HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark Taylor Evert)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Setting some of Bush/Quayle's lies straight...
Date: 26 Aug 1992 18:54:39 GMT
Organization: Loral Space Information Systems

In article <1992Aug26.162609.6892@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> 
lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
> Historical precedent: he already has---- 11 times. You see, we don't 
have to
> rely on rhetoric in this campaign to make our decisions,
> Bush and Clinton have records to
> evaluate...Clinton's is good and Bush's is a joke.

As governor of California, Reagan balanced the budget each time, too.  
Like Clinton, he had no choice.  Both California, Arkansas, (and Texas, by 
the way), mandate it in their laws.  Bush has never been governor of 
Texas, but if he had been, Texas budget would have been balanced, too.   
Therefore, Clinton's record in Arkansas, as far as budget-balancing is 
concerned is meaningless.

Mark T. Evert
Friendswood, TX

My opinions are my own.
From: bev@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu (Beverly Huntsberger)
Subject: Re: The Simpsons answer Bush!
Organization: Univ. of South Carolina, Columbia
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 16:41:24 GMT

In <1992Aug22.164220.5810@athena.cs.uga.edu> heath@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath) writes:

>Man, what is it with Republicans and television shows?  Can't they
>tell make-believe from the real thing? 

You got it.
Remember the tooth fairy? How about Pinochio?
How about "There's nothing wrong with the economy" - R.R.
Or "this isn't a recession", and  "This isn't a war", and
"the war is over".
That's why I call the 80's the decade of denial.
They are constantly acting out text-book dysfunction:
optimism in times of crisis, living in fantasies,
demanding loyalty, trust, and silence and best of all:
always knowing and telling us what's in our own best interest.
Oh, and my favorite:
explaining away secrecy and misinformation with the 
justification that they "don't want to cause us unnecessay alarm".
Ever read any of Alice Miller's "For Your Own Good".
Helps me see who the "real" facists are.

-- 
Bev Huntsberger		bev@grover.csd.scarolina.edu
			The University of SOUTH Carolina
Personally, I have nothing against incumbents.
I'm simply exercising my right to vote.
From: fay@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Intelligence issue
Date: 26 Aug 92 12:33:48 -0500
Summary: Why only "character"?
Keywords: brain power
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

We seem to hear a lot about "character issues" in elections.  Why is it that
so few people seem to talk about intelligence issues?  

I know that brain-power (specifically lack thereof) is mentioned in reference
to Quayle at times, but let's think about this.

After 11 years, I would guess that Arkansas would have found out if Clinton is
an anti-Christ.  And I'm even going to assume that Bush is a good man.

They both strive to do what they feel is right.  Can we be civil on that point?

My younger brother is a man of excellent character, kind, loyal, loving...yet
in no way do I want him to be President!

One candidate went to Yale on family connections (and somehow forgot in 1988
that Yale is in the Ivy League).  He shows some symptoms of apahasia, and
cannot name a single book (not even the Bible for this Christian president)
that has ever influenced him.

One candidate went to Georgetown on an academic scholarship.  He went to Oxford
as a Rhoades scholar.  He graduated from Yale Law.

One VP was an indifferent student at Ball State who would rather golf than do
anything else.

The other VP went to Harvard (yes, possibly family connections helped), and
studied both law and divinities.

If Americans didn't err and elect evil men, then we look at who has the
greater capacity to make intelligent decisions?

Clearly, it is not the GOP ticket.

P.S.  Lest you think I am some Ivy League snob, I went to a state school as an
undergrad and teach at one now.  I do have a Masters from an I.L school, but
this is not simply a "credentialist" argument.



Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:3857 tx.politics:4757
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Plan
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 21:24:10 GMT
 <G8EAr*rU0@caleb.UUCP> <1992Aug31.155800.21734@technology.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <1992Aug31.155800.21734@technology.com>, Judy McMillin writes:

> In article <G8EAr*rU0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug24.140434.3640@sun44.synercom.hounix.org>, Allan Maxwell writes:
> >
> >[lots of stuff deleted. . .]
> 
> >Don't you people know anything about how our government operates?  Every bill
> >is a compromise.  Each side trades this for that to get what they want.  The
> >President traded the tax increase to the Democrats to get something else that
> >he wanted.  He now realizes that that was a grave mistake.  However, the tax
> >increase was a DEMOCRAT idea forced upon the President by holding his other
> >programs hostage.
> >
> >
> >                                                Jim Pritchett
> >
> >
> 
> Jim, you missed the point again!  You are correct; compromise is the only
> way to get most things done. If Bush knew how to lead, he could get what
> he wanted in ways other than at the point of a gun (ala Noriega and SHussein).
> Unfortunately for George, he is not allowed to force Congress to his wishes
> at gunpoint, and since he seems unskilled in any other form of persuasion,
> he can't manage Congress.  

Judy,
      explain how a President can get a totally HOSTILE House leadership to
do the right things?  The single most important goal of Speaker Foley and
friends for the past four years has been to get the President out of office!
How do you "lead" people like that?


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
From: McAldon International Inc. <mcaldon@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Date: 26 Aug 92 19:43 PDT
Subject: Re: Shades of Dukakis
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1588800004:cdp:1588800006:000:918
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!mcaldon    Aug 26 19:43:00 1992


|I'm perfectly willing to believe that Bush lies.  Now we see that the
|Clinton folks think that's good for them to do so as well.  It's an
|interesting tactic.  Convince me that Clinton is just like Bush.
|-andy

Clinton seems to be smarter than Bush, so I doubt he would try such
obvious lies, but anybody who thinks politicians are truthful must
take a licking when buying a used car.  Anyway, I did not advocate
lies but "fractional truths." You know, half-truths, quarter-truths,
millitruths, etc.  Don't get caught is the politico's maxim.  BTW,
I was an ad copywriter for years.  There are similarities:-(DMcKenzie
                           
|                        |     "Nobody ever went broke from     |    
|    mcaldon@igc.org     |   underestimating the intelligence   |
|                        | of the American public."  HL Mencken |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From: cornell@inoc.dl.nec.com (Cornell Kinderknecht)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:49:03 GMT
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: not very organized

jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:

>rl24@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert Lamoureux) writes:

>>In article <mykes.0da8@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>>Ironic, isn't it, that Bush spends his days whining about government
>>bureaucracy and how much he wants to eliminate it, but he's perfectly 
>>willing to hold out Federal aid for people who desperately need it
>>until protocol is observed, or "bureaucracy" is followed, in the 
>>form of a letter from the Governor.

>Do you *really* think it went down like that, or are you just trying
>to be as difficult as you can?  Can any sane person believe that either
>Bush or Chiles did any less than he could have?   This bullshit about
>either of them holding off while people suffered, just for political
>one-upsmanship, is so completely assinine as to make me think these
>posters have a screw loose.

I don't see it as political on-upmanship either as you stated.  I
think it's a prime example of lack of interest in anything
domestic.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Responsibility: The Dirty Word (was Re: Insulted by... 
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 20:35:13 GMT

In article <92236.140940U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> 
U56503@uicvm.uic.edu (Brady Woodward) writes:

> "Family Values.  Words to go to war over.

No they're not, they're words to live by.  I believe that ``Family
Values'' means taking personal responsibility for your children's
welfare.  It means supporting your parents in their old age.  It
means giving assistance to your brother or sister when they're 
down on their luck.  These are the kinds of values which have proven 
themselves to work.  

People should stop blaming the government for all their problems,
and start taking personal responsibility for themselves and 
their family.  



Doug Holtsinger
From: roth@ordin.cs.wisc.edu (Bill Roth)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: New position papers for Clinton and Deer on FTP.
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:13:36 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.

For those of you who are interested, position papers for Bill Clinton
and Ada Deer (who is running for Congress in the Madison Area) can be
found on the ftp server at pslu1.psl.wisc.edu in the directories
/pub/politics/{clinton,deer}. 

For you political historians out there, position papers for Tom
Harkin's abortive bid for the presidency can also be found.
-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Roth, University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept.
Internet: roth@cs.wisc.edu. BITNET: ROTH@WISCPSL. HEPNET: PSL::ROTH
From: JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Does anyone remember the tax increase of 1982
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:06:49 GMT
Organization: GM Research Labs

In article <31AUG199204372310@misvax.mis.arizona.edu>
dfriedman@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (D R Friedman) writes:
>I always like George's promises of no new taxes, but the GOP has wiped
>out my deductions on taxes and I don't have a second home; raised the
  (more blithering deleted just for the sake of brevity, reality, and so on)

Well, there you go again, Denny.  Let me ask you this, though.  Try and
follow this.  Who levies taxes?  That's right, Denny, the legislature does.
Who passes the budget?  Who controls every committee in Congress?
Well, I gave you a little hint there, but you still got it right.  Good.
Now, who controls the legislature, Denny?  That's right, the Demagogues.
Now who has controlled that legislature for a long long time?  That's good
Denny, good.  The Demagogues.  Now, who pads the budget with pork barrel
proposals for hometown goodies.  That's real good, now, Denny - you're
brain is starting to overheat.  Now, where do you find fault, Denny,
the Democrats or the Republicans?  Oops, Denny, well you almost got them
all right.

>I'd say more but I have to stand in line at the unemployment office
>this week and it's too late and I am too bushed.

Well, now, Denny, try to contact reality a little better and I'm sure
you can get a job hauling hay or something.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Subject: Re: Intelligence issue
Keywords: brain power
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 17:49:59 GMT

> = wag5@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>> = fay@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:

[...]
>>After 11 years, I would guess that Arkansas would have found out if 
>>Clinton is an anti-Christ.  And I'm even going to assume that Bush is 
>>a good man.

>In Arkansas it is a 'customary' rather than 'internal' goal of people
>to be Christians.  He may go to church, and thus the people will
>elect him, but that doesn't necessarily mean he is Christian.

Oh, BROTHER.

C'MON with this bullshit.  You people are really getting desperate,
ain'tcha?  You want to talk about fake christians, try Ronnie and
his dress-stealing wife.  



-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
From: gerard@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer)
Subject: Re: Al Gore's Plans for Internet!
Organization: Scum Of the Earth and Senile Tenured
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:35:47 GMT

In article <a_hn-4b.crisp@netcom.com>, crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
|> I found this on another newsgroup. For those of you out there that 
|> think Gore's plans for an upgraded computer network sound great,
|> read on what our DumbOcrat Senator from Tennessee has in mind...

[stuff deleted]

|> >>
|> >>Al Gore, yes *that* Al Gore, is pushing a bill to commercialize the 
|> >>networks we are now using for free. When we start receiving a monthly 
|> >>bill based on bits/buck, using the landline networks is going to look 
|> >>a lot less attractive. I just want people to keep their options open. 
|> >>If we lock ourselves into the landlines for long haul packet, we may
|> >>regret it later.

Is this news?  I thought both Republicans and Democrats were committed
to a commercially operated NREN to replace Internet.  I seem to
remember both Senate and House passing legislation to this effect last
year.  If you object to $$$ take it up with the communications lobby.
-- 
Gerard Fryer  (g.fryer@soest.hawaii.edu)
School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:3056 alt.politics.bush:2972
From: lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Supreme Court
Date: 26 Aug 92 11:42:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: /etc/organization

In article <1992Aug25.152238.20810@ncsu.edu> dgwang@eos.ncsu.edu (D G WANG) writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug24.200936.6840@nuchat.sccsi.com>, lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher) writes:
>|> Xref: taco alt.politics.clinton:3131 alt.politics.bush:3334
>|> Path: taco!rock!stanford.edu!agate!ucbvax!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!nuchat!lcypher
>|> From: lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher)
>|> Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
>|> Subject: Re: Supreme Court
>|> Message-ID: <1992Aug24.200936.6840@nuchat.sccsi.com>
>|> NOT the person to look for. The fact that he criticized Clinton and
>|> the democratic platform because the word G*D was not in the platform
>|> scares the hell out of me. 
>|> 
>It doesn't make sense.  It shouldn't scare the hell of you if you don't
>believe there is a God.                        ^^^^

Just because I do not believe in the christian G*D, does not mean I do
not believe in my own version of a higher power and, for lack of a better
word, hell....
From: skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: CNN/Crossfire
Date: 27 Aug 1992 16:04:33 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Howard Hughes Medical Institute

In article <1992Aug27.143404.26891@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> mjb10@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael J. Bumbulis) writes:
>
>In a previous article, skywalker@DINO.QCI.BIOCH.BCM.TMC.EDU (Timothy B. Reynolds) says:
>
 >>Oh what a joy to watch the right wingers crying on Crossfire last evening
 >>about the liberal media electing Bill Clinton. Where were these people
 >>when the media was trashing Clinton in Jan. ???? The best comment of the 
 >>night was that the media only metioned the J. Flowers story three times
 >>on the news. 
 >
 >
 >Hey, the media is biased towards the left (this has been documented
 >in several studies).  And it sure as hell looks like that bias is
 >translating as a push to get Clinton elected.  

If you are talking about the study by the "Report on Media Equality"
it was written by the media advisor to Pat Bucannan. Thats the report 
every republican runs around quoting. He was the top jerk on Crossfire
screamimg media bias.

Fact 1.
The vast majority of Americans (80+ %)  receive the bulk of their news 
from local print and TV. The majority of newpapers have conservative 
positions and editorial writters . So what are you saying ? the conserv.
media wants Clinton elected ????



 >After all, why hasn't
 >the media (ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN, New York Times, Time magazine, etc) talked
 >about Gore's call for the censorship of non-alarmist data on the
 >environment?  Why did the media point out Reagan's mistake, yet
 >remain silent on Clinton's mistake?  
 
We can put up bias claims all day "Why dont they trash Quayle when he
badmouths Clinton's not serving in the Army when what Danny did was just
about the same thing. 

Fact 2. 
The republicans are looking for anything or anyone to blame the present 
situation on, the media, congress, etc.... They can't run on their record
except to run around chanting "persian gulf" till they're blue in the
face. Say economy ! and they scatter like roaches. 

It's really hard to admit to being a failure,
it much easier to blame everyone else.

Especialy when you are the President 
of the United States of America.

Tim



Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: pashdown@javelin.sim.es.com (Pete Ashdown)
Subject: Re: Clinton Schedule for 9/1-3
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:55:37 GMT

JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:

>Do you want this coward and liar

"Read my lips, no new taxes."

>to protect you?

To protect me from what?
-- 
			  orb be in u, orb be out u

DISCLAIMER: My writings have NOTHING to do with my employer.  Keep it that way.
Pete Ashdown    pashdown@slack.sim.es.com    ...uunet!slack.sim.es.com!pashdown
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis)
Subject: Re: Covenants 
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:27:09 GMT
Organization: The Gizmonic Institute

ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
>
>	As recently as the 1960's it was not uncommon for housing
>	associations to require purchasers to sign covenants that
>	forced the new owner to promise "never" to sell to people
>	with certain skin colors. I'm sure that those covenants
>	are still on the books, some places, but they are hardly
>	Constitutional. 
>
>	Weapons bans would seem to fall under the same category.

There are, in fact, enforceable covenants for all sorts of things:
my "favorite" being a ban on pick-up trucks. Racially based covenants
were outlawed, I believe, by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but the
civil rights of pick-up trucks have not yet been redressed. 

Mostly, real estate covenants are used to ensure that snob neighborhoods
remain snob neighborhoods: paint colors have to match, lawns must be
mowed, fences must meet reqs (usually no chain link fences), minimum
square footage of the house must be met, etc. Most of these are
completely enforceable and are a real pain, leading to all sorts
of either homogeneous neighborhoods of likeminded pills or 
nasty extended quarrels when fashions in housing change.
-- 
Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu> Write when you get the chance.
From: rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Why I won't vote for Clinton
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:29:16 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Francisco

> joeg@meaddata.com writes:

>Clinton has placed himself in to many comprimising positions.  Whether
>he inhaled or not, he tried drugs.  Whether he dodged the draft or
>not, he received his notice and didn't comply.  I am not clear what
>truth lies in the allegations of his affairs.  I try not to let the
>allegations cloud my judgement, but given his other personal failures,
>I'm not sure what to believe.  These are the problems I have with the
>character of Bill Clinton.  Why should I look any farther?  He doesn't
>have the qualities I want in a leader.

You have rather absolutist and inhuman standards -- I doubt
that anyone outside a closed convent could measure up.  You
don't consider context -- that many, if not most college
students in the late '60s considered smoking marijuana no
more harmful and much cooler than swigging a scotch and soda;
that many people considered the War in Vietnam to be immoral
and illegal, and could not, in good conscience, participate
in it.  Who are you to judge these actions of Clinton's as
"personal failures"?

Bush's generation didn't face the moral dilemmas and choices
that Clinton's did.  World War II was the goodies against the
baddies, pure and simple.  The generation gap that yawned wide
in the 60s didn't exist in the 30s and 40s -- there was no
alienated, baby-boom generation of young adults questioning or
rejecting their parents' values.  Bush had it easy -- life was
mapped out for him at an early age, and he just fell into the
groove: Prep School, Yale, the Skull & Bones Club, the way
his father did before him.

Which one do you think has a better understanding of life in
the 90s?  Which one speaks with more conviction about his
vision for the future?  Those are the questions you need to
ask of your prospective leader, instead of nit-picking about
ancient and irrelevant history.


-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjwill6@pacbell.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 08:17:54 EDT
From: <JFL4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The Real Reagan Record
Distribution: usa

In article <ncmntj+.crisp@netcom.com>, crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) says:
>
>Have any of you read the  August 31 issue of NATIONAL REVIEW.  I found
>this quite amazing.  On pages 25-62 is found the cover story, THE REAL
>REAGAN RECORD.  Many (a dozen or so) authors have each taken one plank
>of the conventional liberal tale of how Ronny ruined America, and
>smashed it to pieces.
>
>deficits caused by tax cuts     NOT
>

Gee, what a surprise.  Not that bastion of liberal elite!  Not that rag
of the Harvard boutique!

"...in eight years by direction of the most conservative administration
in modern times, the federal government's spending will have exceeded
its income by the staggering sum of $1.5 trillion.  The next President
will inherit a publicly held federal debt nearly triple that accumulated
by all of Ronald Reagan's thirty-nine predecessors.
   "Historians will undoubtedly find these elephantine figures baffling.
By then, the secret of the Reagan era's fabulous free lunch will be beyond
dispute.  The records will show that within the span of a few short years
the United States flung itself into massive hock with the rest of the
world."  [Note:  the US debt is now a beyond staggering - incomprehensible -
$4 trillion]
   "In the final analysis, only one conclusion is possible.  The American
economy and government have literally been taken hostage by the awesome
stubbornness of the nation's fortieth President."
                        David Stockman, 1st Budget Director under Reagan,
                        who (with Jack Kemp) developed the administration
                        budget direction (quote from 1987).

Jeff Luck                                *Standard Disclaimer*
CES Systems Office
Penn State University           "Whatever you guys want, I'm for."
JFL4@PSUVM.PSU.EDU                     -Quayle to Ohio Farmers, 1988
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc