HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Subject: Re: Sad comment on democracy
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 17:50:45 GMT


In article <1d9ai4INNi07@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>, 
rjs@citi.umich.edu (Robert J. Skrobola) said:

> Barbara Boxer elected to a Senate seat in California, 
> despite huge numbers of bounced checks, 

Really?  And just what were these "huge numbers," anyway?

(Hint: This is a trick question.)

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>


Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:22660 talk.politics.misc:58222 tx.politics:7006
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton's plan our best and only hope for the future
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:45:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

fred j mccall 575-3539 (mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com) wrote:
: No, Clinton's plan is founded on the notion, well proven in history,
: that men are in general a greedy and rapacious lot, and that without
: some outside guidance and restraint they will lay waste to everything
: around them in the name of their own profit and privilege.

Humans are also social animals and will willingly help and take care of
each other.  You socialists just have this strange notion that making a profit
is "evil", and that it's better to pick the pockets of the wealthy than to
strive for excellence.

: Then how do you explain the fact that people are working longer hours
: and making less money than they did in the past?

Because they're not.  This was campaign rhetoric, and not true over the last
12 years anyway.

: In some areas, indeed, but we're working real hard to piss those away,
: too.  We INVENTED most of the technology that other countries turn
: into products and beat our brains out with.  Why do you think that is?

Because we are business idiots apparently.

: Yeah.  Vote for Nobody, because Nobody is perfect.  Vote for
: Marrou/Lord, if you're into social Darwinism and industrial feudalism.

You say that as though it's a bad thing.

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"When you're following an angel, does it mean you have to throw your body off a 
 building?" -- TMBG
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Organization: The Leader Desslok School of Diplomacy
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 03:52:44 EST
From: Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: You Got it

Excuse me, but I simply do not believe that Saddam Who's Sane threw a victory
party in Baghdad after Clinton won.

This _was_ typical Republican doomsaying, right? If not, sources would be
appreciated. (Geez. Just a few days ago we _Democrats_ were the doomsayers.
How things change, huh?)

 "But Dr. Radium, was that necessary?" "Rez, _everything_ I do is necessary."
[Your blood pressure just went up.]        Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
DISCLAIMER: If PSU knew I had opinions they'd probably try to charge me for it.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:22910 alt.politics.marrou:2143 talk.politics.misc:58533 alt.politics.clinton:16131
From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan R. Hagan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: A Clinton Mandate?!?
Date: 6 Nov 92 19:59:39 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven) writes:

>In article <Bx7rGq.43x@world.std.com> adamg@world.std.com (Adam M Gaffin) writes:

>What this tells me is that FIFTY-SEVEN PERCENT of the voters do not
>believe that Bill Clinton should be President.

Right. And SIXTY-TWO PERCENT of the voters do not believe that George
Bush should be President.

and

EIGHTY-ONE PERCENT of the voters do not believe that Ross Perot should
be President.

There for Clinton wins because he had the least number of people who
didn't want him to be President.

Whats your point?

-- 
Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot
From: emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff)
Subject: Re: Perot's Vote Percentage State-by-State
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Corporation, Santa Clara, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:05:37 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.023236.28906@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.221354.3407@kpc.com> emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:
>>>
>>	But that's even low for minority voting. According to ABC's exit
>>polls, Perot got 7% of the minority vote, and Bush got something like
>>8%, with Clinton getting the rest. 
>
>Don't forget the plus or minus three percent in the polls.  "Perot got 7%"
>is really "There's a 95% chance Perot got 4% - 10% of minority votes."

	The +/- 3% is for phone polls. Does anyone know what the margin for
error was on exit polls? They were calling races much closer than a 3% margin
based on the exit polls. I would think that exit polls would be more accurate
(given the same sampling size), because the people definitely did vote and 
can't change their mind.


Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:22964 talk.politics.misc:58613
From: dowzycki@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Ken Dowzycki)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: President-elect Clinton lying already
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:08:34 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac) writes:

Yelstin stuff deleted.....

>  And on the question of mandates, let Clinton have it!  I do not want to
>give the Democrats a SINGLE excuse when 1996 rolls along.  I can't wait.
>They've promised us a paradise and we'd better get it.  Thursday on C-SPAN
>some analysts were saying that Clinton is going to have a BIG problem with
>the Democratic congress next year.  He's going to only want a small amount
>of economic legislation crafted by him passed, but will wind up being
>SWAMPED with every left-wing bill which got vetoed during the last 12
>years.  Will he veto legislation passed by his own party?  Sounds like
>gridlock to me!

