HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Patriotism (was Re: alt.politics.clinton)
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:39:29 GMT
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Sep9.050832.16980@midway.uchicago.edu> wag5@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>	What? You would send him to his death so you could carry
>the head of Saddam Hussein, alienate the political world and
>give his seocnd-in-command the post of leader? You sound just
>like the John F. Kennedy that got us into the Vietnam War.
>

My impression was that Bush's 100 hour "Let's stop shooting" thing
was for the sake of having a nice round number for the history books.
The military commander in the field was not thrilled about this.

Further, Bush decided to go to war in August, despite the misgivings
of Powell.  The latter prefered a blockade, I believe.  As I said,
you should let the military do its job, but make damn sure that they,
and we, know what that job is.



--
"I wish I could vote for you a hundred times"
"You can . . . just kidding."
			-- _Bob Roberts_
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.news-media,talk.politics.misc
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: CNN Anchor Admits Pro-Clinton Bias
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 13:16:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <EefHiK_00iUx88_Ih4@andrew.cmu.edu> mk56+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael J. Keating) writes:
>Objective reporting is absolutely essential.

  This posting entirely missed the point.  I claim that objective reporting
  is not possible.  And I've detailed many of the problems in trying to
  provide it.   We must be the only country in the world that still has 
  a naive fantasy that that it can even be done.  In most countries the 
  major newspapers are associated with political parties and have clearly 
  understood viewpoints.  The world hasn't caved in under Fleet Street 
  because some papers are Tory, some Labour, etc.   I think we should 
  grow up and not expect the impossible, and learn to get our news from 
  different sources and sort things out for ourselves.


>                                            We have more than enough
>opporunities to hear and read interpretations of actors, fictional
>characters, commentators, politicians and a multitude of other speakers
>whom, come election year, are suddenly the most politically adept people
>they have ever met.  At a time like this, when we have to choose between
>the lesser of two evils, and so much mud is being slung, we have to know
>the basic facts! 

  But what ARE the basic facts and who should decide?  Why don't you tell
  us what the "basic facts" are about NAFTA or the budget deficit or the
  trade deficit?  Which experts whould you interview?  How much time would
  you devote to different aspects of the issues?  Are issues like social 
  unrest, poverty, race relations, education, or environmental topics
  among the "facts" related to NAFTA, for instance?   How do you "object-
  ively" decide?    If you have only so many minutes or so many column
  inches to devote to a story what do you leave out?    


---peter

  

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:4168 alt.politics.bush:4183 alt.politics.elections:12495
From: buckmr@marcus.its.rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLICAN AND LIBERTARIAN PLATFORMS COMPARED
Date: 6 Sep 92 02:44:35 GMT

bam@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Bruce A. Martin) writes:

>The only candidates running in all 50 states (plus DC)
>are (alphabetically):

>	Pres. George H. W. Bush		(with V.P. J. Danforth Quayle)
>	Gov. William Clinton		(with Senator Albert Gore)
>	Rep. Andre V. Marrou		(with Dr. Nancy Lord)
huh? i thought the Fulani/NAP crowd were on the ballot in all 50 states. They 
were in 1988, anyway.

-- 
RON BUCKMIRE
Fundraising Committee for the Procurement of a mesh tank-top for LL Cool J
11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735
uunet!rpi.edu!buckmr||buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet||buckmr@rpi.edu||+1 518 276 8910
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Read My Lips -- No More Poverty!
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:19:14 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

     Bill Clinton gave a speech in Atlanta this week in which
he introduced a new welfare plan.  This plan would include
a $6 billion increase in welfare appropriations in order
to get people off welfare (hmmm...).  Nevertheless, I found
one quote of his quite interesting:

     "No one who does work, and who has children in
      the home should live in poverty."

Obviously, we would all agree with this as an ultimate
dream.  However, should we be taking this as a campaign
promise -- to end poverty for working people with children?
Even if it is not a promise, how will *he* raise these families
above the poverty line (the whole premise of the Clinton campaign
is that the federal government can solve most of the problems
in America)?  By family subsidies?  By lowering
the poverty line?  By doubling the minimum wage?
Maybe you Clinton supporters can give me a clue.

     C. Perttunen
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:4638 alt.rush-limbaugh:4464
From: jviv@usmi01.midland.chevron.com (John Viveiros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: "Liberal" - A Misnomer
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:08:39 GMT
Organization: Chevron

In article <1992Sep15.131524.25996@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> ujwb@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Jeff Beer) writes:
>In article <20334@plains.NoDak.edu> green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes:
>>12 weeks?  What if the person involved is someone that is vital to the
>>company or has some technical skill? 
>
>The persons whose salaries are in the top 10% of the company are 
>exempt.  So are companies with employees less than 51.
>
>> What it all boils down to is another
>>attempt by the liberals to force something down the throats of business.
>
>No it truly has something to do with family values.
>
>It also is wrong to assert that it is supported by only liberals.
>Illinois congressman Henry Hyde, a staunch conservative, voted for this
>bill.
>
>Jeff

I think the point is that the Bush wants to talk about family values
because he doesn't have to do anything about them.  Until now.  I
personally like it when a non-issue like this ends up blowing up in
Bush's face.

It comes down to where Bush's priorities lie.  With families, or with
business.  Hardships for either one depending on his veto.  If Bush
truly believes families are more important than businesses, he will sign
the bill.  If you dispute this logic, IMHO you've been indoctrinated by
the new right wing to accept whatever they way as gospel.

-- 
John Viveiros     (jviv@chevron.com)
Chevron USA        Standard disclaimer applies
Midland TX 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5295 talk.politics.misc:45295 alt.politics.bush:5023 alt.flame:12824
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.flame
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for president!"
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 14 Sep 92 16:38:40 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <BuFFqz.AKw@news.cso.uiuc.edu> StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:

>The good doctor's comment was followed by a :) -- that's a SMILEY
>for those of you who fall in the "humor challenged" department.  It 
>was a JOKE!  A FUNNY!  An attempt at HUMOR!

It must have been a very bad attempt, because no one seems to have gotten
it.  By the way, many people can be affended by humor.  Just ask
Andrew Dice Clay.

-- 
--Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: A Dearth of Jobs
Date: 8 Sep 92 00:51:13 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <1992Sep7.200846.11772@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> In article <1992Sep7.154516.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Sep7.161403.6417@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>>> In article <1992Sep7.103517.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>>>>In article <1992Sep7.031815.25831@athena.mit.edu>, bowler@athena.mit.edu (Bert Smith) writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't think that anyone else could have done any better.  Now, on the
>>>>> other hand, a room full of monkeys could have done better than George.
>>>>>             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> -bert
>>>>
>>>>     Are you referring to Congress with that 'room full of monkeys' 
>>>>quip?  The problem is Bush has to try to work with a room full of
>>>>monkeys (Congress), and the only power he has over them is the veto,
>>>>i.e. refusing them bananas.
>>>>
>>> 
>>> Perhaps Sununu, Darman, et al., would qualify as the proverbial
>>          ^^^^^^
>>> "room full of monkeys".
>>> 
>>     NEWS FLASH.....NEWS FLASH.....NEWS FLASH.....NEWS FLASH.....
>>John Sununu is no longer Chief of Staff!  I guess news travels slowly
>>to some parts of the country-- unless you're waiting for the story
>>to appear on MTV Music News (the network that preps 18 to 25 year-old
>>minds for the real liberal media).   :-)
> 
> Pfft.  My point was that the man was there when the economy was
> collapsing around the monkey pens in the West Wing.  "Don't do
> anything.  With those high approval ratings from the war, we could
> have a depression, and you'd be re-elected," whispered one of Bush's
> monkeys into said President's ear.  Paraphrasing a little, of course.
> The word "Stupid" comes to mind.  No, "intensely stupid" would be more
> appropriate.
> 
> And I don't have goddamn cable, so I can't watch MTV Music News
> (though I hear from a friend that U2's Bono was trying to call Bush
> during several of their concerts.  No one was home. :-) This lack of
> cable irritates me, to say the least, since I'm being deprived of my
> God-given right to watch MST3K, USA: Up All Night, and the Science
> Fiction Channel, if and when it starts.                    ^^^^^^^
> ^^^^^^^
> --

     If you're a fan of science fiction, there is a book that you
would probably love reading: Al Gore's "Earth in the Balance."
No cable is necessary!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.elections
From: PA113718@utkvm1.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Informed voter (was Re: SC rally)
Organization: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:46:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.182310.4903@newsgate.sps.mot.com>
titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas) writes:

>
>Lighten up Dr.
>
>Unless it's a hobby or part of your profession you're making a silly investment
>of your time.  One vote won't change any election, therefore no wise voter will
>work to become INFORMED.  I sincerely hope you have a better life than that.
>--

Are you really serious about what you just wrote?  You're criticizing someone
for taking democracy seriously enough to make a rational rather than an
emotional choice in the voting booth?  This is just the kind of scary,
anti-intellectual philistinism that the Republicans hope to thrive upon.
You're going to vote for the "Education" President while proudly thumbing
your nose at those who value knowledge.  The RNC probably has a seat warmed
up for you already.  Glad to hear you have more important things to do than
to learn, although I probably would have guessed as much even if you hadn't
stated the obvious.


>Eric Titmas      Motorola ASIC       titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com
>
>It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowel

              Tom G.
From: jav@rhiannon.sitka.sun.com (Joyce Vanderpoorten)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Bush Says Jobs are important, Owls are not
Summary: owls
Date: 15 Sep 92 13:18:40 GMT
Reply-To: jav@rhiannon.sitka.sun.com
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rhiannon.sitka.sun.com

What!!! where does Bush get off making a closed minded statement like
this - Owls vs. Jobs.   God I hate that man.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Plan
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 14:41:24 GMT

In article <viking.716355393@vincent1.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>
>>In article <PETONIC.92Sep9185935@daisy.hal.com> petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic) writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep09.230151.21511@watson.ibm.com> john@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>
>>>>Well....yeah.  When did medical care become an inalienable right?
>>>
>>>Persuit of happiness, buddy.  Tough to do it if you're 6' under.
>>>Unless, of course, you're Hindu.

Don't fly with airline pilots that believe in reincarnation, right?

>
>>In my pursuit of happiness, I need a 486/50 w/32MB RAM and a 200MB
>>hard disk, and SVGA.  Should the gov't be required to finance this
>>for me also?  Right...

You forgot the CD-ROM.  And go for the 1.2G HD.  A SoundBlaster, too,
or Ultima 7 simply won't be as much fun....

Hell, go for the '586, or J5, or whatever Intel wants to call it.

>
>	I'm suprised nobody mentioned the obvious: the pursuit of
>happiness you are guaranteed free to do.  Actually getting it is
>not something the government, or anybody else, guarantees.

I agree with this, but I see government having a role in opening
opportunities.  I tend to think that conservatives/libertarians
tend to ignore societal forces or structural barriers that preclude
people from pursuing life, liberty and property.  Shouldn't barriers
that may be artificial be brought down?

Also, I don't feel that health care is a good like '486 is.  If
someone doesn't have the latest line of computer, we're willing
to say: so he doesn't have a '486, he'll cope.  Health care is,
at times, quite simply a matter of life and death.  It's much
harder to say: so he doesn't have a liver, he'll cope.  Health
care is also much more basic, and bad health may be considered
a formidable structural barrier.  Young children who have not
received sufficient nutrition may have learning disabilities, for
instance.  Further, it is in our own interests to see public health
policy in terms of infectious diseases.  Aren't we putting ourselves
in risk if we don't pay to treat TB patients?



--
"It's a Drake's Coffee Cake....  I have another one, but I'm saving
it for _later_."
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:4361 alt.rush-limbaugh:4350
From: tag@hermes.ecn.purdue.edu (Tony A. Gibbens)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton's Nobel Laureates
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:56:54 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Sep7.112043.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>     On Sunday's (9/6/92) Meet the Press, Al Gore claimed that
>"Six Nobel Prize winning economists have endorsed the Clinton/Gore
>(economic) plan."  Then, Sunday evening on NBC's Brokaw Reports,
>Bill Clinton said that eight Nobel laureates support his
>economic plan.  I guess that either two more jumped on the bandwagon
>(or more appropriately, on the bus) Sunday afternoon, or two of the 
>eight are not Nobel Prize winners in economics.
>     Does anyone know the names of these Nobel Prize winners?
>I would greatly appreciate seeing a list of these names.  Thanks.
>
>     C. Perttunen
>
>P.S.  By the time you read this, they may be claiming 12 to 14 Nobel
>laureates endorsing the Clinton/Gore plan.

Just to state the other side of the argument, it should be noted that
Bush has NO economic plan let alone ANY Nobel Prize winning economist 
supporting his non-existant economic plan

tag
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.news-media,alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 07:30:34 EDT
From: <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton's Health Ideas.
Distribution: usa
 <1992Sep09.230926.25617@watson.ibm.com>
 <1992Sep10.002625.12614@news.columbia.edu>
 <1992Sep10.161239.34776@watson.ibm.com>

In article <1992Sep10.161239.34776@watson.ibm.com>, john@johniac.austin.ibm.com
(John Iacoletti) says:
>
>In article <1992Sep10.002625.12614@news.columbia.edu>,
>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>|> What do you want?  Preventive care or exotic procedures to repair
>|> damage that could be prevented?  General practioners are more useful
>|> for the former, specialists like those in the US for the latter.
>|> You may ask which doctors are coming to the US.
>
>I dare wager that GPs make more in the United States too.  Why?
>Because they *can*.

The difference between what a specialist makes in the U.S. and in Canada
is huge, something like $40,000 on average.  The difference for GPs is
minor, about $5,000 on average.  In any case, there is no documented flow
of doctors from Canada to the U.S.  Most Canadian doctors know that while
they could earn more money, they would also spend half their day hassling
with insurance companies.

>The US system is far from perfect.  The reason it costs so much is
>because the insurance industry is not subject to anti-trust laws and
>therefore they fix the price of medical procedures to artificially
>high "reasonable and prevailing" rates.  That and the monopolistic

Despite the fact that 30% of the market is now insured through
HMOs, PPOs, and self-insured employers?  In fact, the price of every
medical procedure shows wide variation. For example, the price of a
first office visit paid by insurance companies varied from 20 to 160
dollars.  This is price-fixing by a trust?



>control that the AMA has over who can practice medicine and how they
>can conduct their businesses.  The answer to this is to remove the

As I've stated before on this subject, this argument about the AMA
being the source of monopoly power in medicine does not hold water, and
is not used to explain monopoly power in physician care in economics.
It cannot explain the rising prices as the number of physicians sky-
rocketing in the U.S. through the 1970s and 1980s.

>controls and let the market forces determine the prices.  Sending the
>bill to Uncle Sam is going to make matters worse, because then people
>will be running to the doctor for every hangnail they get, because
>it's free.

In fact, economic studies show that the demand for medical care is very
insensitive to price.



Dennis G. Shea, Penn State
<<DISCLAIMER>>
Ain't nobody's bizness but my own. I'll be happy to accept all
the credit for anything I've written.  It's funny, however, how
employers only acknowledge the profitable ideas.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:4644 tx.politics:4988
From: petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Plan
Date: 10 Sep 92 00:59:35 GMT
	<1992Aug31.091852.19872@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
	<fjQBr*+V0@caleb.UUCP> <1992Sep4.174254.6522@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
	<-wiDr*vX0@caleb.UUCP> <1992Sep9.191421.17961@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
	<1992Sep09.230151.21511@watson.ibm.com>
Reply-To: petonic@hal.com (Michael A. Petonic)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Henry's Laughing Gas Co., Inc.

In article <1992Sep09.230151.21511@watson.ibm.com> john@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.191421.17961@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>|>                                      What do you propose should
>|> happen to the vast majority of us who don't have the money to cover
>|> medical care in the event of a catastrophic illness?  Let us die?
>
>Well....yeah.  When did medical care become an inalienable right?

Persuit of happiness, buddy.  Tough to do it if you're 6' under.
Unless, of course, you're Hindu.

-pet-
--
Michael A. Petonic	       petonic@hal.com		       +1-512-794-2855
        HaL Computer Systems International, Ltd. -- A Bermuda Corporation
                Director of Custodial Services and Entertainment
				 Austin, Texas
                          "No balls, no blue chip."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer)
Subject: Re: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Detroit, MI
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 05:34:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.000005.1@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> matrix@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes:
"I'm curious, and want to find out how patriotic people are.  Bill Clinton
"dodge the draft.  I consider him a coward.  I just got out of the Marines and
"spent my time fighting for this country.  Why would I want to vote for a man
"that dodged the draft?
"

Bill Clinton did not dodge the draft. This has not been proven.

"This is my question, are you really going to vote for this man?  A man that 
"runs from a fight.  What's going to happen if we end up in a war. (Which could
"very well happen with the state the world is in right now.)
"
"LIBERAL == An in-secure person, who is a scared hypocrit, believes in the rich
"	   paying for everything, but for them not to have to do anything, 
"	   and believes homosexuality is normal.
"
"If you have any comments direct them to matrix@unt.edu.
"

No, I'll put them out in public where everyone can hear them. 

CONSERVATIVE = A person who wants to shove his moral views down 
               everyones's throughts. A person who is either rich
               and wants a party to support him, or is a redneck
               who is too dumb to know the difference and follows
               like sheep, anyone who can make the nicest sounding
               speech.

Perhaps, Mr. Matrix, Bill Clinton will find ways to PREVENT wars from
occurring without the loss of lives. I would consider that man a real
leader. Unfortunatly, he has an uphill fight against dumb-head red-neck
ex-marines whose IQ is less than the number of bullets in their M-16's 
who go around shouting "Duh KILL DA RAGHEADS MAN - KILL KILL KILL". 
 
I'd rather be occupied by an enemy force than to live in a state 
run by such airheads. People: Its these kinds that make people like
George Bush possible. The "dumb"ing of America. Sigh.....

Oh, and don't call me a coward - at least I use my real name, Mr. 
"Matrix".
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:5470 talk.politics.misc:45513 alt.rush-limbaugh:4860 alt.politics.bush:5164 alt.politics.elections:13157