HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rauscher@romulus.rutgers.edu (Rich Rauscher)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: Party Preferences
Date: 9 Apr 92 12:01:07 GMT
Organization: Center for Discrete Math. and Theor. Comp. Sci.

mdgale@acpy01.att.com (Michael Gale (CXNIXPT1)) writes:

>>Pro-Choice, Pro-Civil Liberties Republican
>Here's a person I could convince to at least consider supporting
>a libertarian candidate.

I've already considered them, and agree with them on most points 
(more than I agree with either of the ol' established parties), 
but until they start to build an infrastructure (i.e. get some
people on local councils, board of freeholders, etc) they're
not going to be taken seriously.

BTW, I had the same COBOL/JCL experience at American Mgmt Systems.
They hired me as a LAN/Unix person...the first week there I was
sent to D.C. to learn COBOL and JCL!  

mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes:

>Sure we need defense, but we have more than we need now.  

Agreed.  Are you equating foreign policy with defense? 

>And if people have something better than drugs to make them happy, drugs will
>be easier to deal with.

I would agree here if drugs were a victimless crime.  I don't think
that I could be convinced that they are.  
-- 
-------------
rauscher@rutgers.edu                RPO 5997 PO 5063, New Brunswick, NJ 08903
rauscher@PISCES                          Shakespeare learns Discrete Math:
{backbone site}!rutgers!rauscher                (2B | not (2B)) <=> TRUE
Newsgroups: nj.politics
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Subject: Re: POLITICS
Organization: CompuData Inc.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 13:53:19 GMT

dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:



>I'm voting for Perot.

If that's a motion, I'll second it.
Fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     Of what is oatmeal made? 
26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com   48% of Americans said wheat 
Beverly, NJ. 08010                            (Harper's)
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr
From: europa@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (r.j.capik)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: Legislating safety, was Re: Skiing Helmet Bill
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:07:38 GMT
Distribution: nj
Organization: AT&T

From article <1992Apr13.170914.28873@cbnewsm.cb.att.com>, by shz@garage.att.com (Seth Zirin):
> (Bill Sohl wrote:)
>>> Now I'm not an anti-safety nut, BUT I am getting very tired
>>> of everyone else, through the passage of laws, telling me what
>>> I should or shouldn't do relative to taking (accepting) the
>>> risks associated with various aspects of life, sports, etc.
>  
>  Mr. Brilliant replied:
>>I won't buy that argument.  If you were killed instantly, that might
>>be OK.  But it's more likely that you will die slowly and expensively,
>>and we will all pay for that through your medical insurance.
> 
> Doesn't this also happen with AIDS patients?  Do you propose that
> we outlaw "high risk" behavior?
> Seth Zirin
> 
High risk behavior! What about all the women that die in child
birth? How about all the people injured climbing ladders or stairs?
Should we outlaw sex, or high structures? What about kids that
run into the street and are hit by cars? Then there are all the
people poisoned because they can't read the warnings on common labels.
I guess we need a law that you can't buy a product unless you can
prove that you can read the label!
OK, fine. We need some safety laws, but where should it stop?
How protected do we need to be? How responsable do we need to be?
If we, as a society, are highly protected will we in turn forget
how to be responsable? Is our society so immature that we need our
government to act as a parent?

The driving force for the ski helmet bill was that a child died.
Further, the parent of the child had political connections. (Now,
if you, or I died in a skiing accident, we would probably just be
statistics). Also, it is unclear that the death would have been
prevented by the use of a helmet. There were many more factors
here than just a head injury (it's been a long time, so I don't
remember all the specifics). Some of these other items were also
added to the bill, things like a physical "barrier" between beginner
and advanced skiers, mandatory instruction, and thought was even
given to a ski license.
 
A good bill/law should have a clearly measurable objective.
The current ski helmet bill, in my opinion, has no such
goal.

Ron Capik
US Ski Association
(licensed official, and other stuff)
Note: these opinions are mine (as are all the grammer and
      spelling errors), and do not necesarily represent the
      views of the US Ski Association.
From: wnorris@drew.drew.edu (Two Bills)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: pres. election/ignorance of the dem. field
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:43:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: drew.1992Apr7.134307.95756
Organization: Drew University

In article <1992Apr6.215342.8826@njitgw.njit.edu>, dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
> 
> I would vote democratic, but the Dems don't have a candidate worth
> voting for.  I like Tsongas, but he won't get the nomination.  I think
> Clinton is nothing more than a tax-n-spend polititian, and Brown
> scares me.

Well, Tsongas won't get the nomination because he's not running 
anymore.  Come on, keep up....Clinton = Tax/Spend?  Perhaps you'd 
better do some reading.  Check his AK record, the man made 
concessions to business at the expense of the classic liberal agenda 
that the democratic party was so fond of in the 80's.  Harkin was the 
only democratic candidate that was a "classic liberal" in the 
tax/spend mode, and he's dropped out.  Still what's so wrong about 
spending?  Read some economic theory, and you'll see that deficit 
spending is the only thing that awakens a depressed economy.  It 
worked for FDR in the late 30's/early 40's, it worked in England in 
the late 30's, and more recently, it worked for Reagan in the early 
80's.  It's after the economy is up and going again that things get 
tricky, and the theory goes way over my head.


> I'm voting for Perot.

Any real reason, or just becasue he's kind of trendy now?

> -- 
> David Charlap                   Q:"Where do these stairs go?"
> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu          A:"They go up"
> ----------------------------
> Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!


Bill N.
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: POLITICS
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:21:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: njitgw.1992Apr8.132101.8213
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Apr7.152259.20490@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes:
>
>Most of us have been taught to fear foreign attack and taxes, and hope
>for owning a bigger home and a newer car.  The result is you vote
>Republican.
>
>As it happens, I fear incompetent workers and clever rogues, and hope
>for peace.  So I don't vote Republican.  I vote Democratic with my
>fingers crossed.

You don't remember the last Democratic president much, do you?  Carter
had us in double digit inflation AND interest rates

Let's face it.  Not one candidate is qualified to leat this country.
So what are you going to do about it?  I'm certainly not going to vote
either of those party chuckleheads into being suprememe executive
officer.  

A vote for an independant is a vote against Bush and a vote against
Clinton.  No president in the last 20 years has had any ability to
successfully lead the country.  So we all don't vote for the guy who
gets elected anyway.  We all get shafted.  We all complain.  And the
cycle goes on and on until everything collapses someday.  I hope to be
elsewhere when it happens.


-- 
David Charlap                   Q:"Where do these stairs go?"
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu          A:"They go up"
----------------------------
Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
From: jcocurul@drew.drew.edu
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: The American Political System
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:20:00 GMT
Distribution: nj
Organization: Drew University

In article <1992Apr6.003015.20839@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, mf@nvuxr.uucp (26217-fusco) writes:
> From P.J. O'Rourke's book "Parliament of Whores" 
> (without permssion, of course).
> 
> The end of the Preface:
> 
> "... God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat.
> 	God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged male,
> a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer
> in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for
> their actions. He has little apparent concern for for the material
> well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, sociallly
> powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world.
> God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into
> God's heavenly country club.

> 	Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening.
> He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been
> naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it.
> He gives everyone everything they want without thought of a quid
> pro quo. He works harder for charities, and he's famously generous
> to the poor. Santa Claus if preferable to God in every way but one:
> There is no such thing as Santa Claus."
> 
> Marc Fusco           mf@nvuxr.cc.bellcore.com

_God and Other Famous Liberals_ argues differently; see PJ here is 
using the Old testament God, not the loving/died for your sins Jesus 
God of the New Testament.  Also, I didn't really like this book that 
much for after going on and on about how lousy government is, PJ 
O'Rourke always had much kind words to say about them or saying the 
people often do the best they can with what they have in our system of 
democracy.  He especially had a nice chapter on bureaucrats of all 
things, showing that they get a bad rap.  He praises the Supreme 
Court, shows how a Congressman worked very hard for his country, and 
seemed to think wasting money to have nice looking invasions like in  
Panama was ok for he sees the military as an efficient running 
machine.  How this goes with all his anti-government rhetoric escapes 
me.

              -JOE
From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: pres. election/ignorance of the dem. field
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:48:21 GMT
Organization: AT&T

From article <Apr.8.07.50.09.1992.26886@romulus.rutgers.edu>, by rauscher@romulus.rutgers.edu (Rich Rauscher):
.....
> So..what issues do people regard as important?  Here's my top few:
> 
> 1)Education  2)Foriegn Policy  3)National Debt  4)Drugs  

Education, employment, infrastructure, health care delivery.  In no
particular order.

Negative issues (to back off from) are defense and the drug war.

Sure we need defense, but we have more than we need now.  And if
people have something better than drugs to make them happy, drugs will
be easier to deal with.

If you look hard at our schools, our economy, the amounts we spend on
health (and the enormous number of people who don't have it), and the
time we spend waiting in traffic jams, you might not be so eager to
spend every last billion dollars to fend off external enemies.

My wife will wonder why I didn't mention civil liberties and abortion
rights.  Flaming liberal that I am, I have come to believe that the
"conservatives" have done such a lousy job of "conserving" our
resources that "liberalism" is not the foremost issue any more.

							Marty
marty@hoqaa.att.com		hoqaa!marty
Martin B. Brilliant		(Winnertech Corporation)
From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: Party Preferences
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:52:05 GMT
Organization: AT&T

From article <Apr.9.08.01.06.1992.20719@romulus.rutgers.edu>, by rauscher@romulus.rutgers.edu (Rich Rauscher):
....
> mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes:
> 
>>Sure we need defense, but we have more than we need now.  
> 
> Agreed.  Are you equating foreign policy with defense? 

No.  I'm just not that concerned about "foreign policy" as an issue.
I think Russia, Central America, Japan, etc., are all different
issues.  But the defense establishment is being maintained as a
solution without a problem.  Sometimes you need the solution before
you have the problem.  So I want to reduce it, but not eliminate it.

>>And if people have something better than drugs to make them happy, drugs will
>>be easier to deal with.
> 
> I would agree here if drugs were a victimless crime.  I don't think
> that I could be convinced that they are.  

I would agree if the drug war were a victimless adventure.  But it's
been a terrible influence on civil rights, including property rights.
Boats have been officially seized, pried open, or otherwise trashed
just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, or had
the wrong passengers.  The property of defendants has been seized
before trial.  Manuel Noriega was taken captive in a clear violation
of international decency.  And the use of drugs still goes on.

The failure of the Prohibition Amendment should have taught us
something.  You may think that alcohol is a middle-class vice, and
drugs are a lower-class vice, so we have to "condone" alcohol (and
tobacco) and "forbid" drugs.  But forbidding does not prevent, and the
class distinction is false.  The drug war is no more successful than
Prohibition was.

As I said, what you try depends on what you fear and what you hope
for.  That sometimes means that it depends more on what you wish you
could accomplish than what you realistically can.

							Marty
marty@hoqaa.att.com		hoqaa!marty
Martin B. Brilliant		(Winnertech Corporation)
From: shz@garage.att.com (Seth Zirin)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: Legislating safety, was Re: Skiing Helmet Bill
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:09:14 GMT
Distribution: nj
Organization: Just me

(Bill Sohl wrote:)
>> Now I'm not an anti-safety nut, BUT I am getting very tired
>> of everyone else, through the passage of laws, telling me what
>> I should or shouldn't do relative to taking (accepting) the
>> risks associated with various aspects of life, sports, etc.
 
 Mr. Brilliant replied:
>I won't buy that argument.  If you were killed instantly, that might
>be OK.  But it's more likely that you will die slowly and expensively,
>and we will all pay for that through your medical insurance.

Doesn't this also happen with AIDS patients?  Do you propose that
we outlaw "high risk" behavior?

Seth Zirin
From: mf@nvuxr.uucp (26217-fusco)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: The American Political System
Keywords: according to PJ
Date: 6 Apr 92 00:30:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: porthos.1992Apr6.003015.20839
Distribution: nj
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ

From P.J. O'Rourke's book "Parliament of Whores" 
(without permssion, of course).

The end of the Preface:

"... God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat.
	God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged male,
a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer
in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for
their actions. He has little apparent concern for for the material
well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, sociallly
powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world.
God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into
God's heavenly country club.
	Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening.
He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been
naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it.
He gives everyone everything they want without thought of a quid
pro quo. He works harder for charities, and he's famously generous
to the poor. Santa Claus if preferable to God in every way but one:
There is no such thing as Santa Claus."

Marc Fusco           mf@nvuxr.cc.bellcore.com
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: POLITICS
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:53:42 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.


I would vote democratic, but the Dems don't have a candidate worth
voting for.  I like Tsongas, but he won't get the nomination.  I think
Clinton is nothing more than a tax-n-spend polititian, and Brown
scares me.

I'm voting for Perot.
-- 
David Charlap                   Q:"Where do these stairs go?"
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu          A:"They go up"
----------------------------
Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
From: klink@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (steven.r.klinkner)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: POLITICS
Date: 6 Apr 92 20:05:43 GMT
Distribution: nj
Organization: AT&T

shz@garage.att.com (Seth Zirin) writes:
>arnold@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us (Jonathan Hefler) writes:
>> 
>> Hi, I would like to say one thing and one thing only: DEMOCRATS ARE THE 
>> ONLY CHOICE IF WE WANT THIS COUNTRY TO SURVIVE! If anyone out there can 
>> dispute this honest claim, please contact me.
>
>This is a sad commentary on how our tax dollars are being used to
>brainwash kids with the leftist educator agenda.  ...

Education = Leftism?  Does this mean Ignorance = Rightism???  That's an
interesting proposition! 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Klinkner                AT&T Bell Labs                 srk@mink.att.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: POLITICS
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:22:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbfsb.1992Apr7.152259.20490
Organization: AT&T

From article <Apr.7.07.46.30.1992.9504@romulus.rutgers.edu>, by rauscher@romulus.rutgers.edu (Rich Rauscher):
> .....
> As for the comment about Democrats saving this country--
> I don't think you can ever say one political party will
> "save the country."  I, personally have serious problems
> with some of the stands taken by both major parties. It's
> a very dismal year for voters.

I think we have to stand back and look at how we've been manipulated.
What you think is important depends on what you've been taught to fear
and hope for.

In the middle ages, most people (the serfs) were taught to fear
robbers and hope for the life hereafter.  So they were loyal to their
lords and masters, and asked little from them.

Most of us have been taught to fear foreign attack and taxes, and hope
for owning a bigger home and a newer car.  The result is you vote
Republican.

As it happens, I fear incompetent workers and clever rogues, and hope
for peace.  So I don't vote Republican.  I vote Democratic with my
fingers crossed.

I know that's an oversimplification.  But I've tried to tell people
how badly this country is suffering from poor education, poor health
care delivery, an inadequate infrastructure, and unemployed human
resources, but all they can think about is national defense.  So I
guess it depends on what your brain's been washed in.

							Marty
marty@hoqaa.att.com		hoqaa!marty
Martin B. Brilliant		(Winnertech Corporation)
From: rauscher@romulus.rutgers.edu (Rich Rauscher)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: pres. election/ignorance of the dem. field
Date: 8 Apr 92 11:50:10 GMT
Organization: Center for Discrete Math. and Theor. Comp. Sci.


 wnorris@drew.drew.edu (Two Bills) writes:

>				...Still what's so wrong about 
>spending?  Read some economic theory, and you'll see that deficit 
>spending is the only thing that awakens a depressed economy.  It 
>worked for FDR in the late 30's/early 40's, it worked in England in 
>the late 30's, and more recently, it worked for Reagan in the early 
>80's.  It's after the economy is up and going again that things get 
>tricky, and the theory goes way over my head.

Fiscal policy is tricky, and government spending cost tax-dollars.
I almost always expect government to spend money less efficiently
than anyone else.  I would argue FDR's New Deal didn't take the US
out of a depression, WWII did.  And, as for Reagan, we now have a
trillion dollar debt that doesn't look like its ever going to
be paid off.

Deficit spending is the only thing that awakens a slow economy?  
I doubt this very much.  I think (hope) monetary policy is already
making a difference. 

So..what issues do people regard as important?  Here's my top few:

1)Education  2)Foriegn Policy  3)National Debt  4)Drugs  
 
-Rich
-- 
-------------
rauscher@rutgers.edu                RPO 5997 PO 5063, New Brunswick, NJ 08903
rauscher@PISCES                          Shakespeare learns Discrete Math:
{backbone site}!rutgers!rauscher                (2B | not (2B)) <=> TRUE
From: mdgale@acpy01.att.com (Michael Gale (CXNIXPT1))
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Party Preferences
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:45:58 GMT
Organization: AT&T IMS - Piscataway, NJ (USA)

>Pro-Choice, Pro-Civil Liberties Republican
Here's a person I could convince to at least consider supporting
a libertarian candidate.

>>I'm voting for Perot.
In some ways Perot scares me.  I admire much about him.  However, I feel
that much of his success comes from managing via homogeny.  He has been
know to inspire great loyalty and also had a reputation (notice: i use
the word reputation, I am not going to give arguments for or against
reallife experiences) for repaying that loyalty.

My personal experience with EDS is from a job interview.  At the time,
appox 1988, my wife was looking for a job.  EDS was holding job interviews
up on Rte 17 and I suggested she go for the practice.  While waiting for
her, I was helping myself to the free brownies and coffee.  An EDS 
employee came up to me and asked if I was waiting to be interviewed.
(Please picture this- I have shoulder length hair, beard & mustache).
I said no, I don't do mainframes, I'm a UNIX networking/systems person.
He asked me to consider interviewing because EDS was actively recruiting
unix networkers.  Since I was between AT&T contracts and working at an
insurance company I said why not.  During the interview I was asked if
I had any problem with going to Texas for training.  Of course not, by
the way, want kind of training, I asked.  
JCL & COBOL was the reply.  "Are you nuts, why waste the money on me, I
thought that you were interested in my UNIX/Ethernet/TCP/Datakit work?"
"We like everyone to have the same background.  And by the way, are
you aware of our groomming standards?"  I asked if they were concerned
about my beard getting caught in the keyboard?  (the funniest part, to
me is that EDS kept calling me back for a second interview!)

I think that I might be happy with Perot as VP and therefore in charge
of running the Senate.  Now that might be productive.  If there were
a position of Top Bearucrat (to lazy to grab dictionary) I think he
could do excellent work for the country that way.
From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
Newsgroups: nj.politics
Subject: Re: Legislating safety, was Re: Skiing Helmet Bill
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:22:39 GMT
Distribution: nj
Organization: AT&T

From article <1992Apr13.200738.28231@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>, by europa@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (r.j.capik):
>> ....
> High risk behavior! What about all the women that die in child
> birth? How about all the people injured climbing ladders or stairs?
> Should we outlaw sex, or high structures? ....
> ....
> A good bill/law should have a clearly measurable objective.
> The current ski helmet bill, in my opinion, has no such
> goal.
> 
> Ron Capik
> US Ski Association
> (licensed official, and other stuff)
> Note: these opinions are mine (as are all the grammer and
>       spelling errors), and do not necesarily represent the
>       views of the US Ski Association.

Thanks, Ron.  I hope more than a few people will get the idea that
good safety laws are good, but bad safety laws are bad, and it doesn't
make any sense to assume they're all alike.

							Marty
marty@hoqaa.att.com		hoqaa!marty
Martin B. Brilliant		(Winnertech Corporation)