HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sdl@linus.mitre.org (Steven D. Litvintchouk)
Subject: Re: As the sun sinks slowly in the west
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
	<1992Nov6.181034.1742@cbnews.cb.att.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 22:11:43 GMT


In article <1992Nov6.181034.1742@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:

> Republicans became completely trapped in a philosophy that held that
> government could do nothing, and should do nothing, especially when
> capitalists were impeded in any way. For example: if the Japanese want 
> to buy bulk logs from Oregon, fine, that's the free market... forget 
> about any ramifications on the environment or saw-mill jobs. If government
> is doing something that works, try to badmouth it and dismantle it.
> 
> Their bankruptcy was rejected by both Clinton and Perot, both of whom see
> a more activist role for the government. 

I disagree.  Many Republican conservatives (who had served under
Reagan) have suggested lots of ways for the government to help the
economy: supply-side economics, significant tax cuts, deregulation,
enterprise zones (which now the Democrats and liberals have embraced),
etc.  President Bush is representative of a particular *wing* of the
Republican Party, which believes that the economy isn't in such bad
shape; its problems are merely the usual cyclical ones of the
business cycle.  Thus Bush's proposed remedies for the economy dealt
mostly with cyclical, not longer-term structural, economic problems.

Bush systematically excluded any Republicans or conservatives from his
inner circle who might have disagreed with this course: Arthur Laffer,
Paul Laxalt, Lyn Nofziger, etc.  (cf. "Larry King Live" on Nov. 6).
In fact, nearly all the original economic Reaganites were excluded
from the Bush Administration.

And that's why Bush lost, in my view.  Clinton, Perot, Jerry Brown,
and Pat Buchanan might not agree on many things, but one thing they
all agreed on was that our economy was in serious, structural trouble.
Most Americans agreed with this too.  Bush failed to convince America
that our economic problems were merely a (temporary and relatively
minor) downturn in the business cycle.



--
Steven Litvintchouk
MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road
Bedford, MA  01730

Fone:  (617)271-7753
ARPA:  sdl@mitre.org
UUCP:  linus!sdl
	"Where does he get those wonderful toys?"
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13196 alt.politics.elections:22689
From: stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu (Catherine Stanton)
Subject: Re: We have a winner
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 17:36:25 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.224515.5469@desire.wright.edu> stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.151927.28145@athena.cs.uga.edu>, stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu (Catherine Stanton) writes:
>...
>> Muahahahahhaha....yeah yeah yeah Oh now you have credibility with me.
>> I'm also a realist who's ancesteors were amongst this nations founding
>> fathers AND mothers.
>>... 
>	I hereby nominate Cat for most obnoxious newcomer of the month.  Feel
>free to newgroup alt.fan.catherine-stanton.

Yeah right.  If I'm the MOST obnoxious, I'd hate to see the runner ups.

>	Cat, you are the empitomy of cowardice.

Oh really?

>	Insulting people on the net, then refusing to reply, then "bouncing"
>their email back to them.  And you have the gall to insinuate that you're above
>all that.

No, I didn't refuse to reply.  This got on to one of YOUR groups cause I
read alt.fan.dan-quayle.  I just refuse to get mired in email wars and post
wars any longer because Clinton has won.  And furthermore Brett, I AM above
Mr. Davis' hateful attitude towards women and all other people who aren't of
his race.       

Brett dear, give it up okay?  If you've got something personal against ME
go for it, but quit attacking me because I refuse to engage in petty little
arguments with you via email or news.

Cat


Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13480 alt.politics.elections:23058 alt.rush-limbaugh:9217
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Gov of Texas in 1994? Re: check THIS guy out
Date: 7 Nov 92 18:23:26 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

andy@cmptrc.lonestar.org (Andy Hart) writes:
?(Patrick Taylor) writes:
?>Get rid of Ann Richards NOW!
?  Now, *this* may be an idea.
?> PEROT IN '96!
?  No Thanks!

What if Ross ran for Governor of Texas against Ann? Hmm...
(Ross has about the same personality as Clayton Williams, who was
Richards's Republican opponent, but Ross has a bit more money.)

Thoughts?
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
	My humor button seems to blinking randomly. Read at your own risk.
I don't have to have a 4.0 GPA to succeed in life because I'm 
good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13838 alt.fan.dan-quayle:6687 talk.bizarre:37910
From: grendel@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Blood Clot Boy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: FOUR MORE YEARS!!!
Date: 13 Nov 1992 06:03:11 GMT
Organization: The International House of Secretions
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <BxKKn3.H8o@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (REAL LIFE?!?!  HA!!) writes:
*<RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
*>In article <1992Nov4.013750.10169@tc.cornell.edu>, mdw@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU
*>(Matt Welsh) says:
*>>
*>Thank you Bill!  Thank you Bill!  Congratulations!!!!!  Our turn for
*>12 years!!!!  Clinton '92 / Clinton '96 / Gore '00!!!!!!!!!!!  Way to go
*>America!
*
*Everybody knows that in 2000, Madonna and Ann Richards will be elected from
*the Democratic ticket.  Gore doesn't get HIS turn 'til '08.  Mark my words.
*
*And a great big :)

Oh, really?  I thought you were serious.  Silly me.  Thanks for clearing 
things up.


Mark "And keep it the fuck out of talk.bizarre" Lippert 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: ssc@nwu.edu (Steven Chung)
Subject: Re: Mr. Waffle King (the Dodger)
Originator: schung@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:10:59 GMT

In article <Bx8As9.6q4@beach.csulb.edu> sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:
# In article <Bx7x0C.Hx1@ns1.nodak.edu> csmith@plains.NoDak.edu (Carl Smith) writes:
# >In article <1992Nov4.194407.9787@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
# >>
# >>Fine, go ahead and sulk. But, the majority has spoken. That is the
# >>democratic way. 
# >
# >Yup.  The majority has spoken.  And the majority DID NOT VOTE FOR CLINTON.
# >57% of the poeple voted for someone OTHER THAN Clinton.  So now we have
# >a president elect that the majority of the people did not want in office.
# >
# 
#   Faulty reasoning. The ballot only allows you to choose one candidate that
# you prefer/want most. It does not allow second choices (presumably based
# upon some weighting system). Therefore, it is invalid to conclude that a
# majority did not want/would not find acceptable Bill Clinton, only that he
# was not the first choice of a majority.

Wishful thinking on your part, as polls show 54% concerned or scared of the
Clinton presidency.
Sure Clinton is president-elect, but that doesn't mean everyone has to like
it, or that a majority do.

-- 
ssc@nwu.edu | Quid est, Catulle?  Quid moraris emori? (Catullus 52)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Re: January Surprise
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:38:39 GMT

As someone who dislikes Bush immensely, I don't think his
performance in GATT is his most vulnerable - the Europeans
have some very protectionist policies, and I think Bush has
done a pretty good job on this one (from the little I've
observed - I'm no trade expert).  And it has been a long-brewing
process, not just an elecion-year standoff.
-- 
{{{{ bill eldridge                                       x                }}}}
{{{{ bill@cognet.ucla.edu    310-206-3960               xxx              }}}}
{{{{ ~more, ~better, ~faster [80's motto]                x              }}}}
{{{{ ~hot, ~toxic, and ~shallow [90's motto]                              }}}}
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13224 alt.fan.dan-quayle:6314 talk.bizarre:36909
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: FOUR MORE YEARS!!!
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:50:40 GMT
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other THings

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes: >
peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes: >>
<RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu> writes: >>>
>>
>>>Congratulations!!!!!  Our turn for
>>>12 years!!!!  Clinton '92 / Clinton '96 / Gore '00!!!!!!!!!!!  Way to go
>>>America!  
>>
>>What, only one term for Ozone?
>
>Gore will be revealed to be from the planet Krypton, and therefore not
>a US citizen.  Vice President Russ Feingold becomes President in '02,
>and wins the next two elections.  The GOP doesn't see the Oval Office
>until 2012, a time in the wilderness equivalent to FDR/Truman.

