From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Debate results
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 05:49:03 GMT
X-Posted-From: eng-nxt10.cso.uiuc.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

[Stay tuned!  An announcement/plea/advertisement follows this article!]

Well, I think I'll go ahead and throw in my threepence worth on tonight's
joint appearance.  (Sorry, I can't call it a debate.)

As I expected, an awful lot of rhetoric went flying around the airwaves
without much substance.  A lot of vague references were made to proposed
policies, but how much detail can you go into in two minutes while you
are also busy slinging mud?

I must admit that I was impressed with Perot.  Unlike Bush and Clinton,
his comments at least appeared to be frank, straight from the heart, and
relatively unrehearsed.  He came prepared with facts, but I didn't
get the impression that he was regurgitating "just another campaign
speech."  Even though I did get a kick at some of the jabs Bush and
Clinton made at each other, I felt like I was hearing just a short
political mini-speech that had been prepared by some cloistered writer.

I still don't like Perot's positions (yes they'll work in the long run,
but the short run will be the worst times this country has ever seen),
but I gained a lot of respect for the man.  If Perot hadn't dropped
out of the race in July, I think we'd be looking at a mighty interesting
race right about now.

Like I said, I gained quite a bit of respect for Perot.  Respect is
something I don't have for either Clinton or Bush.  I prefer Clinton's
policies (marginally) over Bush's, and I think Bush is a more skilled
politician and diplomat than Clinton, but I just don't like either man.

I also wish that Marrou had been invited to the event.  Granted, I think
he would have come off as sounding like some wacko as compared to
the Big Three, especially on the drug issue, but he is a candidate in
all 50 states.  It seems to me that everyone who has made the ballot
nationwide should be invited to these joint appearances, if only
to give the American public a chance to know that they are out there
and to let them hear what they have to say before Election Day.

IMHO, Perot and Clinton both won in this joint appearance.  Perot won
by not appearing to be a silly old man.  Clinton won by keeping his
head on straight and not stooping to the Republicans' level of 
mudslinging.  Bush lost with his blatant mudslinging, and because he
didn't really say anything new; he sounds to me like he's promoting
the "same story" for another four years.

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.  And, the American People lost, because they did not get 
a true debate, and because some candidates were denied access to the 
forum.

[Begin announcement/non-profit advertisement]

During tonight's joint appearance, on IRC (the Internet Relay Chat), a 
channel was formed for people on IRC watching the debate who wanted to 
discuss what was going on live.  The channel was named #debate, and there
were people monitoring the debate and wrap-up on CNN, PBS, and ABC.

If you have access to an IRC client, and you would like to participate
in "as it happens" discussion during the next joint appearances,
please signon to IRC and /join #debate.  The more people on, the more
interesting it becomes.  (Besides, such "practical" uses of IRC tends
to justify its existence to the program's opponents.  ;)
There were a few too many ultra-liberals on tonight, IMHO.  I'd like
to see a few more moderates and conservatives on voicing their opinions
next time.

If you need information regarding IRC, please check out the alt.irc
newsgroup.  Unless your site has a very short expire time, you will
find instructions on how to compile your own IRC client, and you should
be able to get the addresses of a few people who would be willing
to answer your questions about IRC.

--
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