can understand the complexity
and diversity of what we all do. In trying, the snapshots and 
models are either too sparse or too dated to be accurate, and 
the dynamic nature of our culture defies depiction.

Not that there aren't those who try to mold and control the
culture -- by making all persons a uniform number or case,
in all the vast array of plans and programs. 

The Presidency is an OJT experience because there are no precedents
for the complex nature of the society we've engendered. Thus
the very most fundamental skill a contender can offer is the
ability to remain "in touch" with the evolution of the nation
and the world. The purpose of which is to alert us to disaster
or opportunity ahead. 

The disasters we are running headlong toward are:

	o  economic collapse
	o  the plague of aids
	o  environmental contamination
	o  world population growth
	o  increasingly fragile cities (or metroplexes)

The answer in each case is to maximize decentralization 
of the populace, returning once again to the country, and 
promoting family autonomy. (All still tied together as a 
community through our telecommunication and transportation 
networks.)

In a sense, each family should have their own homestead, and
all the technology we can muster should turn to making each
homestead self supporting -- each a small factory and farm
complex.

And the opportunity of the future is remotely controlling all
heavy industry and central food production -- without having to
be physically at the site. 

Where is the vision being offered in partisan politics that 
does anything more than assert, "the government is the answer
-- let the experts handle it."  Just send your money to....

>David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1993 World Series Champions
>   princeton.edu     | Roland Hemond: SIGN BARRY BONDS!!!!!!!!

-- Stephen Tice    Arlington Texas    10-14-92

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao)
Subject: Re: Buy George
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:23:32 GMT

In article <5962@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>harbison@dbsun.uucp (harbison) writes:
>-Q: What do Donald Trump, Charles Keating (S&L deadbeat), and Henry
>-   Kravis (Wall St. takeover artist) all have in common?
>-
>-A: All are members of Team 100, a group of 249 individuals who
>-   contributed $100,000.00 or more to the 1988 Bush/Quayle campaign.
>-
>-Team 100 consists mostly of the top execs from major investment firms,
>-government contractors, multinational corporations, and oil companies.
>-
>-ARCO chairman Lodwrick Cook, along with the company and CEO, gave a
>-Bush and the Republican party $862,360.00.  According to the National
>-Petroleum Refiners Assoc., ARCO "gets most of the credit" for the
>-reformulated gas plank of the Clean Air Act.  The Bush administration
>-made a last-minute change in the act to allow reformulated gasoline
>-to be marketed in the USA.  This experimental fuel requires more oil
>-than traditional gasoline and emits more pollutants than other fuels.
>-
>-Source: The Riverfront Times, July 8, 1992 (a St. Louis paper). The
>-article credits the June issue of Common Cause Magazine for most of
>-the figures.
>-
>-I don't have figures handy for 1992 donations.  In a story aired during
>-the RNC, CNN investigated the source of Bush/Quayle 1992 donations.
>-Most of them traced back to U.S. Tobacco and big oil companies.  The
>-same story noted that former Prex. Gerald Ford was ferried to the RNC
>-by private jet, compliments of Atlantic Richfield (oil company).
>-
>-I just thought people might like to know who the money is behind the
>-Bush/Quayle ticket.  Not that it comes as any surprise that Republicans
>-get most of their money from rich individuals and corporations.
>
>So?
 
  So George is not my President. He has not been my President, he is not
my president, and most importantly, he WILL NOT be my President.   
  I, one of the common people.
 
  Oh, by the way, just heard this story from A's "This Week With David
Brinkley".  
  A dead beat father (just like George described in last night's debate),
who owed more than 100,000 for child support, was sitting next to the 
"family value" President, aka, "red-bait desperate" President, Mr. George
Bush at a dinner, for whom the dead beat gave some 500,000. The police 
saw him at the table with the President and arrested him. Maybe, George 
is indeed the "law and order" President ?  Thanks, George, for doing such a 
great job for justice.  

>Could you list all the special interest groups and people who are
>supporting the Clinton campaign? 
  
  No, I can't. Can you ?   You are welcome to list them , and we will like
to warn Mr. Clinton not to be the President for those people only.
 

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: craig@jido.b11.ingr.com (Craig Presson)
Subject: Re: Debate results
Reply-To: craig@jido.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, Alabama
	<1992Oct12.054903.29070@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>
	<1992Oct12.163244.749@novell.com>
	<1992Oct12.190830.16312@husc3.harvard.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:47:26 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.190830.16312@husc3.harvard.edu> koumis@husc4.harvard.edu (Anthony Koumis) writes:
   >In article <1992Oct12.054903.29070@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> StarOwl@uiuc.edu writes:
   >>Also, CBS "lost" IMO by deciding that a baseball game was more important
   >>than the joint appearance.  I really thought they'd be more responsible
   >>than that.

   If you read the papers today you would discover that by CBS
   and baseball's contract, CBS couldnt interrupt the
   coverage of the ballgame for the debate.  All you
   free market, liberatarians should be happy at that result --
   yeah, for market results.

That's right. Even in this lame simulation of a free market, I could
choose between networks running the lame simulation of a debate, or
baseball, which is more important than fake politics anyway, or a
variety of entertainment programs. Something is wrong with this?

Let me get this straight. Do you think that CBS should not make
contracts (maybe they *are* incompetent, after all, they paid too much
for MLB '92), or that they should be able to rescind them if some High
Public Good like showing a Joint Campaign Appearance between 3/4 of
the national candidates for President comes along?

--  **************************-><-*************************
    **  Craig Presson          liberty@jido.b11.ingr.com **
    **  Marrou / Lord '92           Revive the Republic  **
    ***********Libertarian Party**1-800-272-1776***********



Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10762 talk.politics.misc:52158