HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:18:56 -0500
From:         STK1236@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU
Subject:      Re: Minority President?
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

I believe the point Brent was trying to make when he said that if Bush got all
of Perot's votes he would have won, is that 53% of those who voted did not
vote for Clinton for one reason or another.  That means that if there were a
better candidate than Bush, Perot, and Clinton, he or she would gotten more
 votes than Clinton.  If Perot were not in the race, most of the Perot
 supporters
would have voted for President Bush.

--Rich
From: CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: "President Clinton"
Date: 6 Nov 92 19:17:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

Dear SHAWN BRENDON CREWS:

        Another reason to cease this thread about killing the President and
Vice-President:  the Secret Service and the FBI take each threat they learn
about VERY seriously.  Unless you want a badge or two on your doorstep sometime
soon, lay off.

By the way, do you really want them killed after the inaugural?  By then, Foley
will have been re-elected as Speaker.  You want Tom Foley over Bill Clinton???

-T.
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:15:46 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: electoral collage and question from my 9-yr-old

In article <01GQVEAEQXQO001OMR@drew.drew.edu>, JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET says:
>
>In article <tfilt379749@drew.edu>, andy <2893684@QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA> writes:
>>     Here's an idea, how about getting rid of the Electoral College and doing
>> what France does. Declare the candidate that gets over 50% of the vote the
>> winner, if no candidate does that on the first ballot, have a run-off
>between
>> the top two candidates in two or three weeks time. Your current system holds
>> the possibility that a candidate can get a majority in the Electoral College
>> and come in second in the popular vote (it's already happened once, late
>last
>> century). It's a strong possibility in especially close elections.
>>
>3 presidents were elected who got a minority for the popular vote:
>Harrison, Hayes, and John Quincy Adams. Electoral voting originally
>came in because the founders didn't trust the people plus fears of small
>states (what one was a stronger reason is open to argument).
>Clinton's electoral landslide shows that his popularity was
>countrywide (he only missed Fl and TX by a few percentage points),
>which is a lot better than winning the popular vote but doing so in
>select areas.  The Electoral College helps make the president a
>countrywise insitution, not one that is fought by region alone.
>Problems arise for third party candidates plus that Clinton didn't
>have to win any votes in Ca, TX, or Fl (or any other combination of
>100 odd votes) to win the presidency. [this would mean he'd need some
>other 3 votes because 370-101 is too little, but you see my pt] One
>has to decide the pluses and minuses.

Would you prefer a President who received fewer votes than his opponent but had
 broader regional support?

>
>Clinton's major advisor was/is James Carville.  His Northern one died
>a little while ago.
>
>      -Joe
>
>P.S. Anyone hear any mention of Thomas Kean as a possible presidental
>or vice-presidental candidate?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:21:00 EST
From:         PSICILIA@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Oliver North for Senate
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

X-News: drew bit.listserv.politics:30848

>From: "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@VAX1.UMKC.EDU>
>Subject:RE: Oliver North for Senate
>Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:26:51 -0600
>Message-ID:<tfilt382776@drew.edu>

>What a travesty! An admitted criminal (I don't care if he beat the charge) AND
>a sanctimonious twit to boot elected to the Senate? Charlie Robb sure isn't
>Mr. Nice Guy, but Ollie North OR Pat Buchanan to replace him really would
>further dishonor the Senate in the public's eye. VMS

Remember, he is an alledged criminal.  Oh, besides, Ted Kennedy (of
Chapaquita fame- leaving the scene of an accident is criminal), and
Joe Biden (the plagarizer in college- another criminal act) are
sitting nicely in Senate.
Personally, I'd have North over Robb any day, or Kennedy, or Biden.

-Paul
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 8 Nov 1992 17:18:30 -0400
From:         MIKE <8612775@SSCVAX.CIS.MCMASTER.CA>
Subject: re: T's libelous rantings

Thanks for saying something Julie I'm getting pretty fead up with it also.

--mike..
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:03:03 CST
From:         erteltsa@ALPHA.HENDRIX.EDU
Subject:      Re: Calooh! Callay!
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>Re your post about Gandhi...It does not remind me of the illustrious Pat B.
Rather, it reminds me of some needed reforms in Christianity. However, that
does NOT invalidate the relgion as a whole. It's sad that he turned away from
the religion for that reason . . . especially when one of the main goals of
Christianity is inclusiveness.
--Steve
From: KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Justice
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:38:48 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Jamie:
>Is Jeanne Kirkpatrick really the person whose name is bandied about
>as a possible Clinton appointee to the Supreme Court? That is
>VERY hard to believe.

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall Kirkpatrick's name coming up in
conjuntion with future Republican administrations.  Didn't her name get
tossed around the list a bit a while back?  Like maybe right around
convention time?

Kerry
From: rhead@S850.MWC.EDU (robert v head jr)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Pat Buchannan and ACT-UP/RI
Date: 7 Nov 92 04:46:31 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25]
Comments: To: "(Forum for the Discussion of Politics)"
              <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

>
> Robert Head writes that "if... over 50% of the people opposed homosexuals,
> I think the best policy... would be to try to eliminate these people's
> fears... rather than just completely dismissing their opinions."
>
> --Julie
>
	I apparently didn't word what I was trying to say well enough.
I feel that everyone is entitled to the same rights no matter what % of
the population disagress with them.  What I was trying to say was that
I think that it is always dangerous to hear someone saying that the
opinions of a great number of people are "irrelevant".  I was refering
to opinions in general, not opinions on homosexuality per se.

						Robert Head
						rhead@s850.mwc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:09:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: This "12 years" thing

>Ahem.  I must comment on behalf of my ex-running mate.  -other Andy is the
>final arbiter in all matters of otherness. (Jus' l00k at 'im)  newbrett can
>be other brett if -other Andy says so.

boyoboy...are all sick little perverted men so uptight? :) it was just a
suggestion .... sheesh.
didn't know -other andy was in charge of others. sorry for stepping on
others toes.

>  In case the list denizens don't know, they're duties are to provide
>beer and lodging to any list member who arrives in their state - for the
>asking.  Really, check the bylaws.

this is cool. let me check my calendar to see when i can take a little
drive.
-linda
>Steve
From: CDELL@VAX1.UMKC.EDU (VALENTINE M. SMITH)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: history staff, other stuff, val.
Date: 7 Nov 92 02:20:06 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%OHSTVMA.bitnet@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: CDELL
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Comments: To: POLITICS%OHSTVMA.bitnet@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu

I don't mind wearing the "hat" of virtual Secretary of State. That will be
intriguing, Val
From: jse2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JASON STEVEN EUCULANO)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: "President Clinton"
Date: 7 Nov 92 19:07:21 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <POLITICS%92110613350250@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>, MEC038@UKCC.UKY
.EDU (K=A*T) writes:
>From:         "(JASON STEVEN EUCULANO)" <jse2@NS1.CC.LEHIGH.EDU>
>
>> I'm wondering something here.  Who did you support in the PA senate race,
>> Arlan Specter or Lynn "I have no political experience and am proud of it"
>> Yeakel?  By the way if you said Yeakel, she started running for the sole
>> purpose of how Specter did his job in the Hill-Thomas hearings.
>
>> Jayce
>
>Which is much more than many other complainers do.  Don't you
>respect THAT?
>
>--KAT
>
Sure.  She can run all she wants.  I was frightened by the sensationalism that
went along with her campaign, though.  Seems to me that the American public
were so abhorred at the hearings that they thought Sen. Specter was the
Anti-Christ or something.  I know this since my mom's reason for voting for
Yeakel was that she was a woman.  Interesting experience there, believe me.
                                Jayce
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:09:06 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Potatoe

My only regret regarding the Bush/Quayle defeat is this will probably mean
the end of the "Quayle Quarterly", the quadrennial collection of Danny's
latest goofs and gaffes. Also, I'll have to retire my Dan Quayle t-shirts,
at least until 1996.
From: JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU (Song Weaver)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Religious Discourse
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:24:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%OHSTVMA.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Comments: To: POLITICS%OHSTVMA.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU

There's a list called BELIEF-L, at node BROWNVM which is a perfect place
to argue about Christianity.  If we're not talking about Christianity
in a political context, I'd rather it not be addressed at all here.  Same
goes for any other religion.

(If you want to sub to BELIEF-L send the command SUB BELIEF-L your name
to address LISTSERV@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU or LISTSERV@BROWNVM.BITNET).

This has been a public service announcement.

--Julie
From: DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU (The Integral Differential)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Justice
Date: 12 Nov 92 17:33:07 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>KAT:
>>> With names such as Governor Mario Cuomo and J. Kilpatrick being invoked
>>> in the media, one wonders.
>
>> Who is J. Kilpatrick? Just wondering.
>
>He is a newspaper columnist, somewhat on the conservative side.
>
	*She* is former US ambassador to the UN, and currently speaks/writes on
generally conservative issues.
	A very good choice for VP, but not for the SC.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:33:00 EST
From:         ASTMOLLI@STETSON.BITNET
Subject:      Re: "President Clinton"

LET JAYCE SPEAK.  FINALLY THERE IS SOMEONE WHO KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING
ABOUT.  LET'S HOPE WE CAN MAKE IT THROUGH THESE FOUR MISARABLE YEARS.
MARSHALL
From: CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Calooh! Callay!
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:24:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

One of CHRIST'S main goals was inclusiveness.  Christianity hasn't changed

a bit since Gandhi's encounter.


-T.

"Can one talk about the ocean to a frog in a well - or about the divine to
 people who are restricted by their concepts?"

        -DeMello, _Taking Flight_
From: 8612775@SSCVAX.CIS.MCMASTER.CA (MIKE)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: The cost of excluding lesbians and gay men from the military
Date: 7 Nov 92 03:34:38 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

>kinsey's research indicates that it is approximately 10%, and that more
than 30% of the population is either gay or bi.

Julie
Those numbers sound kind of high. Can you tell me more about this research.
or where I could obtain it to look at.
thanks
---mike...
From: jfisher@NETXWEST.COM ((Jonathan Fisher))
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: "President Clinton"
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:59:12 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> As a Bush supporter I have something to say...BNill Clinton will ultimately
> ruin our country's economy.
>
> --Steve
>
I guess that you are more of an expert on the economy than the 550 economists
and 10 nobel prize winners who endorsed Clinton's plan.

Jonathan
"Clinton in '96, Gore in '00 and '04"
From: CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: America Has Spoken
Date: 7 Nov 92 01:28:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

Jayce:

        I believe the word is "imbEciles", not "imbIciles".

Gete itt write - orr us imbeciles wil stirt to gett uppsette!

-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 09:29:44 PST
From:         "(Jonathan Fisher)" <jfisher@NETXWEST.COM>
Subject:      Re: Poor losers!
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> Clinton cheated on his wife(Flowers), he cheated on his state (his promise to
> serve the full term as governor), and he cheated on his country (by illegally
> dodging the draft)  How can people of  the U.S. feel he will not cheat on them
> as well.  If people listened to the issues, which were so very important, I
>  don't see how anyone could vote for Clinton.  As for him raising taxes, he is
>  going to have to raise them to support his plans.  And if he doesn't get
 enough
>  money
> for his plans, he said he would not put them into affect.  So then he will do
> nothing about those important issues.
> -Rich
>
I get so tired of this....
Let's first correct your erroneous statements.
There is no evidence the Clinton had an affair with Flowers and I posted
the massive holes in her stories.
After making his promise to finish his term as Governer, Clinton went
to all of the counties in his state asking them to let him out of his
promise and let him run for President.  Overwhelmingly people wanted him
to run.
Only you believe that Clinton illegally avoided the draft.  He didn't but
I don't expect you to listen.
But let's try this paragraph...

Bush cheated on his wife(Fitzgerald), he cheated on his state (vowing to live
 there after retirement, but avoiding paying taxes), and he cheated on his
country (Iraq-Gate, Iran-Contra)  How can people of  the U.S. feel he will not
 cheat on them
as well.  If people listened to the issues, which were so very important, I
don't see how anyone could vote for Bush.  As for him raising taxes, he is
going to have to raise them to support his plans.

Jonathan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 8 Nov 1992 11:32:00 EST
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Re: 1996
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

In article <tfilt380349@drew.edu>, The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGH
   T.EDU> writes:

>>considerably different.  I'm waiting for the "week in review" in
>>tomorrow's paper which should have lots of nifty polling data to
>>give me some more insight.
>>--Julie
>
>       Post it!
>
> Brett'
>
Last Thursday's Times election section had "lots of nifty polling
data", I have the figures if any particular type is wanted.
             -Joe
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 8 Nov 1992 12:06:28 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Pat Buchannan and ACT-UP/RI
              8 Nov 1992 12:02:00 EST from <JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>

From:         Song Weaver <JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>

> The Pope urged Catholics in America to actively fight laws which prohibt
> anti-gay legislation.  Furthermore, our own local Bishop Gelano of Rhode
> Island insisted that to vote for Pro-Choice legislation was a mortal
> sin.  Do you not conside that to be attempting to affect the body of
> politics?  Bishop Gelano used his position in the Church as a power
> base for influencing politics.  Now tell me how Rhode Island's Catholic
> Diocese is eligible for tax exempt status.

Let me first say what I think about tax-exempt status of churches:
actually I don't tthink much about it but it seems to me that by
accepting this handout from the government, the church will be
influenced.  For example, the church might open their mouth about
a policy and people would start yelling "revoke the tax-exempt
status."    :-)

Legally speaking, the separation of church and state (OK, Robert,
for you it is "The Congress shall pass no law .........")
only applies to the state and not to the church.  That is, the state
cannot interfere with the church but the church can interfere with
the state as much as it wants.

The above is not to say that I necessarily agree with what the
Catholic church's stand regarding homosexuality.

> --Julie

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:39:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: "11 November"

-andy:

        What the heck are you talking about?  "Rightists" DON'T hate, but they
CAN, and "Leftists" MUST hate?  What?

        Do me a favor - give me some examples of what you mean by Leftists
hating - hating who? How? When? Who did the hating?

        Since I never said that either hate, please don't ask me to give
examples of how "Rightists" hate.

        ?????

-T.
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:37:35 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: electoral collage and question from my 9-yr-old

In article <01GQX85WXY2O0002HP@BENTLEY.BITNET>, CONWAY_O@BENTLEY.BITNET says:
>
>Federalism is more important than democracy? In any case, your teacher is
>wrong the principle of federalism is preserved a) by the requirement that
>2/3 of the states approve constitutional amendments and b) the Senate
>
>I would suggest that both these features are more important to federalism
>than an undemocratic Electoral College.
>
>
>        If were going to make the country democratic, why don't we let them
>vote on every matter. Just like a real democracy. The Senete is not democratic
>either. America was not founded to be a democracy but a a republic

It's a question of degree. Obviously replacing the Electoral College with
a Popular Vote with runoff system would be more democratic. It would
be consistent with other countries that have elected Presidents
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:48:47 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Deleted Emails

From:         Kip Shaw <KIS100F@SMSVMA.BITNET>

> KAD: The comments were interesting.

Thanks, but let me say it again, without the speed of the fly, the
problem cannot be solved.  And if the speed of the fly if given, the
problem becomes an easy one.  So why would this be associated with
a famous scientist or be considered a famous problem?  And I don't
see why you have to work out an infinite series as Kerry claimed?
Of course you MAY solve it by an infinite series but why should you?

Say the trains are 300mi apart and they travel at 50 mi/hour.  Say
the fly travels at 100 mi/hr.  It takes 3 hours for the trains to
collide during which the fly is travelling at 100 mi/hr.  That
gives us 300 mile traveling distance for the fly.  See, it didn't
take von-KAT or an infinite series to solve this problem.

Unless I am missing something big (which is not out of character :-)

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:05:07 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Modest Request
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>Maybe we could get the newcomers (and others) to answer a few questions
>that will determine their place on the list food chain.

	Oooo, a pop quiz!  Did I mention that I don't test well? :)
>
>1. Do you do crossword puzzles (fill in the blank)
>   a. permanant marker
	Ink.  I hate smudgy pencils along with smudgy papers.

>2. My SAT score was (Fill in the blank)
>   b. top 20%
>   d. SAT scores are hardly an indication of how smart you are
>   e. I don't test well

	Can I mention that my ACT score was a 31?

>3. What kind of shoes are you wearing today?
>   d. loafers made from fine carinthian leather

	Sperry Topsiders to be specific, although I prefer Dexters.

>4. My idol is (fill in the blank)
	None of the above.  (My dad, specifically.  Because he's always been
the best he could be, instead of trying to be something else.  He is always
there for us and has led by example.
	(And it's not even father's day!)

>5. If i could be anyone i would be (fill in the blank)
	Me.

>6. If you won 10 million $ in publisher's Clearing House you would:
	Invest it, of course.

>7. I do this for a living (fill in the blank)
>   h. I don't have a job, I just hang out on the net. :)

>8. For Fun i like to (fill in the blank)
>  e. hang around on the net and
	piss off others
:)

>Send all questionaires back to me, i'll tally up the results and present
>the president with a comprehensive food chain agenda that should be helpful
>in figuring out the pecking order around here.

	But doesn't everyone want to see these?!?  What good is a survey if we
can't say "but of course (s)he'd say that!"?

Brett'
Much too early in the morning.