You mean Vice President Dianne Feinstein. :-)


-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13607 alt.politics.clinton:16570 alt.politics.elections:23248 alt.politics.perot:5364 alt.fan.dan-quayle:6532
From: foy@aero.org (Richard Foy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Remember ...
Date: 9 Nov 1992 20:57:13 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: aerospace.aero.org

In article <1992Nov6.171504.29961@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
...
>
>Oh.  So Algore has a brain even though that brain believes that 
>leopards have stripes and the automobile is the most dangerous  
>weapon on the planet? 
>

It is true of course that cars kill more people in the US than any
other weapon.

Richard Foy  Redondo Beach, CA         Standard Disclaimer


>Ted
>
>-- 
>            
>
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu


Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13658 alt.politics.clinton:16679 alt.politics.elections:23330 alt.politics.perot:5389 alt.fan.dan-quayle:6544
From: jks2x@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (Jason K. Schechner)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Remember ...
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:25:02 GMT
Followup-To: misc.test
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <1992Nov6.171504.29961@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>In article <1992Nov2.193427.24394@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov2.173828.9686@b11.b11.ingr.com> Jeff Kilpatrick,
>>jeff@jlk.b11.ingr.com writes:
>>>In article <1992Nov1.174742.6518@u.washington.edu>, 
>>>sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>>>|> A vote for George Bush is a vote for Dan Quayle.
>>>|> 
>>>  It could be much worse; Al Gore could be VP.  
>>
>>Yeah, God help us if we actually had a VP with a brain.  :-/
>>
>>Norman
>>
>>Dr. Norman J. LaFave
>>Senior Engineer
>>Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company
>
>Oh.  So Algore has a brain even though that brain believes that 
>leopards have stripes and the automobile is the most dangerous  
>weapon on the planet? 
>
>Ted
>
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu

	It must be wonderful being this stupid.  Do you buy everything
the republicon party says hook, line and sinker?  He never said that
automobiles are "the most dangerous weapon", what he did say is that
automobiles are one of the most destructive machines ever made, which
is true.  Do you know what is in automobile exhaust, Ted?  It isn't
the kind of things you want to breathe on a regular basis (but if
you'd like to, I won't stop you).  Now, multiply that times all the
cars on the road today, all over the world and maybe, just maybe, you
can see Al's point.  He's not saying we should stop driving our cars
altogether, but even someone like you can see the sense in driving
them less and making them more efficient.  (let's not get into an
efficiency arguements now either).	
	Secondly, as for the leopard comment.  Everyone has a
brain-fart every now and then.  No one is perfect, not even the VP.
Now, when he has to start putting katsup on his toes like dear old
Dan, then we'll start to worry.  That's why we rail on Quayle so much
- not because he messes up, but because he does it so regularly.


-Jason

-- 
"I sneak in my own house... it's 4 in the morning... I've had too much to 
drink... said I was out with the boys... I sneak in my bedroom... slip 
into bed... I know if I wake her, I'll wake up.... DEAD!"
   							-Dave Mustaine
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton
From: rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade)
Subject: Re: Na na, na na na na, Hey hey hey , good bye
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:32:30 GMT

In article <LARRY.92Nov9121509@boris.webo.dg.com> larry@boris.webo.dg.com (Larry Rogers) writes:
>
>
>We cannot afford welfare health care in this country at this time.  We
>can neither afford an ill-conceived growth program based on monies
>that are not there.  Clinton may succeed by trying a different
>approach.  We will see.  In the meantime, lock in those mortgage
>rates; we are in for a bumpy ride.
>
>Larry

wow larry, you know it all.  what lotto number should i buy for saturdays
drawing?  how many millions have you made in the stock market with all your
expertise??
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness)
Subject: Re: How times change
Organization: SSDT SPS, Motorola Inc., Austin TX
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 18:11:02 GMT

In article <1dbftuINNse3@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac) writes:
>
>  Remember how a few weeks ago when the stock market had an overall 
>drop of 20 points for the day, the Clinton "we're not going negative" 
>campaign yelled that the business community had rejected the Bush
>Presidency, and the "unbiased" media led the evening news blasting Bush 
>for the stock plunge.  Gee, isn't it strange that when the stock market
>drops 30 points the day after Clinton is elected we don't hear the
>"honorable" Clinton forces coming out and saying that business has rejected
>Bill Clinton.  Why isn't he withdrawing from the Presidency?  After all, he
>is already a failure based on his own criteria.  And isn't it funny how the
>"we're defenders of truth" media relegated yesterday's stock plunge story
>to a ten second slot right before a commercial, halfway through the news?


Isn't it also funny how all the recent good news on the economy ....
productivity up sharply in the third quarter, drop in the unemployment
rate again, other good signs on the housing front ...
all these suddenly suggest a brand new day, while before the
good news was just blips on an otherwise grim scene.

The paper sure is reporting it differently.
I guess they don't have George to kick around any more. :-)

Pat


>Richard Mulac                                       ck347@cleveland.freenet.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>       1996 election countdown - 1461 more days         | These pontifications 
> until the Democrats are thrown out of the White House  |      are my own!     

Abe Lincoln's comment that a President can't do too much damage in 4 years
will be *sorely* tested.

"Visualize Kemp President."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Dear Republicans
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:48:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.150214.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.203511.12221@pwcs.stpaul.gov>, chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
> 
>> Remaining in power is problematic considering that the White House and
>> Congress will both be controlled by Democrats.
>
> Here you are in error. The people that voted against Clinton are in a mjority
>still. Therefore, by definition, WE are still inpower. Last time I checked the
		   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>US is still a democracy. You know, "Rule by the people." 

Certainly the ones who voted against Bush are legion compared to those
voting against Clinton.  I'm exaggerating somewhat, but, still, 3/5th
of the people voted against the sitting President, the one in power.
Bush received a smaller portion of the vote than Herbert Hoover,
hardly a clarion call to keep him in the Oval Office.





And gentlemen in England now abed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speak
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.	   [Henry V, 4.3]
From: cjk@nic.cerf.net
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Just for a moment
Date: 8 Nov 92 18:46:37 GMT
Organization: CERFnet

In article <BxDsyo.3pw@cs.uiuc.edu> watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe) writes:
>Whoa. Are you saying that higher interest rates would benefit 
>the economy, because it would make loans more profitable,
>and thus more loans would be made to businesses, improving
>productivity?

I'm saying that interest rates that are too low force 
money into the stock market, inflating the stock market
above and beyond what it should be.

>A higher interest rate can make it much more difficult for 
>a business to survive, because it is more difficult to pay
>the interest on its long-term debt.

Not if it is a healthy company with a good product or 
service to offer.  With good long term planning this would
not be a problem. (In most cases).  And thats what the 
Risk - Reward system.  The more risky the venture, the
greater the return and costlier.  And besides, I'm not
talking 15% or anything, just enought to get people
out of the market and into capitol ventures.

>It may be true that money made in the stock market
>produces nothing, but neither does the interest on loans.
>The money made in the stock market goes to the stockholders,
>and the interest on loans goes to the lender.

The money lent is what produces.  The interest is the payoff.
I'd rather have the money loaned to business ventures that
produce jobs, taxes, and manufactured goods.  In order to do
this the people who lend must be given incentives.

>The money raised through offering shares, and the money
>raised through getting a loan, both allow a company
>to grow and expand.

Existing shares far outnumber new offerings, and don't usualy
go to the company.  There are some examples like when a company
issues new shares and such, or sells portions of it company off.
But most shares are traded between individual investers who are 
in-effect gambling on a companies bottom line, rather than 
investing it.

>-Larry Watanabe

Chris Kevlahan
cjk@cerf.net

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: jacksonk@regulus.cs.rpi.edu (Keith Jackson)
Subject: Re: Gov of Texas in 1994? Re: check THIS guy out
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:17:13 GMT

In article <6781@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>andy@cmptrc.lonestar.org (Andy Hart) writes:
>?(Patrick Taylor) writes:
>?>Get rid of Ann Richards NOW!
>?  Now, *this* may be an idea.

Yes!  Ann Bitchards is sleezy politician incarnated.  I get shivers
just listening to her annoying voice.  Visions of "Damien : The Omen III"
come to mind!  (OK, so I exaggerate, a LITTLE BIT!)

>?> PEROT IN '96!
>?  No Thanks!

And why not?  After Will-billy and The Ozone-boy-wonder get through
screwing up the economy, we'll need a real business man to save us.
Besides, I think Ross will have the sense to pull our troops out of
Bosnia ;^)

>What if Ross ran for Governor of Texas against Ann? Hmm...
>(Ross has about the same personality as Clayton Williams, who was
>Richards's Republican opponent, but Ross has a bit more money.)

>Thoughts?

More than money, he has a lot more sense.  As long as he doesn't make
jokes about rape he would be allright.  Then again, the govenorship of
Texas is a step down from being the most voted-for independent since
T. Roosevelt.  In plain Texas talk : "You don't sell your car to buy a
horse!"
-- 
__ __  ____ ______ ______ __  __ 	Keith Jackson
|| // ||    | || | | || | ||  ||
||<<  ||==    ||     ||   ||==||	jacksonk@cs.rpi.edu
|| \\ ||___ |_||_|   ||   ||  ||
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Mr. Waffle King (the Dodger)
X-Xxdate: Thu, 12 Nov 92 11:23:27 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:26:45 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.200746.3121@nic.csu.net> j. tinkle,
jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu writes:
>Gotta tell ya, Doc.  I find this one way too hard to believe.  I'm not
rich
>either, and I'm a student in school.  Usually the poor and lower middle
class
>students are racial minorities right?  Well, at my school, I can't get a
>grant or scholarship because I'm white and in a major that offers no
scholar-
>ships.  I'm female, but that doesn't help.  See, I'm white, so I can't
>possibly be underpriviledged.  I live at home, and I pay my tuition.  But
>my father makes too much money now that he's retired for me to qualify.
>All the scholarships always go to black and latino female students.
>I don't hate them for it, I think it's great; but I'm getting screwed for
>being middle class.

Actually Jennifer, you made my point for me. It used to be quite easy for
middle class people of all races to get scholarships, grants, and loans.
This
is no longer the case. Many talented individuals are being denied the
opportunity
to better their station. Note that race had nothing to do with my point.

Norman

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




When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13737 alt.politics.clinton:16812 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8358 alt.rush-limbaugh:9426
From: jccompto@eos.ncsu.edu (JAMES C COMPTON)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: What is a Conservative?
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:15:34 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Nov10.230134.26099@Cadence.COM>, phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov2.152813.21375@anasazi.com> best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
|> >Conservatives believe in limited government and the empowerment of the 
|> >individual (the sanctity of individual rights a la Locke) to allow people
|> >the freedom to seek their own happiness rather than to stand in a line
|> >at a federal office waiting to receive what the liberals have deemed as
|> >todays portion of happiness.
|> 
|> A True Conservative (tm) would be against the RICO seizure statutes, against
|> keeping drugs illegal, against keeping prostitution illegal, against making
|> abortion illegal, against forced prayer in schools, etc., etc., etc.

A conservative would support prostitution and drug legalization?
 
|> -Pete Zakel
|>  (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)
|> 
|> Everything you know is wrong!

No, I'm not the one that's wrong.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh