HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tesco@bumetb.bu.edu (Dances With Babes)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 28 Sep 92 00:07:14 GMT
Reply-To: tesco@bumetb.bu.edu (Dances With Babes)
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Organization: Boston University

>William.A.Hall.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (William A. Hall Jr.) writes:
>
>It is also _equally_ possible that aborting a fetus MAY NOT be taking
>a life.  As far as "society" erring on the side of caution, how do
>you define society, and what gives the government authority to dictate
>on behalf of society?

Government does not dictate in a democracy.  You want abortion to be legal?
Overturn R.V.W. and vote for it.  Or vote against it if opposed.  Government
then upholds and enforces the decision, it does not dictate.
R.V.W. is a good example of dictating by the government.

>Um, friend?  Who are you to say that any person should live or die.

A concerned member of society.  The constitution does not outlaw the killing of
prisoners, so it is up to the states (that's you and me) to decide if the death
penalty is valid.  Should be the same with abortion.  This is not difficult.


>I don't think you have any place to be saying that any person "DESERVES"
>to be put to death.

Then why do we have juries (or judges) in murder cases in death penalty states?

-tesco vee
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Waste of time!
Date: Sat,  3 Oct 92 12:04:37 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

>In article <afarquha.2.0@cs1.uct.ac.za>,
>afarquha@cs1.uct.ac.za (A J Farquharson) whines:
>
>> To us here in South Africa it seems as though the American elections are a 
>> waste of time.
>
>When your country becomes a democracy, you'll be in a better position
>to criticize the American political process.  In the mean time, keep
>your vapid glimpses to yourself.
>
>Kris Popat
>MIT Rm. E15-391  Cambridge, MA  02139

When the U.S. ceases to have a greater percentage of its population in
prison than South Africa (including one in every 10 or 20 Black males
between the ages of 18 and thirty--all in the name of the War on Some
Politically Incorrect Drugs), you'll be in a better position to criticize
South Africa.  In the mean time...etc.


    Alan T. Furman         | VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!  Marrou/Lord in 92!!
---------------------------+----------------------------------------
  atfurman@cup.portal.com  |   (800)682-1776 for more information
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 18:58:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.185527.22191@midway.uchicago.edu> shou@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>Effective schools are those which strive to instill a similar sort of
>responsibility among their students.  They assign meaningful homework; they
>expect their students to do it; they hold high academic expectations for
>students; they attempt to promote traditional values concerning the 
>importance of working and studying.  When parents respond in kind to these
>efforts, there is a powerful learning effect.  Note that this process is
>not one that can really emerge out of large increases in spending.  Instead,
>it springs mostly from the life and learning philosophies of schools, students,
>and parents. 

This does not preclude providing suffient textbooks (up to date ones,
and not the 10 year-old discards from other districts) for all the
students, lab equipment, plugging holes in the ceiling, etc.  This is
the main thrust of Kozol's argument.  He also brings up a number of
court decisions in Texas and somewhere else (I don't recall where)
that stated that there is no reasonable excuse for the enormous
disparities in the facilities between wealthy and poor districts.  For
instance, a lack of good textbooks would crimp anyone's ability to do
homework, even if they are well motivated.

>
>By the way, Jon Kozol is one of the last people I would turn to for 
>advice on anything.  Read his book on Cuba.  Anyone who speaks in such 
>glowing terms about one of the worlds largest concentration camps does
>lose some credibility.

I haven't seen his book on Cuba.  This is the first book by him that
I've read.



--
"Sounds interesting....  Sounds interesting...."
				-- Homer Simpson
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu (Scott Aaron)
Subject: Re: Line Item Veto
Reply-To: aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 19:35:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep24.202912.824@webo.dg.com>, lyford@dagny.webo.dg.com (Lyford Beverage) writes:
>Couldn't that be rectified by making the congress only need a simple majority to
>override a veto of a single line item, as opposed to the 2/3 needed for a 
>veto override of an entire bill?  That way we could force congress to justify
>the things that it is funding.  As it is now, every congressman can disavow
>a lot of the spending, but stuff still goes through, because of the omnibus
>nature of the budget.  I believe that the line-item veto, with this stipulation,
>could go a long way toward helping rid the budget of much of its pork.

Wouldn't this idea of simple majority override for a line item veto render the
line item veto meaningless?  If Congress has enough votes to pass a bill then
there would be enough votes to override any partial veto by the President, 
unless some who originally voted for the bill vote against the override.

  -- Scott
From: raek@athena.mit.edu (Robyn A E Kozierok)
Subject: platforms online?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 20:09:54 GMT


Are any or all of the platforms available online?

--Robyn

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: United We Stand And Deliver
Date: 28 Sep 92 20:18:18 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA

In article <1992Sep28.182120.5100@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>
>Emmett, you seem to have gotten by message exactly backwards.  If
>you think Perot would be that bad for the country, why on earth
>would you want to vote for him?  What I was trying to say is that
>you should always vote for someone you *want* to see get elected,
>even if you know they haven't got any chance of winning.  You are
>suggesting that people vote for someone they want *not* to see
>elected.
>
>/June

   Maybe I did. The point I thought you were trying to make, 
is that if people are making a protest vote (for a candidate 
that can't win, like Perot or Marrou), they should make sure
they have a preference for their positions, because after the
elections the pundits (and other politicos) look at the election
results as much as the candidate`s stand on issues as the person. 
Therefore, if you beleive in the Libertarian positions, but 
know nothing about Marrou, voting for him would at least send
a message about the  support for the Libertarian's positions.
It doesn't necessarily mean that you think that person is the
best qualified to run the country. In fact, given the level
of political and governmental experience of either Perot or
Marrou, it would be a streach to say they are as qualified
as a President or a Governor. 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: olshen@biostat.washington.edu (Adam Olshen)
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
Organization: Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Univ. of Wash.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:39:31 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.210646.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
> How can we look up to a President who was afraid to defend his country? 

Were we attacked?  If so, I missed it.

>How can we look up to a President who- in a church, before his friends, 
>family, a priest and God could not uphold a promise to remain faithful to
>his wife? 

How do you know what arrangement he had with his wife.  Maybe his wife had
affairs?  Maybe she did not care?  How can you judge their marraiage from
the outside?

>How can we look up to a President who sees nothing but doom and
>gloom in the American work place? 

What does this mean?  

>How can we look up to a President who has
>experimented with drugs... particularly in an age when drugs controls our
>streets, and murders children? 

You seem to be the gloom and doom man.  I walked down many streets today
and none of them was controlled by drugs.  In fact, in 24 years, I have never
walked down a street controlled by drugs.  I must hang out in the wrong 
neighborhoods.  Drugs don't murder; people are the only objects that have
the capability of murder.  Drugs lead to murder, but that is mostly the
result of our inane drug laws.

>You've choosen an interesting thread. Now
>let's see how many other flaws we can find in "Billary" Clinton. 
>Here endith the lesson.
>		 --VSG001@acad.drake.edu (Vince Goddard-ARCH Conservative)   

Adam Olshen
olshen@biostat.washington.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: United We Stand And Deliver
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:21:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.171521.22251@kpc.com>,
emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:
>In article <1992Sep26.172551.6843@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>>Perot does not need to be stopped.  He is at most polling about 25%
>>of the vote any where I've seen.  That at best makes him just
>>another protest candidate like Marrou.  If you prefer Marrou to
>>Perot but vote for Perot this will be interpreted by the pundits as
>>a preference for Perot's positions, not preference for viability.
>>Stop trying to play the election as though you were betting on a
>>horse race.  Vote for what you want and send a message that can't be
>>ignored.
>>
>
>        I agree. I may vote for Perot because a) I agree with a good
         ^^^^^^^
>percentage of his positions and b) he has no chance of winning. God
                                                                 ^^^
>help us if he were actually to win.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Emmett, you seem to have gotten by message exactly backwards.  If
you think Perot would be that bad for the country, why on earth
would you want to vote for him?  What I was trying to say is that
you should always vote for someone you *want* to see get elected,
even if you know they haven't got any chance of winning.  You are
suggesting that people vote for someone they want *not* to see
elected.

/June
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: United We Stand And Deliver
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 16:51:10 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Sep25.214703.1790@kpc.com> emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:
]In article <Bv5Iv4.I6D@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
]>  Are you saying that you agree that a pair of software engineers
]>  (not in management) living in a modest 3 bedroom ranch in a 
]>  suburb of Lowell, Mass are "wealthy"?! 
]>
]	Seeing as a couple of sofware engineer's yearly income
]is probably more than the average U.S. home price, Yes.
]

It used to be that the wealthy were those who lived an extravagant
lifestyle (or could afford to). Now we are defining the wealthy as anyone
who is moderately successful in a profession? I suppose this is what
the "balance the budget on the back's of the wealthy" naturally leads to:
anyone over "average" by some sense is wealthy. How convenient... as soon
as we label someone wealthy, then we are morally justified in extracting
their money.

Sigh.... the politics of envy really suck.

-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - If a field of study has the word "science" in it - it isn't a science - -
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14318 talk.politics.misc:48010
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: United We Stand And Deliver
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 00:01:25 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
NNTP-Posting-Host: maine.ce.utk.edu

In article <1992Sep25.214703.1790@kpc.com> emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:

=>In article <Bv5Iv4.I6D@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter 
=>Nelson) writes:
=>>In article <Bv5HEF.ELu@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com
=> dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
=>>>
=>>>Perot's book claims that tax changes on incomes of over $89,250
=>>>will affect 4% of the taxpayers.  I suspect his opinion of what
=>>>"wealthy" means is shared by many more Americans than yours.
=>>
=>>  Are you saying that you agree that a pair of software engineers
=>>  (not in management) living in a modest 3 bedroom ranch in a 
=>>  suburb of Lowell, Mass are "wealthy"?! 
=>>
=>	Seeing as a couple of sofware engineer's yearly income
=>is probably more than the average U.S. home price, Yes.

     Eventually the government will be honest about the whole thing and
rewrite the tax scale based on how much you get keep.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  Information Services Group
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.marrou
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: 1-800-BEND-OVER
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:17:22 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.124522.29686@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
>
>People who vote for Perot will deserve what they get.  Unfortunately, there
>will be lots of innocent bystanders that won't deserve it, but will still
>have to BEND OVER.

What is this obsession with "bending over"???

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner)
Subject: Re: Perot's Re-Entry: What's the Possible Electoral Effect?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:45:47 GMT

In article <BvICFH.GJr@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com> dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
|In article <1992Oct2.124348.12393@cbfsb.cb.att.com> I wrote:
|>
|>OK, so now he's back in officially.  I've heard various opinions
|>in the media regarding who's hurt and who's helped by Perot's
|>candidacy.  I've heard that he could cause Clinton to win Texas

|If I may pose question to the readership at large, why do people 
|care what Perot's effect is on the other two?  Why do people allow 
|polls to dictate for whom they vote?

[stuff deleted]

I'm interested in other opinions, but mine is that I won't decide
whom to vote for based on any poll.  My reason for asking is that
I've already made up my mind and am just curious whether Perot's
participation will help or hurt my candidate's chances of winning.
I must admit that I don't fully understand how the electoral college
system works; I don't see why we can't just determine the winner by
popular vote (it seems fairer if everyone's one vote counts equally).

Scott


Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14925 alt.politics.clinton:8157 alt.politics.bush:7490
From: sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner)
Subject: Perot's Re-Entry: What's the Possible Electoral Effect?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:43:48 GMT


OK, so now he's back in officially.  I've heard various opinions
in the media regarding who's hurt and who's helped by Perot's
candidacy.  I've heard that he could cause Clinton to win Texas
and that, without winning Texas himself, Bush can't be re-elected.
I've heard a similar thing about Florida.  On the other hand, I've
heard that Perot could actually help Bush in several midwestern
states.  Although winning these states would help Clinton win the
Presidency, they're not absolutely critical.

So I'm a little confused.  If Texas is a "must-win" for Bush (with
its ~34 electoral votes), why isn't it a "must-win" for Clinton?
Ditto for Florida.  And what about those midwestern states?

I see many poll results every day.  I've seen them with Perot and
without Perot.  I've seen Clinton ahead by 3 points and I've seen
him ahead by 21.  The problem is that these polls represent the
_national_popular_vote_, NOT the impact of people's preference on
the electoral vote, which is how a President is elected.  Perhaps 
someone could present a (hopefully objective) view of the possible 
and/or likely implications of Perot's candidacy on the electoral 
college.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Scott D. Brenner
AT&T Consumer Communications Services
Basking Ridge, NJ
scott@cimu03.att.com  -or-  sbrenner@attmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: wag5@quads.uchicago.edu (john peter wagner)
Subject: Re: Bush and Iran Contra
Reply-To: wag5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 02:25:54 GMT

In article <19vqb2INNaa8@news.aero.org> foy@aero.org (Richard Foy) writes:
>General Secord said Bush is lying about his role in Iran Contra.
>
>I wonder how the Bush supporters will discount this. I think it is at
>least as serious as Clinton's draft discussion.
>
>Richard Foy  Redondo Beach, CA         Standard Disclaimer
>

	Why discount it? There was nothing wrong with Iran Contra but the fact
that it violated 'proper routes.' But the Democrats, who were bitching
about Bush not overriding the authority of the Florida Governor following
the hurricane in sending in troops should have no problem with that little detail.
	The fact is, Iran-Contra was about as physically harmful as
WaterGate.  And perhaps as politically useful to the opponents.

			J. Wagner


Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:14763 talk.politics.misc:48790
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:06:58 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Chris Bartz) writes:
|> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
|> >
|> >  But it's how loud that answer will be....
|> >
|> >  A million calls in 12-16 hours??
|> >
|> >  Now, unless someone's doing some serious calling, there's got to be a lot of
|> >support for him.  It's just that, in these polls, "likely voter" usually =
|> >Republican or Democrat.
|> >
|> 
|> If I really wanted Ross Perot to run I'd call the number hundreds of times.
|> Why not - he's paying for the call.  It doesn't take much effort to dial
|> a number, wait for a machine to answer, and then hang-up.  I'd be willing
|> to bet that there are quick a few people doing some serious calling.
|> Add to that the number of people who called to say DON'T run and your
|> 'poll' is pretty useless for telling how many people want him to run.
|> Ross Perot may call the number himself a few hundred times :)
|> 
Let's not forget the people who would like to see him run for reasons
other than wanting him to win.  Example: would be Bush supporters who
feel Ross would take votes from Clinton.  Use the user.

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
From: bsc7@po.CWRU.Edu (Bradley S. Corsello)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: what # if you DON'T want him to run? was call XXX if want Perot 2 run
Date: 30 Sep 92 04:20:10 GMT
Reply-To: bsc7@po.CWRU.Edu (Bradley S. Corsello)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


see subject
-- 
Brad Corsello (bsc7@po.cwru.edu) 2L Case Western Reserve Law School
"The Fanaticks have always had a way of affecting to run into Per-
secution, and count vast Merit upon every little Hardship they suffer."
^ J. Swift.  "Factum clarum, jus nebulosum."  Rex v. Haddock.
From: detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Bob Dornan on Bill Clinton - Important
Date: 4 Oct 92 05:06:40 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


     Rep. Bob Dornan has been speaking on C-Span in the House
live concerning Bill Clinton and his anti-war, anti-Vietnam
protests during his college days.

    Most specificly, in 1970, Bill Clinton was invited to go
to Moscow to be part of the so called "Peace Movement".  During
this time period, an American in the former Soviet Union had to
be invited by the Communist govt., and they had to have prior
knowledge or provide instruction on where he may travel along
with what he may say while in the former Soviet Union.

     This is the same Bill Clinton who, while at Oxford, sought
information on either obtaining dual citizenship or obtaining
British citizenship.

     Is this the individual the American people should send to
The White House?

     Rep. Bob Dornan should be addressing the house again this
weekend.  I urge those concerned about what I have briefly outlined
here to call:

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515

(202) 224-3121

     Your can either ask for Rep. Dornan's office or staff, or attempt
to reach your own.  This information must be presented to the American
public, and the events which occurred there must be researched and
addressed by Bill Clinton.


-- 
---------------------------------
     David De Trolio
---------------------------------
(detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu)
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Clinton leading in Maine
Date: 4 Oct 1992 02:25:17 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a poll of 800 households conducted last week by WCSH-TV in Portland,
the showings in a three-way race were:

Clinton 44%   Bush 30%    Perot 14%

In a two-way race, Clinton led by 19%. I didn't get the exact numbers.

Favorable ratings for the candidates were as follows:

Gore 53%
Clinton 40%
Bush 26%
Perot 25% (approx.)
Quayle 23%

Numbers as recalled by my father. Thanks, Dad. 
-- 
"In universities, it is forbidden     |  "Personally, my politics are so far
to teach nonsense. But the _history_  |  to the right, I consider Paul Revere
of nonsense -- that's scholarship!"   |  to be a pinko."
               -- Saul Lieberman      |                 -- Tom Grundner
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections