HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mwette@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Matt Wette)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: socialism (was B isa MF)
Date: 1 Oct 92 14:31:12 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Originator: mwette@mr-ed


In article <1992Sep30.085315.613@ida.liu.se>, brant@ida.liu.se (Brant Cheikes) writes:
|> As an American who has been living in Sweden for just over a year, I
|> couldn't let this nonsense pass:
|> 
|> mwette@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Matt Wette) writes:
|> >Carrying on an intellectual discussion is one thing, but how about an
|> >example of (i.e., a country where) these programs actuall work?  When
|> >I see statements like [in a previous article] I think of Sweden,
|> >where everyone gets 
|> >guaranteed housing and health care.  Nice, isn't it? By the way,
|> >Sweden has an income tax rate of 85% and a >50% unemployment rate.
|> >Socialism is a loser.   Is this what you want for the US?
|> 
|> Sorry, but the income tax rate here is more like 35%, and current
|> unemployment figures are in the 4-5% range.  Time to get off the
|> controlled substances.

Yes -- I screwed up.  Apologies to all Swedes and thanks to Brant for
not frying my butt.

I recalled this stuff from a article I read in the LA Times about six
months ago.  The article was concerned with gov't housing and medical
care programs in Europe, and how many countries are rethinking them.  I
screwed up on the country , but I'm pretty sure I remember the figures
correctly.  Anybody know which country (in Europe) fits?

Matt
--
mwette@csi.jpl.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 05:00:48 GMT


No one wants to acknowledge it when I provide proof that I'm not a neo-nazi
or whatever the word of the week is.  When my comments aren't racist, I'm still
accused of being one.  In one instance, I said that a good step towards solving
racial problems would be for everyone to stop blaming each other and look at
ourselves individually, and to look to the future, and put the past behind us.
I got yelled at about that!! I was talking about looking beyond race, and to
look at ourselves as people, and that's still a bigoted remark.

There's no way to win.  My remarks were very sincere, no one cared though.
Simon
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 01:52:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.095613.5527@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:

>			   I have personally lost track of all the times
>my rights to free speech wee taken away. I've been denounced as a racist
>merely because I oppose the welfare system, I got in trouble in high school
>for promoting our space program, and one time I was called a racist bigot
>because I called the rioters in LA murderers and thieves.  That's hyprocrisy!

	I've read your posts, and I'm not surprised that you feel this way.
Regardless of how you speak, your opinions tend to sound very narrow minded
when you put them into print. You are also an idealist, and so your views
don't tend to jive with what other people percieve as reality. To wit:

	I suspect that, when you describe the LA Riots, you catagorized
everybody involved as a simple criminal, and refused to acnowlege any
social pressures that might be involved. This simple argument was interpreted
in a simple way, (ie: racism) and that was the end of the communication.

	The 'racist' label was incorrectly applied, but the slander is no
worse than your own reasoning. You, like Rush Limbaugh, tend to express
your views in extreamly simply terms, ignoring complexities like the social
currents that drove the LA Riots. Discounting the riots as simple criminal
behavior is a rediculous oversimplification, and while it's not racist, 
it's not much better.

	I'm aware that I've put words in your mouth, and I don't mean to
misrepresent you. I used this example because it fits with your postings,
and even if you didn't say it, you've said similar things, with a similar
result. In short, I think that you get treated like a narrow minded bigot
because you are narrow minded, and people assume that you have other defects
as well.

	I hope this helps.


-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
  "[Ronald Reagans] support of George Bush is absolutely not as lukewarm
  and halfhearted as it appears"  -- Ed Meese 1992

Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: cea1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Carolyn E. Adams-Price)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 19:12:44 GMT

And....to all of you who think the problem with the US is
business regulation, I say, I hope you drown in the pollution
or are hurt by an end to safety standards that an end to business
regulation would cause!!!!!

Carolyn Adams-Price
Department of Psychology
Mississippi State University


Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: walsh@spider.wri.com (Jerry Walsh)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! statements
Organization: Wolfram Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 05:39:34 GMT

It is quite safe to say that there are numerous political
subcultures that tend to produce annoying selfrighteous
idealogues.  Some are liberal and some are conservative;
there are bigots in every group.

But when people react by indiscriminately labeling and
condemning people as "eco-freaks" and so forth, that
perpetuates narrow-minded attitudes.

By the way, if someone calls you a racist for caliing
rioters criminals, that may be unfair, but it
does not infringe on your right of free speech.  You
speak freely, and they speak freely back.

----
Jer. Walsh
walsh@wri.com
From: aa001@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Tom Grundner)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
Subject: Campaign '92 Documents Available--FREE
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:19:29 GMT
Reply-To: aa001@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Tom Grundner)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu



   The National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN), is pleased to 
announce a new service for the duration of Campaign '92.

   We are teaming-up with the American Cybercasting Corporation to 
provide special Campaign '92 newsgroups to Internet hosts anywhere 
in the world--for FREE.

   These will be special moderated newsgroups containing the full-
text of the position papers, speeches, press releases, fact 
sheets, (and anything else we can obtain) from the campaigns of 
the REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, and LIBERTARIAN parties.  Each item will 
be carried complete and un-cut, and each is obtained directly from 
official sources within the respective campaigns.  (These are NOT 
discussion groups--you can get that in alt.politics.<whatever>.  
They are moderated newsgroups containing pure campaign information 
for your study and analysis.  You can argue about it somewhere 
else.)

   These special newsgroups will be delivered directly to your
host system by ACC.  The value is obvious for political science 
classes, students, faculty, staff, and anyone else who wants the
FULL story and not just sound-bites and factoids.

   To obtain the newsgroups, have some decision-maker at your 
computing center send an e.mail message to: usa@americast.com 
and all will be made manifest by return e.mail.  The message
MUST contain the name, title, and institution of the person
making the request somewhere in it.

   To repeat, there is no charge to receive this service from
American Cybercasting (although donations to NPTN will be 
gratefully accepted).

-- 
T.M. Grundner, Ed.D
President, National Public Telecomputing Network
Box 1987
Cleveland, Ohio 44106 - e.mail: tmg@nptn.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: brant@ida.liu.se (Brant Cheikes)
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
Organization: CIS Dept, Univ of Linkoping, Sweden
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 08:53:15 GMT

As an American who has been living in Sweden for just over a year, I
couldn't let this nonsense pass:

mwette@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Matt Wette) writes:
>Carrying on an intellectual discussion is one thing, but how about an
>example of (i.e., a country where) these programs actuall work?  When
>I see statements like [in a previous article] I think of Sweden,
>where everyone gets 
>guaranteed housing and health care.  Nice, isn't it? By the way,
>Sweden has an income tax rate of 85% and a >50% unemployment rate.
>Socialism is a loser.   Is this what you want for the US?

Sorry, but the income tax rate here is more like 35%, and current
unemployment figures are in the 4-5% range.  Time to get off the
controlled substances.

Socialism is definitely *not* a loser.  Now, the system here is not
perfect, and arguably would not work in a country as culturally
heterogeneous as the US, but that's a discussion for another time and
place.  But there's enough misinformation about Sweden in the US as it
is; let's not go adding to it.

[I'd be happy to discuss this further in private e-mail if anyone's
interested.]
--
Brant Cheikes
Internet: brant@ida.liu.se
Department of Computer and Information Science
University of Linkoping, S-581 83 Linkoping, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: merlyn@digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! statements
Organization: DigiBoard Incorporated, Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1992 02:17:36 GMT

sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>			   I have personally lost track of all the times
>my rights to free speech were taken away. I've been denounced as a racist
>merely because I oppose the welfare system, I got in trouble in high school
>for promoting our space program, and one time I was called a racist bigot
>because I called the rioters in LA murderers and thieves.  That's hyprocrisy!

You have obviously mistaken "Freedom of speech" with "Freedom from criticism".
Your right to free speech was not taken away.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Newsgroups: alt.politics.democrats.d
From: cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! statements
Originator: cs911461@a02.ariel.yorku.ca
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Distribution: york
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:35:53 GMT


In article <LABACH.92Oct6084859@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>, labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct2.000441.27536@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>
>> cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR) writes: 
>> > 
>> > There is a debate currently going on at this stupid university (York U,
>> > Toronto, Ont. Canada) about supporting the bid for the ISU (International
>> > Space University).  All the peaceniks have hijacked the process screaming
>> > such claims that we're about to become an arm of the US military-industrial
>> > alliance.  Of course this is bullshit; the US military would never fund
>> > anything at a university where the faculty/student bodies could include
>> > Cubans, Chinese, Iraqis or worse still, Canadians.
>> 
>> Well, the University Department I'm in has received many contracts from
>> the US and Canadian militaries, and we have students from mainland
>> China, Eastern Europe, the United States, and Canada.

	Are these visa students directly employed to do top secret
	military work?  I doubt it.  Admit it, you've over-simplified
	the facts to suit your version of reality.  Talk about a
	Canadian tradition.
 
>> Of course, I'm sure the fact that a blatant counter-example like this to
>> your paranoid fantasies won't change your mind.  (WHY do they let
>> undergraduates post to Usenet?)

	You're assuming that undergrads are garbage just like you
	assume WASPs are garbage... predjudiced faux-liberal.

>> > It such a sad situation you wouldn't believe it.  People are actually
>> > listening to the bad rhetoric and brainless crap these hippies are
>> > saying.  Of course, science students are all in favour for it and it's
>> > usually humanities and fine arts who oppose it.  If someone were to make
>> > a perfectly legitimate statement like: "Science is science; there is no
>> > such thing as 'military' science", they'll tar and feather you.
>> 
>> Of course, people like Einstein and Oppenheimer wouldn't agree with you,
>> but they probably wouldn't count as scientists to you because they
>> didn't listen to Rush.

	Oh yeah?  Quote them!


C. Armour-Kidson
cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14578 alt.politics.clinton:7683 alt.politics.bush:7079
From: robart@agora.rain.com (Robert Barton)
Subject: Re: Larry Agran?
Organization: Organization
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 00:32:15 GMT

In article <ya!p74m.saf@netcom.com> saf@netcom.com (Steve A. Feinstein) writes:
>
>Candidate named Larry Agran.  He was on the primary ballots in 40
>states, but aparently the media ignored him.  Even going so far as to
>crop him out of pictures in the N.Y. Times.
>
>I was very intrigued by this story and I'd like to learn more, does
>anyone know more about this, and perhaps is there an address where I
>can write to find out what this guy is/was all about?

  Yes, just ask Harel.

Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14609 soc.culture.african.american:9561
From: FKR@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Pres Bush is Coming to Penn State
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:17:38 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

Robert,

I have cums once a month. The chem dept here offers 4 cums every month and
the grad cmte suggests their grad students try to take one a month. I have
2 years to pass 6 exams. That works out to be 6 cums passed in 2 years.
I think I can do that :-)

Fred Rozenblad       *
FKR@psuvm.psu.edu    * Why would anybody want to get a PhD in Chemistry?
                     *
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Bo Gritz info
Date: Sun,  4 Oct 92 10:27:02 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

>Briefly, Gritz is a vicious anti-communist

I suppose that makes Elie Wiesel a "vicious" anti-Nazi.


    Alan T. Furman         | VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!  Marrou/Lord in 92!!
---------------------------+----------------------------------------
  atfurman@cup.portal.com  |   (800)682-1776 for more information
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15282 alt.politics.clinton:8622 alt.politics.bush:7833
From: ric@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU (Ric Miller  ACNS)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Mr Bush or Pres. Bush?
Date: 6 Oct 92 14:39:30 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

In article <1992Oct05.165519.4109@watson.ibm.com> born@scepter.raleigh.ibm.com (Christopher J. Born) writes:
>Mr.  Bush or President Bush?  About 3-4 weeks ago in US News and 
>World Report's Washington Wispers column reported that the 
>Clinton campaign was putting out the word that they wanted to 
>stop referring to Bush as President Bush and start referring to 
>him as Mr. Bush, to help diminish his stature.  Supposedly, the 
>media has come on board with this.  Has anybody noticed this 
>usage (blatantly) by the media?
>
>If this is true, it is real sneaky!
>--
>Christopher J. Born
>
>born@ralvm48.vnet.ibm.com

   This is nothing new, the party out of power has always done this.
   I have not noticed the media "blatantly" doing this.  The question
   is "What title do we want him to have for the next four years".  
   This country needs a President that is willing to lead and not just
   react.  Is this Mr. Bush?   
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
From: cortez@milton.u.washington.edu (Tom Warner)
Subject: Re: Secord says Bush is lying about Iran-Contra
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 05:15:54 GMT

>In article <19ub11INNrjc@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>  dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon) writes:

>> In interviews with the Associated Press, retired Air Force Major General
>> Richard Secord says that Vice President Bush was briefed by Israeli official
>> Amiram Nir on the plans to sell arms to Iran in exchange for release of
>> U.S. hostages. A former National Security Council staffer, Howard Teicher,
>> also asserted that he "briefed the Vice-President several times" about
>> the plan. Teicher and Secord appeared on ABC Nightline Thursday night.
>> 
>> Secord was convicted and sentenced to probation for giving false
>> information to congressional investigators about the Iran-Contra affair.
>> He pled guilty to the offence. Teicher was not charged in the 
>> investigation.

It's good to see this made an issue, even if Nir's briefing is old news,
and Secord and Teicher are only pulling out a few more bones from
the closet. Mr. Bush happens to be running a campaign right now; one that
he says is about "who you can trust." The press should have been hounding
him from day one and doing the investigative work themselves instead of
standing around waiting for announcements from Walsh or Secord.


Here's one thing the press hasn't reported this campaign season:

Some time after Nir died in a plane crash in Mexico, his widow's home
in Israel was ransacked and his personal records collection stolen.
The thieves took nothing else of value.

Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14823 alt.politics.clinton:8032 alt.politics.bush:7380
From: yount@crchh473.BNR.CA (Jeff Yount)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: More Bush cowardice.
Date: 1 Oct 92 14:24:47 GMT
Reply-To: yount@crchh473.BNR.CA (Jeff Yount)
Organization: BNR

So we know that Chicken George wouldn't face the American
people at Penn State or anywhere else he goes. And
we keep hearing TV Reporters and talk show hosts say those
words that are etched into our memory forever: "We have
invited President Bush to participate in our discussion,
but he has refused." And we hear that Bush will be going
on Larry King Live. But not live. And he will not be 
taking any calls. Now we find out that the Bush
campaign has a black list of reporters that George is
afraid of. This appeared in the local paper Tuesday:

---
President Bush is refusing to do one-on-one interviews with
at least five prominent network reporters, 60 Minutes 
Correspondent Lesley Stahl says. Ms. Stahl told the 
national Radio-Television News Directors Association
convention in San Antonio that she had been told the list
includes CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather, World News
Tonight anchor Peter Jennings, Today co-host Bryant
Gumbel, Meet The Press moderator Tim Russert, and
conservative commentator George Will, a regular on This
Week With David Brinkley.
---

How can we look up to a President who is even afraid
of Bryant Gumbel?!?
However, now that this list is public, I would expect
the Bush campaign to agree to some kind of interview 
with one of these people soon. If I were on the list
I would be calling today. 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Prediction
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:21:36 GMT

In article <2598@tymix.Tymnet.COM> filfeit@rael.Tymnet.COM writes:
>
>I predict (and I've never been right yet B-) that Perot will attend the
>first debate, and find a reason to miss the next two.  Either he'll
>decide the debates aren't about the issues (he'd be right), or he'll
>decide that the people aren't interested in debates, or he'll declare
>that B or C agree closely enough with him that he needn't run any futher, 
>or that both B & C are discussing his issues and he isn't needed.
>
>In any event, I don't think Perot will do well in the debates.  And
>I think that's gonna really piss him off.
>
>--f2

This may be a chance for your first predictive success. :-)
Throughout the campaign (or non-campaign) HRP has been very testy
when asked questions about topics which he did not regard
as "real issues".  Since his resurrection on Friday, he
also has responded to well-formed questions about specific policies
spelled out in UWS with his usual petulance and disdain.
If he carries this attitude into the debates, he
will get TROUNCED.  

Can't wait ...

-- 
| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |
From: fay@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: agents of change
Date: 5 Oct 92 12:39:45 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

A vote that is not for Clinton is a vote for Bush.

That may not be how you intend it, but that's how it will be.

If you say that you know that your candidate won't win, but that you're voting
for him or her because "it's the right thing", does that right thing include
giving Bush four more years?

Of course, if you want Bush, that's your right.  This is directed at those
voting for Marrou, Perot, Fallani, etc....

A vote that is not for Clinton is a vote for Bush.


Bucky



P.S.  Not voting at all is another vote for Bush.

Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15074 talk.politics.misc:49389
From: MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jim McMaster)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Date: 4 Oct 92 16:07:52 GMT
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering

In article <1992Sep29.190346.2694@fid.morgan.com>
joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins) writes:
 
>
>Subject says it all - this number was announced by Perot
>last night on CNN. He asked people to call it if they want
>him to run for President. Over 500,000 calls were logged
>in the first 30 minutes and over a million calls by this
>morning.
>
>If you plan to call, call before Thursday.
>
>If you are undecided, read his book UNITED WE STAND, a current
>bestseller on the NY Times Bestseller list. It also has been posted
>in alt.politics.elections.
>
>Joe
>joec@morgan.com
>
>Usual disclaimers...
>
>
This number is a fraud.  My wife called to say she did *not* want Perot
to run.  The number was answered by a computer-voice which thanked her
for her support and informed her that her call would be tallied in
support of Perot's decision to run.
 
Subtract at least one supporter from this inflated claim.  I wonder how
many others were fooled.
 
Jim McMaster
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections