HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dave@gergo.tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:48:00 GMT

In article <1867@celia.UUCP>, celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes...
} The main problem here is that our great nationalized weather service stated
}24 hours before the eye hit florida that the storm appeared to be weakening.
}Just a few hours before it hit florida they said that it appeared to be gain-
}ing strength again. Later using hind site the weather men said that the Islands
}to the east of florida slightly weakened the storm and when the eye got over
}the gulf stream it strengthened dramatically. Everyone was surprised by the
}damage.  The democrates must be panicking if they feel the need to use natural
}disasters politically...

Odd -- last week the night before Andrew went ashore in Louisiana, I was
combing the Internet for back position data for the storm. I located it and
went through all the weather service reports. I read all the prediction and
modeling info, and the discussion comments. While I don't have the files here
at home, I am certain that the discussion as Andrew approached Florida did
state that the storm appeared to be weakening BUT that it was expected to
strengthen once it hit the gulf stream. This was mentioned at the same time
as the weakening was (~24 hours before landfall in Florida, according to your
estimate), not just a few hours short of coming ashore.
People usually are surprised at the amount of damage from ANY major storm.

With all the argument over whether Bush could have legally sent troops to
Florida, and the claims that he was sitting by the phone waiting for the
call from Florida's Governor (any pictures?), nobody has pointed out how
simple it would have been for Bush to call Florida and say, "It looks as
though you have a tough situation on your hands. Could you use some help
down there? I've got some troops ready to roll if you want them."
As far as I have heard, Bush did not make any such offer. Bush has means
for getting reports (don't know if he trusts the TV :) and could have
decided that the people of Florida were in serious need and made that call
to the Governor.
It is less important how "prepared" Bush was, or how concerned, or how
long he sat up at night waiting for that phone to ring -- the fact that
he didn't take the initiative in a domestic disaster is very telling,
particularly if you compare his initiative in foreign wars. You can be
sure he wasn't just sitting by the phone waiting for Saddam to call.
And you can be certain that the people of Florida and Louisiana will
take this into account come November. 

 -                                                                     -
 - Dave Martin - Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M - 
 - DAVE@GERGA[GERGO,GERGI].TAMU.EDU - BROOKS@TAMVXOCN.BITNET - AOL:DBM -
 -                                                                     -
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3933 alt.politics.clinton:3904 alt.rush-limbaugh:4223 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5047
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (beta) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:41:01 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <7iyebtp@Unify.Com> ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan) writes:
> In article <1992Aug31.163023.23747@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
> >I was totally amazed that there was a delay in getting federal aid to
> >florida, and it's convinced me that GHWB is flat out incompetant.
> >Here's what I figured would happen: ...
> >
> >I was amazed that this didn't happen. GHWBs strongest liability is that
> >he is perceived as being uncaring about domestic issues. The disaster
> >was a made for TV oppertunity to get scads of great publicity on his most
> >problematic issue. If GHWB, a career politition, is so out of touch that
> >he can't grasp this, he diserves to be roasted on an open fire.
> >
> >This gaff could cost the GOP florida, a major player with many electorial
> >votes, and GHWB has noone to blame but himself.
>
> And he certainly has someone to thank that it wasn't worse.  You may recall
> that his first reaction to the news in Florida was to head for Kennebunkport,
> and he had to be talked out of it.
>

And a couple of years ago, Bush sent the troops into Maine where Kennebunkport is.
His OWN home there was seriously damaged...  Yeah, right :)

>
> Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244     ----------------------------+
> | ... one of those cliches that are always lying in wait to fill a vacuum in  |
> | the brain.		- H.W. Fowler					      |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

--
Amiga programmer of: GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle
Sega Genesis programmer of: Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3579 alt.politics.clinton:3575 alt.rush-limbaugh:4126 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4939
From: tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:15:00 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Aug31.163023.23747@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
>I was totally amazed that there was a delay in getting federal aid to
>florida, and it's convinced me that GHWB is flat out incompetant.
>Here's what I figured would happen:
>
>	Hurricane Andrew is on its way to florida. GHWB makes sure that
>	the pentagon is ready to act on a moments notice.
>
>	Andrew hits. Florida is devistated. GHWB interrupts his campaign
>	and flies to the disaster area immediately, gathering damage info
>	as it comes in. Arriving in florida, GHWB shows massive concern
>	for the suffering, and promises immediate federal troops to 
>	help out.

This is exactly what was planned, but we must be aware that some politics
was going on with the governor of florida (who just happens to be a
democrat) that prevented Bush from sending the troops in.  The media did not
point this out, although Mona Charin pointed it out Saturday night on the
Capital Gang.  What prevented Bush from sending the troops?  The governor
of a state must request troops for them to be sent, and, unfortunately for
Floridians, the governor did not request them until 3 or 4 days after the
Hurricane hit.  

by the way, the state did ask for national guard unit from the state of
florida to help, which they did promptly.

======================================================
 Teddy Kalivoda  ------------> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu 
   University of GA Computing & Network Services       
     Inst.of Higher Education               
=====================================================                                                                          
	"The sleep of reason gives rise to monsters"
				        (Goya, Caprichos)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: jason@ab20.larc.nasa.gov (Jason Austin)
Subject: Re: Bush bashing, etc....
Reply-To: Jason C. Austin <j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov>
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 18:17:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.005824.8872@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bx822@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ben Hansen) writes:
-> >It sounds to me like what Mr. President
-> >said what that he would not create any new taxes, and 
-> >although he stressed in his campaigning in '88 that he 
-> >would not *like* to raise taxes, a lackof agreement 
-> >between the executive and legislative branches (no matter 
-> >on whom you place the blame) forced him to do that.
-> 
-> No actually Mr President made quite clear that he expected
-> Congress to *push* and he would say no, repeated it and then
-> told what is normally called a lie.

	I love when the Democrats try to nail Bush on this one.  It
was their idea to raise taxes and Bush compromised to try to get
things done.  They got their way and now their bitching about it.

-> 
-> As to Governor's Clinton's avoiding the Viet Nam War. I
-> 
-> attended President Bush's war in the Persian Gulf and can only
-> respect those who may have participated in what was essentially
-> the slaughter of nearly helpless Iraqi conscripts. Viet Nam was
-> an equally questionable undertaking.

	These hindsight arguments are pointless.  No one knew how
Vietnam or Iraq would turn out.

	In the 30s, Germany went from a destroyed country to almost
conquering the world in a very short time, and Iraq was attempting the
same thing.  Iraq had a standing army of a million men and controlled
almost half of the world's known oil sources.  Bush and most the world
leaders knew what this could turn to if not stopped immediately.  WWII
was much more devastating than it ever needed to be, because people
did not want to fight and allowed Hitler to continue to gain territory
and military power.  The reason Iraq did not get farther is because of
the world response of intolerance and our advanced military technology.
The reason we had such small loses was from excellent leadership that
paid attention to the lessons of Vietnam.
--
Jason C. Austin
j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Don M. Gibson)
Subject: Re: Progressive taxes
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:48:08 GMT

wag5@quads.uchicago.edu (john peter wagner) writes:

>Many of you are under the impression that soaking the rich will
>solve all of our nation's financial difficulties.
>	Ther are a few problems with this.
>	First of all, as Adam Smith wrote, it is unwise to create a tariff
>which is too large, because the total income decreases due to resultant
>smuggling.  A small tariff will at least be paid honestly.
>	People with lots of income WILL find loopholes. If you assume

close the loopholes!

>only thing we can look forward to are popularist politicians(Pericles,
>Hitler,Clinton) enacting 'quick-fix' legislation that causes problems
>which haunt us for generations. My advice, my children- do not

is BC the quick-fix guy?  preventive health and job re-training quick
fixes?  student loans quick-fixes?  i think GB is the guy who has
stuck us with the deficit that will haunt is for generations:(

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:53:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.204545.28084@kadsma.kodak.com> pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) writes:
>Apparently the Bush property is also subject to a 'covenant' that makes
>it illegal for Bush to sell of give the property to a member of a racial
>minority. Source: NYT, week of 8/24, Schanberg column.
>
>Cute, huh?

"Cute" is an apt term for the quality of the NYT's coverage.  The NYT
knows that such covenants are not legally enforceable.  Moreover,
neither the seller nor the buyer can remove them and they're quite
common.  Given that such covenants are legally meaningless albeit
indelible evidence that the property was once owned by a racist, what
does bringing them up tell you?

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3442 alt.politics.elections:11934 alt.politics.clinton:3465
From: af610@yfn.ysu.edu (Ben Hanson)
Subject: Taxes
Organization: Youngstown State University/Youngstown Free-Net
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:53:09 GMT


 Is there a taxpayer in the country who sees George owning a
vacant lot in Texas, using this as a dodge to avoid paying
state taxes, and considers him ethically superior to Ronald
Reagan's mythical welfare queen?
-- 
Ben Hansen
af610@yfn.ysu.edu
bhansen@oread.cc.ukans.edu
From: fay@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Please clean up acts
Date: 1 Sep 92 13:17:31 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

"if knowledge was common, he wouldn't have said something so FUCKING STUPID"
(approximate words used in recent post)

Once again, I implore net-users to be able to rise above the petty name-calling
and down-right rudeness that is far too common here.

If I have insulted anyone on my posts, I hereby apologize deeply.  My enjoyment
of this net stems from intelligent conversation and debate on political issues. 
I love solid argumentation, and appreicate that (unlike in most political
discussions) I get a wide variety of views from articulate individuals.

But if I want ill-mannered statements, or ad hominem attacks, or off-target
shouting matches...well, I can always watch the candidates for that!


Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3434 alt.politics.clinton:3459
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: CNN Sound Bite...
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 23:04:41 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS, New Orleans, LA

Just heard a sound bite that makes my weekend.  GHWB, in response to a question
about how the FL relief effort has been politicized asked 'if there was no
honor left.'

This coming from the man who went to a flag factory in '88, promised no new
taxes in '88, lied about it in '90, regularly claims that Clinton and Gore are
godless, and spends more time trashing Clinton's wife than he does Clinton.

There was a time that I'd really get offended when a sleaze merchant like Bush
would talk about honor.  When he started on this theme tonight, however, I
didn't get upset.  He's become such a cartoon figure that it's just funny these
days.  Sort of like Pat Oliphant's cartoons of Carter at the end of his term,
when he kept getting smaller and smaller.  The same is happening to Bush.




|Edward J. Branley                         elendil@mintir.New-Orleans.LA.US|
|Seashell Software                                UUCP:  rex!mintir!elendil|
|3508 North Woodlawn Avenue                          Compu$erve: 71237,2227|
|Metairie, LA   70006       voice: +1-504-455-5087     bbs: +1-504-455-8665|
From: believer@world.std.com (Frank G Sesco)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Evolutionist lies
Date: 30 Aug 92 03:52:41 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

I urge all GOD fearing Americans to write to the Republican party and
demand a stand against the forces of evolutionism. Can we expect to remove
the scourge of drugs, homosexualism, and secular humanism while ignoring
the root of the problem?

Evolutionism attempts to write GOD out of our lives and the world. Read
talk.origins to see its true consequences. Our children are taught a
Pagan doctrine of a world without GOD as though it was fact. We must
fight to regain the schools of America! As prayer was taken out of our
schools Pagan dogma was put in its place.

-- 
  |                     In God We Trust                            |
--+--                                                            --+--
  |                                                                |
  |                                                                |
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3457 talk.politics.misc:42807 alt.politics.clinton:3477 alt.politics.elections:11944
From: lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
Date: 30 Aug 1992 00:14:46 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: tempest.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug28.170408.1712@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:

>In that, he's just like any other govt official stationed somewhere
>else.  He's just like Congress critters who "live" in their home
>district only to maintain election eligibility.  (My critter doesn't
>own squat in "his" district and may not even rent more than a mail
>drop.)

Documentation please?

andy
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: born@scepter.raleigh.ibm.com (Christopher J. Born)
Subject: The media
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 18:08:07 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.037 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: born@scepter.raleigh.ibm.com (Christopher J. Born)
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research

The media is continually being bashed and accused of being "biased".  Has
has anyone thought that maybe they (the media) just want to sell copy?
Examples of supposedly "biased" reporting include reporting
unemployment stats instead of employment stats, or reporting on all of
Dan Qs snafus instead of the "good" things he has said.  Maybe nobody
cares about the "good" things he says.  The list goes on...

It has been reported recently that people seem to have an increased
response to "negative" campaigns and "negative" information.  That
there is some sort of fear factor in people that "negative" information
seems to activate (if that's the proper word).

My point is, WE respond to what the media reports. Depending
on that response, the media will react in return, i.e.,
change the format, the message(in what way you ask!), etc...

I'm getting tired of all the media bashing.

Christopher J. Born

born@ralvm48.vnet.ibm.com
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: George Will on the GOP
Date: 31 Aug 92 19:24:00 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

In article JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com, JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com () writes:
>Actually, George Will has been an avowed George Bush antagonist for some time.
>Could be from when Bush acquiesced to the Democrats on taxes but maybe before.
>An interesting side of George Will that one liberal writer at the Detroit
>Free Press described: this writer attended a graduataion ceremonyat which
>Will's son (who is retarded) spoke as did George Will.  Will said that he
>would like to be remembered as his son's father rather than anything else,
>because of his pride and love for him.  There apparently wasn't a dry eye in
>the place.  I wonder if the viciousness of some of the Republican attacks
>hasn't further caused George Will to question Bush's designs.

George Will is a member of the cultural elite and the intelligencia.
He is an enemy of the right.
>
>Republicans could win on the issues if George Bush dropped the stupid
>personal attacks and pointed out that a Democratic congress with a
>dependent Democratic executive would ram through more taxes than even
>George allowed them too do.

I agree with that.



---
===============================================================================
Mitch Sako	LSI Computing Systems			Office	408-433-4187
internet:	msako@lsil.com				FAX	408-433-8796
uucp:		lsil!msako
RIME:		->REDBARON, conference=POLITICS
Disclaimer:	Opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone and do not
		reflect those of anyone else including my organization,
		my management or my mother
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
From: lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher)
Subject: Re: Republican Platform 1992: where is it?
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:59:34 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.210436.19397@genie.slhs.udel.edu> tom@genie.slhs.udel.edu (tom) writes:
>where is the republican platform? there must be a loyal republican out
>there somewhere who can figure out how to use a scanner. why haven't we
>seen the platform yet? is it too scary to show people?
>

As a matter of fact, if the republicans even HAD a platform, which they
don't, it WOULD be too scary to see....(besides the fact that everybody
would then vote for clinton)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.politics.elections
From: birdman@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Christopher Kush)
Subject: Re: George Will on the GOP
Keywords: brainless linear bastards
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 01:39:18 GMT

Jim Puccio writes:

>Interesting.  From this I glean that only the culturally deprived and ignorant
>have the proper qualities to play along with the right.

From this I glean that liberals comprise the most enlightened, freethinking
individuals on earth.

>But we knew that.

<adjusting knobs on acetylene torch>
<kerFWOOSH!!! roar roar roar>

Now then, we've been doing well at keeping abortion off this group.  As well
as we ever do, anyway.  So let's attempt to keep our inane, blithering,
worthless generalizations off the group, too, since all they really do is
cause others to believe we might be shitsuckingly ignorant knuckledragging
buffoons.

<FWOOSHphishphew>

birdman
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
From: russ@math.okstate.edu (Horatio "Random" Hellpop)
Subject: Re: Anti-religious fanatics (Was Re: School Choice )
Organization: Aggie? What precisely is an Aggie?
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:57:31 GMT

> = Dave Sill
>> = John R. Moore
>>As has been mentioned before, Christians do no burn witches or conduct
>>crusades.

>Historically speaking, yes they do.  They haven't recently, but the jury's
>still out on whether this reflects a fundamental change in the lengths to
>Christians will go, or the coincidental lack of an opportunity/need to go to
>extremes.

*I* understood what he meant.  There is no teaching of Christ which reads
"go kill those weird easterners who bathe".  Quite the opposite.

That they did these things falsely in the name of Christianity does not
require me to accept that they did it as Christians.

>>ALL religions, including atheism, convert "heathens."

>Wrong.  Firstly, because atheism isn't a religion.  Secondly, because even if
>you define atheism to be a religion, it isn't organized, and most atheists
>simply don't try to talk people into not believing in Santa Claus, er, God.

'Most' being an important word here, but I digress.

>>Most (but not all) Christians don't dump on those that don't share their
>>beliefs.

>I don't know about that.

I do.  'Hate the sin, but not the sinner.'

>>Look, if he believes in God, he can resent what he is told. If he doesn't
>>believe, then what is his beef? I don't think it is the religion he
>>is reacting to, it is the behavior of a few of its adherents.

>Again, I can't speak for Bill, but perhaps what he resents is that the
>religion has the effect of taking over the minds of its adherents.

Horse puckey.  False adherents have a way of trying to find justifications
for their deeds which simply do not exist.

If we were all judged by the worst of our number, where would any of us be?

-- 
Russ "Random" Smith
+----===Comedy!  Sudden, violent comedy!===-----------russ@okstate.edu--------+
|  Godfather of the Random Gang; Diplomat of the Brotherhood of Evil MUDders  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush