HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Question about Clinton's "didn't inhale" remark
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 20:38:32 GMT

king@cogsci.ucsd.EDU (Jonathan King) writes:
>Whether or not a public works program will eventually pay for itself
>really depends on the program, I would think. 

I agree.  However, I would think that given the past record of
government it would be fairly evident that any program involving the
government most certainly wouldn't pay for itself...

>[good analysis]

-- 
A vegetarian, eh?  Well, at my house, even the plants eat meat. -- D. Honig
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:36393 alt.politics.elections:9306
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
From: dcriswel@oracle.uucp (David Criswell)
Subject: Re: Republican ads against Clinton: Gennifer Flowers
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Redwood Shores CA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:17:07 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Jul14.204027.239732@cs.cmu.edu> dredish+@cs.cmu.edu (David Redish) writes:
>In article <5534@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil> jxxl@cs.nps.navy.mil (John Locke) writes:
>>saurav@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Saurav Chatterjee) writes:
>>
>># Just read in todays paper that some Republican group will come out
>># with ads asking people to call a 900 number to "find out what really
>># happenned between Clinton and Gennifer Flowers", and the phone
>># call will be the taped phone conversation between Flowers and Clinton
>># that the Star has.
>>
>>Talk dirty to Gennifer Flowers for $4.99 a minute... Way to go, Republicans!
>>There's a buck to be made.
>>
>>John
>
>Gennifer Flowers sued the company that made the ad and a judge agreed
>and issued an injunction and the company had to pull the ad and the
>number.  (source: washington post)
>
>david redish

Maybe so, but as of 7/28/92 5pm Pacific time, the number is in operation.
(702) 784-7600, charges $4.99 to your credit card. Even sleazier than
the Willie Horton ad.

Anybody know of any good phone pranks that work against recordings?


Dave Criswell

My views do not represent those of my employer.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:34890 alt.politics.clinton:109
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: choices: was Re: Question about Clinton's "didn't inhale" remark
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:07:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mitre Corporation, McLean VA

In article <1992Jul20.210040.6869@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins) writes:
}
}Regarding the lesser of two evils proposition used to justify support for 
}either Bush or Clinton, John McGlauglin used a great Mae West quotation in
}Friday's show:
}
}     "When it's a choice between two evils I always opt for the one I
}haven't tried."

Oh, THAT's a good way.  Let's see - a change can either be for the better or
for the worse.  There is not much evident better, but there is a LOT of room
worse.  Just changing would probably go downhill.  yuch.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: burke@tss.com (Jim Burke)
Subject: Re: Libertarian Platform
Reply-To: burke@tss.com (Jim Burke)
Organization: Teknekron Software Systems. Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 00:27:33 GMT

In article <BrqnvK.H59@apollo.hp.com>, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:

|>   Would you agree to holding parents responsible for the actions of their
|>   children, then?   I.e., subjecting them to whatever penalties would accrue
|>   to their children for doing some hurtful thing?

Naw, the Libertarians wouldn't go for that.  Each individual must be 
responsible for his/her own actions.  If a little kid gets drunk and then
does something stupid that kills somebody, Libertarian doctrine would 
require you to lock up the little kid.  Kids have full rights and full
responsibilities according to these guys.  

-- 

	Jim Burke	"Life is uncertain - eat dessert first!"
	Teknekron Software Systems		... burke@tss.com
  	phone:(415) 617-2432			... uunet!tekbspa!burke
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: snoopy@crchh426.BNR.CA (Antonio Tello)
Subject: Re: Which of you is 'good enough' ?
Reply-To: snoopy@crchh426.BNR.CA (Antonio Tello)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 13:23:42 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.214115.26714@cognet.ucla.edu>,
tmark@cognet.ucla.edu (Terence Mark) writes:
|>In article <1992Jul20.195741.27981@bnr.ca> snoopy@crchh426.BNR.CA
(Antonio Tello) writes:
|>>
|>>2) could your history survive the media scrutiny required to be
|>>   elected president ?
|>
|>No. And I have no problem with your implication that few if any of us
|>could get elected President. I could turn the question around :
|>How many of you could survive the media scrutiny required to become
|>a supreme court justice ?

A more than valid point... Lets just judge (anybody) upon their record
and policy.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:35056 alt.politics.elections:8763
From: veal@utkvm1.utk.edu (David L. Veal)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Perot sued!!
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:11:11 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education

In article <1992Jul21.192940.20241@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) writes:

[Perot gets sued!]

>We have an offer:

>"If my name is put on the ballot in all 50 states I will stand for
>President and guarantee a world class campaign"

>We have an acceptance:

>The work put in to get the name on the ballots

>We have a consideration:

>Perot: Chance to run for office
>Supporters: Candidate who supports particular agenda


>It would seem that there is a contract.

>Question is has the contract been breached? I think yes since Perot has
>announced that he will not stand. Since this action frustrates the sole
>condition he put forward there would seem to be a strong case against
>him.

     We may still be in for an intertaining election season after all!
 
     Better go invest in popcorn...

>Phill Hallam-Baker

===========================================================================
|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
| Statistics are any data which can be twisted to support your posititon  | 
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: when in trouble, when in doubt . . .
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:30:52 GMT

In article <1992Jul26.185218.20035@oakhill.sps.mot.com>,
pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:

|>In article <MATT.92Jul24113937@physics16.berkeley.edu>
|>matt@physics.berkeley.edu writes:
|>>In article <BrwKoA.KwL@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter
|>Nelson) writes:
|>>
|>>>    I'm not suggesting that the Iraqis are blameless, or that
|>they're
|>>>    not being especially provocative just now, but from the
|>Republican's
|>>>    perspective wouldn't this be a really good time to have a war?  
|>|>
|>I disagree with the assumption here that a war (or military action)
|>would help
|>a President. Democratic success in WWI and WWII led to defeat at the
|>polls
|>in 1920 and 1946. Similarly, Britain booted Churchill out after his
|>success
|>in the War effort, replacing him with Clement Atlee.
|>Bush's successful prosecution of the Gulf War will not help him much,
|>viz. recent poll ratings.
|>

Big difference is conscription. People conscripted into a war tend to
kick out the clowns who got them into it.

Mind you, the problem with a bombing raid on Iraq is that unless Bush
hits Saddam, it will be a failure.

|>I'd be interested in finding a single person who would vote for Bush
|>based on whether he orders a bombing raid on Iraq or not.
|>I doubt such people exist.

Come off it, some people would vote for Col North given the chance,
after he has been proven to have subverted the constitution and lied to
congress.


Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: Demopublican or Republicrat ?
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 22:12:55 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.134319.21264@hemlock.cray.com>,
rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>
>In article <1992Jul22.160011.11244@morrow.stanford.edu>, GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>> However, Mr. Sanders had previously been very active in Vermont
>> politics as a Democrat and had developed much name recognition as
>> such prior to deciding to seek the Senate seat as an independent.
>> Libertarians are not willing to pretend they're Republicrats just to
>> get elected to lower office first.
>
>Why not?

Because we think political parties should stand for something
besides expediency.

>The socialists never had to win any elections to get their 1924 party
>platform enacted.

And perhaps the Libertarians can too, but I think it will go a lot
faster if we  actually start electing people and I'd like to see
some real progress before I die.

/JUne
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: Bush/Baker Ticket??
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 11:01:17 GMT

scholl@uvmark.uucp (Kathryn Scholl) writes:
>If the conservative-favorite Quayle DID drop out, would conservatives
>ACTUALLY sit out rather than taking the chance of having a liberal
>Clinton on board?
>

One would think that ideological conservatives have no place to go but 
Bush, but the detailed poll results posted here recently show that
self-described conservatives go for Clinton pretty readily:

       Harris 7/21/92:

                 CONS.  MOD.  LIB
       Clinton   45%   69%   89%
       Bush      51    28    10
       Not sure   3     4     1

Maybe without Quayle, Bush's 51% among conservatives drops even further.

By the way, how do Republicans react to statements often given by media
spin-doctors that Dan Quayle represents the "core of the Republican Party?"
:-)

---
Joe Knapp    jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: barrett@cc.gatech.edu (James Barrett)
Subject: First 20 Spy reasons not to vote for Bush
Reply-To: barrett@cc.gatech.edu
Organization: Georgia Tech College of Computing
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 14:10:43 GMT

1.  He cheats on his wife.

2.  The JFK Thing.

3.  The Lying-About-JFK Thing.

4.  The War-Hero Thing.

5.  Harry Bluckmun is 84 years old.

6.  If we vote him out, that's one new job created.

7.  His doctor says he should get some rest.

8.  Asked why he wanted a second term, he said, "I think the people want change."

9.  In March 1992 he said, "Change is nothing to fear."

10. In April he said, "The need for reform won't wait."

11. And "We must rekindle a revolution."

12. In seven public appearances in April, he referred to "change" or "reform" 188
times.

13.  The GNP increased an average of only 0.6 percent per year during the first
three years of his presidency.

14. Even if the economy does nine times better this year, he will still have the
worst record of any president since World War II.

15. In January 1992 he said, "I will do what I have to to be reelected."

16. A campaign official said, "We'll stoop to whatever is necessary to win."

17. When schoolchildren chanted, "Read my lips: no new taxes," he whined about
"attack-dog politics."

18. He told newspaper editors that the 1992 presidential campaign was the
"ugliest" he'd ever seen.

19. He added that "we've tried to have most of our positive."

20. He said he'd "instructed his people to stay out of the sleaze business."
------------------OS/2 v2.0 -- Why settle for anything less?--------------------
James C. Barrett (barrett@cc.gatech.edu)| "When I need a little free advice
Georgia Tech College of Computing       |    about Saddam Hussein, I turn to  
                                        |    country music." -Bush, Oct 1990
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: Dole attack backfires
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:46:05 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.155500.13833@cshl.org> pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo) writes:
>	Political panic sometimes brings out Senator Dole's dark side.

On Evans & Novak today, he assumed his attack dog role:

	1) Clinton was "disingenuous" about his handling of the Vietnam
           draft issue.

	2) Gore's support for the Gulf war resolution was self-serving.

	3) Gore was only a journalist in Vietnam anyway.

	4) Gore is a Ted Kennedy clone. 

	5) Dan Quayle helps the ticket because he's a good conservative
           whereas the Dem ticket is liberal, liberal, liberal...

        6) The liberal media has adopted the Clinton/Gore ticket and
           unfairly attacked Bush/Quayle.

Even Evans and Novak weren't buying it.

Dole says that the only reason people are second-guessing Bush is that he
is 30 points down in the polls. If Bush were 30 points up in the polls, says
Dole, he wouldn't be getting any criticism at all!

Duh, yeah.

And the good Senator estimates that the lead is really only about 10%. Where
he gets this, who knows. Maybe he's figuring the 20% undecideds are all Bush
voters.

---
Joe Knapp     jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Don M. Gibson)
Subject: Re: CLinton Re: Question about Clinton's "didn't inhale" remark
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:46:01 GMT

pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:

>In article <1992Jul28.224631.14115@tss.com> burke@tss.com (Jim Burke) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul28.134136.20160@cos.com>, bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
>>|> >	The real reason for two-wage earner families
>>|> >	is the huge TAX load that we all pay; is that
>>|> >	exclusively the fault of George Bush, or does
>>|> >	the Democratic-party controlled Congress have
>>|> >	just a little bit to do with it?
>>
>>Again, I would add that Carter inherited a horrible inflationary
>>spiral from the Ford/Nixon regime.

>.... of 4%.

average CPI yearly increase from '70->'75 was 8%.
average CPI yearly increase from '75->'80 was 11%.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: California Fields Poll
Date: 31 Jul 92 15:58:12 GMT
Reply-To: pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar

In article <1992Jul30.175204.23390@udel.edu> lintz@buster.cis.udel.edu (Brian Lintz) writes:
>In article <l7ej71INNn28@roundup.crhc.uiuc.edu> sunder@altair.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder) writes:
>>The California Fields Poll shows Bush to be lagging
>>34 percentage points behind Clinton, which is the
>>largest gap ever in the polling history of the 
>>organization. It is a state-wide poll.
>>
>>Clinton gets 62%, Bush 28% (I guess error margins
>>are irrelevant given the size of the margin).
>
>Also, a poll in Orange County, CA, which hasn't gone democratic since
>FDR, shows Clinton ahead by 7 points. Not to mention that George Will's
>latest column states that many significant republicans wish Bush would
>step down... It's looking real bad for George these days.
>
>Brian Lintz
>lintz@udel.edu


Imagine the energizing effect of a Jack Kemp/Vin Weber ticket...


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Perot sued!!
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:35:00 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.164952.2848@amhux2.amherst.edu>,
twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
|>In article <l6m8vmINNva@roundup.crhc.uiuc.edu>
|>sunder@altair.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder) writes:
|>
|>>One of Perot's ex-supporters, a Miami woman named Michelle
|>Alexander,
|>>has filed suit against Ross Perot for having broken his promise to
|>run
|>>for President. It is supposedly a class-action suit.
|>>
|>>Talk of frivolous lawsuits!!!
|>
|>When Pete Wilson of California vetoed AB101, a supporter of his who
|>had donated $4,000 to his campaign on the basis of his promise to
|>sign
|>was given a refund.  It doesn't sound entirely unheard-of.

Is it just me or does that sound like a bribe?

I am most amazed that such a situation could happen since donnating
money to a candidate on condition that he vote in a particular way is a
bribe and hence illegal. Thus the contract was illegal. What if some PAC
(or concert party of such) gave several $ million to a Senator on the
understanding that he bring back prohibition? Since the actions of
legislators are privilaged I do not see how there is a possibility of a
contract occuring.

Perot asking for support to stand is entirely legal though so this
objection would not apply.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pssres12@ucs.usl.edu (Vignes Gerard M)
Subject: It's A Long Time 'Till November, Folks
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:42:19 GMT

	A lot can happen between now and the election.

	Just ask Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, and Michael Dukakis.


					Another Friendly Reminder From,

					Gerard Vignes

-- 

                Mai, y'all hab'en lisd'nen ta d'voice ah

                         RADIO FREE LAFAYETTE
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: One-Third can't spell potato
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:20:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.015955.22262@msc.cornell.edu> hillyard@msc.cornell.edu writes:

>What a masterful move by Quayle, courting the third of the electorate
>that can't spell worth beanes. :)

"Weer not illiterate."
		--sign held by an American commenting about Japanese
		  suggestions to the contrary
From: rjv@a2.cim.cdc.com (Rene Valdes x4660)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Question about Clinton's "didn't inhale" remark
Date: 22 Jul 92 17:50:29 GMT
Reply-To: rjv@a2.cim.cdc.com (Rene Valdes x4660)
Distribution: usa

In article <3443@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul21.035951.8389@news.Hawaii.Edu> blais@milo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Kristin Blais) writes:
|> >
|> >Clinton never said he had an affair. Also at the point the Gennifer 
|> >Flowers affair supposedly took place, He was running for 
|> >re-election-had a ten *month* old daughter. Even the 
|> >Republicans Arkansas say that he was too *obsessed* with his career
|> >to ever jeopardize it that way. Additionally the story is *known*
|> >to have been brought to the press by an old enemy of Bill Clinton,
|> 
|> Ya know Kristin if you're going to support this guy you might want to 
|> brush up on the facts so you don't look quite so silly. 
|> 
|> Ms. Flowers was number thirteen in a string of women (mostly state employees)
|> that have claimed to have affairs with Bill and received a job or promotion
|> to keep quiet.  Secondly these accusations have been around since long before
|> his plan to run for President and it wasn't Republicans that called him on the
|> issue but Democratic state house representatives that had gone as far as suing
|> him for official corruption because of his alleged sex for jobs scam.
|> 
|> Get it right would you.
|> 
|> PSG

You know, Paul, you need to do better than scolding Kristin.  You need to refer
to all the facts, because it is evident that you don't know them or choose to
ignore them to misrepresent Bill Clinton.

The one very important fact you are suppressing is that Ms. Flowers has been
proven to be a liar since she claimed that she had been with Clinton at a certain
time at a hotel that was only build a year later.  Sorry you "forgot" about that!

RJV
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.folklore.urban
From: glitto@iastate.edu (Scott M Klabacha)
Subject: Re: Vacation Time!
Keywords: Ditch Day, vanishing room
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:35:26 GMT

 (Art Nicolaysen) writes:

  [stuff deleted from previous letters about Caltech prank
   to wall up room of unsuspecting, non-present student]

>
>There is an annual "Ditch Day" held in late May, but the object is for
>the frosh to solve elaborate puzzles left for them by the upper
>classes.  These puzzles/obstacles/degrading feats are known as "stacks", 
>after the ***old*** practice of stacking furniture against the door to 
>keep the frosh out of one's room during Ditch Day.
>
>The revenge aspect only enters in if an upperclassman is caught on campus
>after 9am; the offender is punished by being tied to a tree for the whole day.
>
>Every 3 years or so, the local papers rediscover Ditch Day and run an
>article; has anybody seen these published outside of Southern California?
>

If you're referring to thingamabob where the upperclassmen make their rooms as 
difficult to enter as possible, leave something in it which the freshman has to
acquire, and set up a whole series of complex obstacles which the frosh needs
to surmount for success, I haven't just read about it...I've seen a movie!

I can only remember a few details (I saw the film six years ago), but I seem
to recall it being at CalTech, with the students trying to get into
the room using all sorts of complicated electronic and mechanical methods to
get in...remote control devices and flying things in through windows and having
to do things really carefully because of booby traps.

I saw this film in my AP Biology class in high school (really)--in Illinois. 
The film was mostly about Ditch Day, but covered some other things. (At about
the same time, I heard about the "student's room being walled over" story but
I don't remember whether someone actually mentioned it in the film, or whether 
my teacher mentioned it around the same time.)

*****GlittoFern***** glitto@iastate.edu
---.sig under construction---
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: lis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Elisabeth Riba)
Subject: Didn't Inhale--original transcript available?
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 11:30:36 GMT

For all this talk of whether he was lying, previcarating, or being
naively candid, does anyone have the original transcript of that
speech/Q&A session?  I'd like to know exactly HOW that was said.

The way I heard it, he didn't say "he didn't inhale" as an excuse, but
more as a self-deprecating comment.  But I never heard the original
remark.  Perhaps, seeing the context will end some of the debate on
his intentions for that remark.

I also heard from his mother (on last week's Today show) that Bill
Clinton was so sensitive to smoke that he had to leave the house when
she burned leaves.  You may take this as you will--I'm just repeating
her explanation.
-- 
--------------->Elisabeth Anne Riba * lis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu<---------------
"I want to be Robin to Bush's Batman."  Dan Quayle
Quick!  Notify DC.  I think it's time for another 900 number poll.
"We are enjoying a sluggish economy & not enjoying it very much."  --Bush
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.religion.misc