>  At first I was dejected when Clinton won, but now I think I'm going to
>enjoy the next four years even more.  I will get sadistic pleasure watching
>Clinton / Gore hoist on their own patard of unrealistic promises which they
>made to the public just to get in the White House for four years.

>  SO GO TO IT, MIRACLE WORKERS!  YOU ASKED FOR A MANDATE, YOU GOT IT! COME
>1996 YOU WILL NOT HAVE A SINGLE EXCUSE IF EVERY ONE OF THE PROMISES YOU
>MADE DOES NOT COME TRUE.  WE READ BUSH'S LIPS AND THREW HIM OUT AFTER FOUR
>YEARS, WE'LL DO THE SAME THING TO CLINTON IN 1996 IF EVERY PROMISE UTTERED
>FROM HIS LIPS DOES NOT COME TRUE.  ENJOY THE NEXT FOUR YEARS.


HEAR! HEAR!    I can't wait either!  The Democrats and media just had
a field day with Bush and everything he said and did.  These same folks
protested the Gulf War and now claim we didn't go far enough  'cause
Saddam is still in power.

Clinton seems to have something to please everyone.  He's going to
tax everyone making over $200,000 a year to pay for his spending spree
What he and the rest you 'Crats fail to realize is that the people 
making that kind of money are smart enough to get lawyers and 
accountants to get them out of it.  What happens next, you and I will
pay for it.

Mr. Hillbilly claims to have created jobs in Arkansas, yeah, ok, but
what kind of jobs are they?  Pulling feathers out of a chickens ass?

Am I better off than I was 4 years ago?  Yes!
Am I better off than I was 8 years ago?  Absolutely!

Will I be better off 4 years from now, I have my doubts.
I'll be the first one to scream if my take home is less 'cause
I have to pay for some brats child  care.

It took Nixon to bail out Johnson's global mess...
It took Reagan to bail out Carter's global mess...

Who will it take to bail out Clinton????

I predict  Baker and Kemp in '96.

I HAVE FOUR YEARS TO SIT BACK, RELAX and KEEP SMILIN'!!!
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:22949 talk.politics.misc:58583
From: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: The "education" President-elect
Date: 6 Nov 1992 21:15:17 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


  Wow!  Now we have a real "education" President in Bill Clinton.  Someone
who uses proper English words like "How're" when communicating to millions
of Americans in his campaign commercials (How're you doing?).  Maybe he
wants the Arkansas dialect of English to become the official language of
the US.  I can see it now.  In six months the White House is going to look
like the set from The Beverly Hillbillies.  Chelsea will have all her
"pets" living on the White House lawn and in the swimming pool.   (^:}

-- 
Richard Mulac                                       ck347@cleveland.freenet.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       1996 election countdown - 1460 more days         | These pontifications 
 until the Democrats are thrown out of the White House  |      are my own!     
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: So, Who Does He Like in the Superbowl?
From: mike@uunet!tellab5!odgate (Mike J. Kelly)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 14:35:08 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: Odesta Corporation
Summary: Bush 68%, right.

>From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
>Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
>Subject: Re: New Newsweek Poll
>Message-ID: <13781.2ab407bc@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu>
>Date: 14 Sep 92 03:32:11 EDT
>
>In article <1992Sep13.155755.25329@wuecl.wustl.edu>, gl1@cec2.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon) writes:
>>     According to the results of a new Newsweek poll which I heard about on
>> the radio last night, Clinton has widened his lead over Bush to a 15 point
>> margin, up five points from the previous poll.  The actual numbers were
>> 53-38.
>  ^^^^^^
>
>LIES! It's more like 68-24 in favor of Bush. I heard that this is reported
>among _National Review_ reader poll (if I am correct). It is *amazing* how
>people eat up all the LIBERAL LIES and DISTORTIONS.
>
>Yeah, right. Liberal fool.
>
>-Garrett
>
>

(notice date on original article)

68% for Bush, eh?  Any Superbowl predictions so I know who to bet AGAINST?
-- 
--
Mike Kelly               Odesta Corporation, Northbrook, Illinois, USA
...!clout!odgate!mike    - Until odesta.com is registered.
odgate!mike@clout.uucp   - From the Internet.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:23193 talk.politics.misc:59075 tx.politics:7121
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,tx.politics
Subject: NYC School Chancellor Fernandez should get a medal.
Date: 6 Nov 92 12:59:08 GMT
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin


*13  SCHOOL CHOICE:  N.Y.C. PLAN BROADENED BY FERNANDEZ
     New York City Schools Chancellor Joseph Fernandez yesterday
said junior high and elementary schools would have to make
available any empty seats to students from other districts as a
part of his new school choice plan (Berger, N.Y. TIMES).
Fernandez said that as many as 320 elementary and 135 junior high
schools have spaces available.
     "Even the receiving superintendent could not deny an
interested child a place if a seat was available," Fernandez told
the Board of Ed, according to the TIMES.  Fernandez also said he
might soon try to require the city's 32 school districts to
permit students to choose any school within their districts.
     But Board members Ninfa Segarra and Westina Matthews
expressed concern that the plan would close unpopular schools and
leave children in disadvantaged neighborhoods with no convenient
alternative (See DRC 11/4, #12).  "Where will they go?"  Matthews
asked, "It's not like closing a factory ... children will still
be in those communities."  Concerns that school choice would
result in segregation were also aired.
     Fernandez said that his staff is preparing rules to guard
against "resegregating."  He pointed out that school choice
exists already in city high schools and that the plan has been
"color free."  Fernandez also said 39,000 of the city's 65,000
freshmen attend high schools they selected.
     Fernandez added that rules would prohibit admissions
criteria created specifically for new "choice" students, and
lotteries would be used to ensure racially exclusive standards
are not used by schools to select students (11/5).

----
Listen to these school board jerks try to resist real reform.
They live in fear that they might have to get a real job. 
We need these kinds of school choice programs in TX.  
Who cares if they close schools (really crack houses) that NOONE WANTS
TO GO TO?
	- curt
-- 
--
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |        Austin, TX
 - Begin means testing of Social Security, Medicare and Farm Subsidies now. -
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,tx.politics
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: The end of the Reagan Era
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:18:33 GMT

In <1992Nov05.163408.29439@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:

>Michael A. Petonic (petonic@hal.com) wrote:
>: It's not artificially inflating.  At the risk of sounding like Gore,
>: there are tangible costs associated with dealing with pollution
>: generated by cars.  Someone has to pay the costs, why not the causer
>: of the pollution?  

>This argument might make sense if gas tax revenue had EVER been used to do
>anything about pollution generated by cars.

Uh, excuse me, but aren't we talking about a hypothetical INCREASE in
gasoline taxes here?  What does what the amount we collect now is
spent on have to do with anything?

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,tx.politics,alt.politics.bush
From: casey@well.sf.ca.us (Kathleen Creighton)
Subject: Re: The US - laughing stock of the world
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 17:37:45 GMT


>Gennifer Flowers . . . was a close confidant whom he trusted

Oh puhLEEZE.  Highly intelligent people might not be real discriminating
about their sex partners (if indeed she was one), but they do tend to be
very discriminating about who they take into their "confidence".
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl)
Subject: Re: NYT (6-17) -- Clinton on Cuomo & Supreme Court (re: The Decline ...)
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 15:05:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.052509.29112@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
>Cuomo would easily be confirmed.

While I understand the fact that one need not be a former judge to be
appointed to the Supreme Court, how likely is that today.  Cuomo has
no prior judicial writings to offer, nor any judicial experience at
all (as far as I am aware).  Isn't it also likely that Coumo's firm
opposition to the death penalty will not be favorably viewed by 
"conservative" democrats, especially those from the south?

As to the prior judicial background, seems to me that that was
made an effrot in several of the Reagan and Bush appointments...
that is, the claim was made that the appointments were not "the best"
judicial candidates.  Those claims were made by the democrats who
opposed the Reagan and Bush appointments.

I'd also wonder what the American Bar Associations "rating" of
Coumo would be?

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process
bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot
From: prhaikal@eos.ncsu.edu
Subject: Re: Perot's Vote Percentage State-by-State
Originator: prhaikal@c00471-224wi.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: prhaikal@eos.ncsu.edu 
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Distribution:  alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:10:01 GMT


> NC            14
> VA            14
> LA            12
> SC            12    
> AL            11
> AR            11
> TN            10
> MS             9
> DC             4  

Well...North Carolinians now have to things to be ashamed of:

	-Jesse Helms

	-Perot getting only 14% of the vote, nine out of last place

Sorry...
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:23246 talk.politics.misc:59163
From: mcgredo@prism.CS.ORST.EDU (Don McGregor)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: * THE MEDIA ELECTED CLINTON!?! *
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:48:39 GMT
Organization: Oregon State University, Computer Science Dept.
NNTP-Posting-Host: prism.cs.orst.edu

In article <1992Nov9.152237.21914@samba.oit.unc.edu> Norman.Miller@launchpad.unc.edu (Norman Miller) writes:
>
>Trouble is: Walsh, a former ABA president and life-long Republican,
>was appointed pursuant to an application by Attorney-General Meese.
>And he did so because Irangate was no small matter.  
>
I think Walsh has lost control of the investigation.  He spends most
of his time away from the investigation, and he's getting on in years.
His prosecuters, [Gillen and the person handling the Weinberger
case] do essentailly all the day-to-day work.  Walsh has said he only
occasionally confers on the overall direction of the prosecution.

>Now if McGregor wants to call Meese a scumbag, that's fine with me.

This is right up there with "I'm not going to stand here and listen to
you bad-mouth the United States of America!"  

Oversight is critical for an effective prosecution office.  The 
special investigator's office has received little or none, and has
in consequence run off into the tall weeds.  They resemble not a
prosectuion team so much as a WPA make-work program.  

Walsh was the wrong man for the job.  He doesn't know or can't admit
that the prosection is no longer serving any useful purpose (aside 
from providing hefty salaries and some nice digs at the Watergate.)
>
>What's especially interesting, though, is that McGregor--along with
>resentment-consumed haters like the Senator from Kansas--is ready
>to make a Federal case out of something that may not be even a mis-
demeanor but a clerical error.

Maybe.  But it has "the appearance of impropriety," cause for more 
than one investigation.  Perhaps we need a special prosecuter for the
special prosecuter.  It would be perhaps instructive for them to
be subject to Kafka-esque investigations that are capable of financially
ruining the subject, even while the "crimes" are loosely defined
and highly creative constructs.

-- 
Don McGregor             | "I..I blame society.  Society made me  
mcgredo@prism.cs.orst.edu|  what I am."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,soc.culture.african.american
From: prhaikal@eos.ncsu.edu 
Subject: Re: Perot's Vote Percentage State-by-State
Originator: prhaikal@c00471-224wi.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: prhaikal@eos.ncsu.edu 
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:21:22 GMT


>In article <Bx9ruw.8Jt@rice.edu> byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:
>>>    DC            4
>>
>>Gee, go figure!  Why do you think it might be that Washington
>>D.C. only voted 4% for Perot when the national average was 20%?
>
>Because Washington DC is something like 90% black.

Think again.  Who controls Congress? Democrats (unfortunately).  Who
uses the biggest staffs? Congress.  Where do all the staff members live?
D.C.  So who are they gonna vote for?  Bozo.  That's also the reason
why Maryland went so strongly for Clinton- Much of Maryland's suburbs 
are D.C.

Perot '96
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: The "education" President-elect
In-reply-to: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu's message of 6 Nov 1992 23:39:14 GMT
Organization: pubs
	<1den96INNom2@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1devn2INN1jl@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Date: 7 Nov 92 01:44:27 CST

Richard A. Mulac writes:

     I'm not even talking about the way he speaks.  I'm referring to their
   campaign ad which talks about the last four years and at the end they 
   plaster in big type across the screen:

			     HOW'RE YOU DOING?

   Great example to set for kids.  And this man is going to IMPROVE our
   educational system???

I don't see what you find objectionable about this.  It's a
grammatically correct sentence containing a contraction, correctly
spelled.  Perhaps you object to forming a contraction from "how are",
but why is this worse than "don't", "what's" and so on?  Although this
sentence wasn't meant as *Clinton's* words, you seem to imply that it
reflects badly on his ability with English.  Read interviews with him
and you'll see evidence of someone who thinks and speaks precisely even
if you disagree with his ideas.

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:23150 alt.politics.marrou:2172 talk.politics.misc:58983 alt.politics.clinton:16459
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Using Power (was Re: A Clinton Mandate?!?)
Date: 8 Nov 1992 22:06:47 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, jfr@RedBrick.COM () says:
>  Its truly a new day :-)
>

               Yup, a New Day. 
               Adios, America.  The world will miss you.
>  Jon Rosen
>

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections