HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: Calfiornia Aerospace Forums
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Sep 21 1992
Date: 29 Sep 92  08:31:00

California's Aerospace Industry To be the Focus of Forums
 
    The California Space Development Council, a coalition of
pro-space organizations in California, is sponsoring a series of
forums during October to discuss the future of the aerospace
industry in California, and the future direction of America's
space program. 
    On Saturday, October 3, at the Riverside Central Library, 
in downtown Riverside, a congressional candidate forum will be
hosted by the Inland Empire Space Group at 10 am. Among the
candidates invited to the forum are Congressman George Brown,
the current chairman of the House Committee on Space and
Technology, and Dick Rutan, the pilot of the Voyager
around-the-world aircraft. The candidates will address the
issues of preserving aerospace jobs in California, and the
future of the nation's space program.
    On Thursday, October 8, at 7:30 pm at the Reuben H. Fleet Space
Theater in Balboa Park, San Diego, congressional candidates will
discuss aerospace issues and the space program. The event will
be hosted by San Diego L5, a chapter of the National Space
Society.
    On Saturday, October 24, at 10am, at the Sandman Inn, in Santa
Barbara, a forum on the future of the California aerospace
industry will feature representatives of industry and political
figures.
    The general public is invited to attend all of these events and
admission is free.
    For more information on these events or the California Space
Development Council, please contact David Anderman, Events
Coordinator for CSDC, at 714/524-1674.
 

--- Maximus 2.00
Xref: sparky talk.politics.space:1331 sci.space:13793
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space,sci.space
Subject: Re: Clinto and Space Funding
Followup-To: talk.politics.space
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:47:33
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk's message of 30 Sep 92 18:27:10 GMT

In article <BvEMCo.2Kw.1@cs.cmu.edu> amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk writes:

   > and getting your medical
   > system sorted. You can lambast the UK and other Eropean countries for having
   > doctrinally unsound socialised (gasp!) medical systems, but the fact is *our
   > health services are ****cheaper***** in terms of GNP than yours.

   Having experienced both, I prefer the US one. In three years here I have yet to  
   recieve a call from my doctor. Wellness programs are unheard of. And if you need  
   certain classes of operations, you are best off flying to the US and paying for it  
   because you might be dead before your turn in the queue comes up. There ARE NO  
   QUEUES in the US. When a government controls the allocation of resources, they are  
   either under or over supplied.

Having experienced both I prefer the British system, and I prefer the
Scandinavian system to either.
	To say that there are no queues in the US for health care
services is as ludicrous a claim as I have yet seen on Usenet.
What is true is that if you are in one of limited occupations,
especially a public University or a rich private University,
or if you have money/good credit you will get immediate health
care in most places - until your coverage or cash runs out, 
and if the care is not intrinisically supply limited (eg. organ
transplants). Of course unless you're part of a very powerful
customer base, like UC, you better not plan on getting ill
again or being chronically ill as you become uninsurable,
in large part due to a very peculiar attitude in the US
that insurance actually involves more of a pre-payment
installation scheme rather than actual insurance (in which
a large fraction of the contributors by definition do not
recoup their contributions). If you are not one of the fortunate
group you are essentially limited to heavily supply  limited
charity and enormously expensive emergency services, leading
to a large fraction of the population receiving most of
their health care as emergency services, often for routine
maladies that had to wait treatment until they constituted 
an emergency.
	The US health care system is neither caring nor systematic
and quite unhealthy.

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			Lick Observatory      	*
*  steinly@lick.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	*
*  I know people whose idea of fun				*
*  Is throwing stones in the river in the afternoon sun		*
*  Oh let me be as free as them					*
*  				- BB 1986			*

Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: phoenix.Princeton.EDU!carlosn (Carlos G. Niederstrasser)
Subject: Re: Explore->Colonies (Was: Clinton and Space Funding)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 23:00:54 GMT

In article <80834@ut-emx.uucp> wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)  
writes:
> In article <1992Sep25.211355.20297@Princeton.EDU>  writes:
> >
> >After all, Columbus was Spanish, and so the first colonies were Spanish as  
>                      ^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Sorry, but that's wrong. Columbus was from Genoa in Italy.
> 
OK, I've gotten enough responses about this I feel it's time to respond.  As  
far as I know, Columbus was _born_ in Genoa.  If you want to get technical,  
however, this does not make him Italian, this makes him Genovese.  At that time  
Italy was still a cupple of hundred years into the future, Genoa was in a much  
smaller kingdom.  However, my main point was that everything he did he did for,  
and in the name of Spain.  He was what today we would call a Spanish citizen.   
Back then it was equally valid to change your citizenship.  The spanish  
financed the missions, he set up colonies in Spain's name, and did everything  
through Spain, to me that qualfies him more as a Spaniard than a Genovese.  In  
fact he even had the title of Grand Admiral of the Spanish Navy, or some other  
ceremonial thing like that.  His _roots_ were Genovese, but by the time he  
"discovered" the new world, and when he died he was Spanish.  (Granted when he  
died he was an outcasted Spaniard)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
-
> Patrick Chester            |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to  
keep
> wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
> Politically Incorrect      |"The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us
> Future Lunar Colonist      |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
>  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
-


--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
|                                 |   and the reality of tomorrow   |
| carlosn@phoenix.princeton.edu   |---------------------------------|
| space@phoenix.princeton.edu     |    Ad Astra per Ardua Nostra    |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Carlos G. Niederstrasser        |   It is difficult to say what   |
| Princeton Planetary Society     | is impossible; for the dream of |
|                                 | yesterday, is the hope of today |
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: DCX Funding (was: Re: Lunar landing in 2002)
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:41:48 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <BvDLJx.MHE@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:
>Is there any possibility of McDonnell Douglass funding development if no one
>else takes over? ...

McD-D is not really in the best financial health right now, and probably
couldn't spend a billion or so of its own money on such a thing.  That's
comparable to what's needed to start a new major airliner... for a project
with substantially greater technical risk and no guaranteed customers.
(Not even Boeing starts airliner development without firm customer orders,
and Boeing's in much better financial shape.)
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: Clinton and Space Funding
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 21:16:15 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.space
 .com> <1992Sep27.151838.467@ke4zv.uucp><j8#pmzm.tomk@netcom.com> <1992Sep29.131331.8398@ke4zv.uucp>
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

Let me see if I've got this right...

1. Military and aerospace dollars are well spent because they go into
high-paid jobs, so have a high multiplier.

2. Companies that get these dollars are lousy because they're fat and
lazy and make $800 toilet seats.

But surely (1) has something to do with (2)?

Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent)
Subject: Re: DCX Funding (was: Re: Lunar landing in 2002)
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 13:49:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.132110.16812@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>SDI will not pay for DC-Y; that is already well established. The funding
>for DCX will be secure LONG before Clinton or Bush is sworn in.
>
>NASA cannot successfully implement this program. It needs to be moved
>into the Air Force.

The white-world Air Force would have the same problems as NASA.  The only
two agencies that could pull this off are SDIO and DARPA.  (In my opinion.)

Mike

-- 
Michael Kent                                   kentm@rpi.edu
McDonnell Douglas                              Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
All facts in this post are based on publicly available information.  All
opinions expressed are solely those of the author.    Apple II Forever !!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: DCX Funding (was: Re: Lunar landing in 2002)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 14:16:42 GMT

In article <h9jz+!n@rpi.edu> kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes:

>>NASA cannot successfully implement this program. It needs to be moved
>>into the Air Force.

>The white-world Air Force would have the same problems as NASA.  The only
>two agencies that could pull this off are SDIO and DARPA.  (In my opinion.)

I aggree SDIO or DARPA are better suited however SDIO doesn't have the money
and DCY is too big for DARPA. There is however a small group in the Air
Force which does procurement the right way and could execute this program.

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
+----------------------207 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
From: loeb@ai.mit.edu (Eric Loeb)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: (none)
Date: 26 Sep 92 22:39:32 GMT

Subject:  AUTOMATED CLINTON/GORE MAIL SERVICE
 
 Bill Clinton and Al Gore are committed to bringing all Americans 
 into the American political process -- for the good of our country.  
 At this critical time in our country's history it is imperative that 
 we all do everything in our power to make our system work.  
 
 We are happy to announce a new step forward in 21st century 
 democracy: We now have a mail server that will allow you, the 
 internet citizen, to receive on-line campaign documents and send 
 your comments and ideas back to us.
 

 To learn more, send mail to the automated Clinton/Gore mail server 
 
    clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org



 RECEIVE THE LATEST SPEECHES:
 
 If you send the Subject line "info speeches" to the mail server, 
 you will receive all the latest Clinton/Gore speeches as soon as 
 they come on-line.


 RECEIVE ALL AVAILABLE POSITION PAPERS:
 
 If you send the Subject line "info all" to the mail server at, 
 you will receive the full set of Clinton/Gore position papers.


 QUERY THE CANIDATES -- INTERNET POLL:
 
 If you have a question for Bill Clinton or Al Gore, then send your
 question to the mail server ("clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org")
 with the Subject line "question propose".  

 Send the Subject line "question get" to get the current numbered 
 list of questions.  

 Send the Subject line "question vote <X Y>" to vote for questions 
 number <X> and <Y>.  For example, you would send the SUBJECT line 
 "question vote 3" to vote for question number 3.

 Each week the questions with the most votes will be forwarded to 
 Little Rock.

 
 SEND YOUR SUGGESTIONS & COMMENTS

 If you have a suggestion for Bill Clinton or Al Gore, then send your
 suggestion to the mail server ("clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org")
 with the Subject line "suggest propose".  

 Send the Subject line "suggest get" to get the current numbered 
 list of suggestions.  

 Send the Subject line "suggest vote <a b c>" to vote for suggestions 
 number <a>, <b>, and <c>.  For example, you would send the Subject 
 line "suggest vote 18 4" to vote for suggestions 18 and 4.
 

 The questions, suggestions, and the campaign's responses will be 
 posted to the network.  You can help redistribute this and other 
 information by sending the Subject line "volunteer email distr" 
 to the mail server at

 clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org
 


 Clinton/Gore '92
 Volunteer Email Effort
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins)
Subject: Re: Clinton and Space Funding
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 20:17:28 GMT

walsh@spider.wri.com (Jerry Walsh) writes:

>In article <1992Sep29.131331.8398@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>> Right now the Democrats are paying the interest on
>>one credit card by charging it on another. That's the road to bankruptcy
>>and ruin for individuals and nations. A rubber stamp in the White House
>>can only make matters worse.

>Is it the Democrats who are borrowing us into trouble?
>Statistics for the last 20 years show that the federal budget deficit
>as a percentage of gross domestic product has grown under
>Reagan, Bush, and Ford, but declined under Carter.

>> . . . Clinton would be a rubber stamp for the half
>>baked plans of the Democrats in Congress. Bush has done a sorry
>>job of saying *no*, but Clinton wouldn't even try.

>What reason is there to think that Bill Clinton will be a
>"rubber stamp"?  On the contrary, when the Democrats are unable
>to blame the deficit on a Republican president, they will have
>to be more responsible.  Clinton is more likely to get the
>line-item veto out of Congress than Bush is.

I've run across some interesting statistics lately, one of which is that George
Bush has never had his veto overridden.  The other, which was from a less 
reliable source, stated that the budget finally passed has been lower than that
requested by the White House for the last four years.

While the fact that I can't substantiate the last one means I can't blame the
deficit entirely on Bush, the former suggests to me that he hasn't exactly 
tried very hard to stop all this spending.

Can those who equate congressional Democrats with flowing cash cite some 
comparisons to show me they aren't just blindly following the conventional
wisdom?

Note:  I don't want to sound like I endorse big spending - I don't.  I just
like to see those involved get their fair share of the blame.
-- 
Josh Hopkins                                          jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
	 The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of
ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the
                      Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins)
Subject: Re: DCX Funding (was: Re: Lunar landing in 2002)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 05:21:32 GMT

aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>In article <h9jz+!n@rpi.edu> kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes:

>>>NASA cannot successfully implement this program. It needs to be moved
>>>into the Air Force.

>>The white-world Air Force would have the same problems as NASA.  The only
>>two agencies that could pull this off are SDIO and DARPA.  (In my opinion.)

>I aggree SDIO or DARPA are better suited however SDIO doesn't have the money
>and DCY is too big for DARPA. There is however a small group in the Air
>Force which does procurement the right way and could execute this program.

Is there any possibility of McDonnell Douglass funding development if no one
else takes over?  I'd heard this, but I get the impression that if it is the
case, it's not something MD is eager to talk about.

-- 
Josh Hopkins                                          jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
	 The views expresed above do not necessarily reflect those of
ISDS, UIUC, NSS, IBM FSC, NCSA, NMSU, AIAA or the American Association for the
                      Advancement of Acronymphomaniacs
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: darknite@camelot.bradley.edu (John S. Novak III)
Subject: Re: ALTERNATIVE Comet Rendezvous Mission
Organization: Bradley University
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:50:36 GMT

Excuse me, but haven't I seen the _exact_ same load of tripe
either here or in sci.space two or three times already in the
past week?

--
"Well, probably if you see what to do, then it should be obvious."
	  -Dr. In Soo Ahn, 10-18-91
John S. Novak, III		darknite@camelot.bradley.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.space:1351 sci.astro:10436
From: wang@cedar.nrl.navy.mil (Dennis Wang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space,sci.astro
Subject: Re: Clinton and Space Funding
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:09:39 GMT
Reply-To: wang@cedar.nrl.navy.mil
Distribution: world
Organization: Naval Research Lab

In article 15183@vax5.cit.cornell.edu, njzy@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (T. Joseph Lazio, Cornell University) writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.055424.12501@ke4zv.uucp>,
>gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes: 
>> 
 The Democrat Congress dominates where, when, and how much is
>> spent on various programs. They have a 50 year track record of ignoring
>> Presidential budgets and doing as they please.
>
> I) I don't think this is factually correct.  Most of the reports I 
>    hear indicate that the budget the president submits is usually
>    the one enacted.  A few billion dollars are shifted here and 
>    there, but the broad strokes of how money will be spent are 
>    quite similar to what the president proposes.

Gary, as a trivia question:  Each year the president submits a budget and Congress passes one.  In the last four years, how many times has the president's proposed deficit exceeded the one actually passed by Congress ?

Think carefully, your reputation as a pundit depends on this!




Answer:  Congress has passed a budget with a lower deficit than proposed by the President 4 years out of 4 !  That's right they cut government spending more than the President proposed!

As an extra credit question,  answer the same question as above for the last 8 years.
The answer will surprise you!
From: John C. Mallery <jcma@ai.mit.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: MAC Hypercard Stack of Clinton-Gore Position Papers and Speeches
Date: 28 Sep 92 11:38:34 GMT

A MAC Hypercard Stack of Clinton-Gore Position Papers and Speeches is
now available. If you would like a copy (800K / 1 disk), please send a
note to Michael (msagosta@cs.unlv.edu), who along with JBLIII authored
the Mac stack.

John Mallery
Join the Clinton/Gore '92
         Volunteer Email Campaign
Send To: CLINTON-WINS@Mail.Clinton-Gore.ORG
Subject: Volunteer Info
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
From: noyes@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (tom noyes 283-4177)
Subject: Re: DCX FUNDING
Organization: McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:41:47 GMT

In article <BvDLJx.MHE@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Josh 'K' Hopkins) writes:
|> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
|> 
|> >In article <h9jz+!n@rpi.edu> kentm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael V. Kent) writes:
|> 
|> >>>NASA cannot successfully implement this program. It needs to be moved
|> >>>into the Air Force.
|> 
|> >>The white-world Air Force would have the same problems as NASA.  The only
|> >>two agencies that could pull this off are SDIO and DARPA.  (In my opinion.)
|> 
|> >I aggree SDIO or DARPA are better suited however SDIO doesn't have the money
|> >and DCY is too big for DARPA. There is however a small group in the Air
|> >Force which does procurement the right way and could execute this program.
|> 
|> Is there any possibility of McDonnell Douglass funding development if no one
|> else takes over?  I'd heard this, but I get the impression that if it is the
|> case, it's not something MD is eager to talk about.
|> 
MD funding development of DCY? HA! we are much more likely to allocate our
very, very, very limited capital resources to our commercial aircraft 
development than to sink money into funding development of the DCY.
Delta Clipper is a great project that will revolutionize space travel.
Just get us the funding and we'll prove it! But we are so short of cash
that we were close to bankruptcy in January. 

-- 
=======================================================================
Thomas C. Noyes                            noyes@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov
McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Co.

     The thoughts expressed above do not necessarily represent those
                             of my employer. 
=======================================================================
Thought for the day
 - Don't get a degree in Aerospace Engineering - The aerospace industry
    is over dependent upon defense budgets, politics, and the cold war.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space