HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pjm@isis.cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Subject: George
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 02:07:30 GMT

Be it therefore enacted by the authority of the people that
the said George Guelf be, and he hereby is deposed from
the kingly office within this government and absolutely
divested of all its rights, powers, and preprogatives;
and that he and his descendants and all persons claiming
by and through him, and all other persons whatsoever
shall be and for ever remain incapable of the same;
and that the said office shall henceforth cease and
never more either in name or substance be re-established
within this colony
-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn)
Subject: Re: pat is back!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:49:49 GMT

In article <mlt2001-111192225454@m248-113.bgsu.edu> mlt2001@andy.bgsu.edu (the
big steak!) writes:
> PAT BUCHANAN IS BACK ON THE MCLAUGLIN GROUP.  THE ANTI-SEMETIC IS BACK IN
>HIS GLORY.  THE MAN WHO RAN FOR PRESIDENT AND HURT GEORGE BUSH IN THE
>PRIMARIES.  WHY DID THIS RACIST RETURN TO THIS PUBLIC AFFAIRS PROGRAM?
>BECAUSE NOBODY ELSE WILL LISTEN TO HIM, EXCEPT MICHAEL KINSLEY OF CROSS
>FIRE!  WHEN WILL PAT LEARN THAT HE WON'T WIN ANY SUPPORT OF ANY SORT WHAT
>SO EVER.  THIS SHIRT STUFFING CONSERVATIVE HAS NO FUTURE.  UNTIL JOHN
>MCLAUGLIN REALIZES THIS WE'LL HAVE TO PUT WITH MORE PAT!  I RATHER WATCH
>MEET THE PRESS!

     I have this theory that anyone who posts in all-caps to InterNet is 
irrational. Hasn't been proved wrong yet.

                                   Steve
///
-- 
    Steve Casburn (scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
    They gave me differential calculus, and I said "Hit me again"
    So they gave me integral calculus, and I said "Hit me again"
    Now I have vector calculus, and...I'm starting to lose consciousness...
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: lav4208@venus.tamu.edu 
Subject: Re: Before its too late...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: alt
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:26:00 GMT

In article <YOUNG.92Nov3180410@kuwait.gdfwc3>, young@gdfwc3 (Mark Young) writes...
> 
>Before its too late I want to get my "I Told You So" in to all of 
>you Clinton supporters.  If Clinton wins the election tonight we
>are all in deep trouble.  Our country has major problems and Clinton
>will only make things worse.  That so many of you believe in this 
>charlatain scares the hell out of me.  What's wrong with this country.
>How can you be so naive?  All Clinton wants is to win, to be president.
>He doesn't care about you.  He just wants your vote.  The entire
>Democratic platform is an advertising blitz;  its has absolutely no substance.
>The Democrats have been wanting to win for so long now and they finally 
>found their man;  Bill the used car salesman.  Boy can he look good.  
>Well guess what?  He just sold you a lemon.  I hope you enjoy eating it.
>I won't!
> 
>Looking Forward to Laughing in Your Face,
>Mark Young


A prime example of the success of negative campaigning.
Mary Matlin should include the above in her resume.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: re: Subject: Re: As the sun sinks slowly in the west                                
Reply-To: pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:07:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.024432.24574@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@fish.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>In article <1992Nov8.010851.26858@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>>sdl@linus.mitre.org (Steven D. Litvintchouk) writes:
>>>jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>
>>>> Republicans became completely trapped in a philosophy that held that
>>>> government could do nothing, and should do nothing, especially when
>>>> capitalists were impeded in any way. 
>
>>>I disagree.  Many Republican conservatives (who had served under
>>>Reagan) have suggested lots of ways for the government to help the
>>>economy: supply-side economics, significant tax cuts, deregulation,
>>>enterprise zones (which now the Democrats and liberals have embraced), etc.
>
>>Everything you mention is an example of government getting out of the way
>>or collecting less taxes in certain circumstances. This fits the Republican
>>philosophy of inactive government.
>
>I have to disagree.  There is a MAJOR philosophical difference between
>Jack Kemp and George Bush on government's role in the economy.
>
>George Bush believes everything is fine, and that government shouldn't
>do ANYTHING.
>
>Jack Kemp believes in using the government to help guide the free-market
>towards solutions to problems.
>

And the difference between Kemp and the average Democrat is that Kemp's
use of government would be confined to offering incentives toward
certain selected behaviors (e.g., enterprise zones), as opposed to
simply having the government setting up shop and doing the thing
in question.

BTW - I have seen some references that suggest that enterprise zones
will be part of the Clinton economic package. Can anyone confirm?

>David M. Nieporent


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13581 alt.politics.clinton:16512 alt.politics.elections:23189 alt.politics.perot:5340 alt.fan.dan-quayle:6516
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Remember ...
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:15:04 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Nov2.193427.24394@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
>In article <1992Nov2.173828.9686@b11.b11.ingr.com> Jeff Kilpatrick,
>jeff@jlk.b11.ingr.com writes:
>>In article <1992Nov1.174742.6518@u.washington.edu>, 
>>sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>>|> A vote for George Bush is a vote for Dan Quayle.
>>|> 
>>  It could be much worse; Al Gore could be VP.  
>
>Yeah, God help us if we actually had a VP with a brain.  :-/
>
>Norman
>
>Dr. Norman J. LaFave
>Senior Engineer
>Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company

Oh.  So Algore has a brain even though that brain believes that 
leopards have stripes and the automobile is the most dangerous  
weapon on the planet? 

Ted

-- 
            

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.flame
From: matta@lclark.edu (Matt Alexander)
Subject: Re: Election Results 11/3/92
Organization: Sacajawea's Voice, Portland OR
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:30:28 GMT

In article <lefty-061192172006@lefty.apple.com> lefty@apple.com (Lefty) writes:
>In article <1992Nov3.183832.8448@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>,
>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) wrote:
>> 
>> Results of the 1992 US Presidential Election:
>> 
>>                BUSH DEFEATS CLINTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> 
>>                FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> 
>> Yes, the media has egg uopn its collective face, along with the Democrats!!
>> 
>> The media thought they could get Clinton elected, but in the end the 
>> American people had the last word!!!

I've heard of denial, but this boy needs help.

--- Matt Alexander

    "Boy, they were big on crematoriums, weren't they?"
        -- George Herbert Walker Bush, during a tour of Auschwitz, 28-SEP-87

 2-AUG-88:  Bush declares, "I will never apologize for the United States of
    America, ever.  I don't care what the facts are."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.perot
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: Election Results 11/3/92
Organization: George Washington University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:30:10 GMT

In article <adams.720979002@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>trif@bike.rad.washington.edu (To Run In Fear) writes:
>
>>Bill Clinton -- Democrat          43,713,885
>>George Bush -- Republican         38,150,812
>>Ross Perot -- Independent         19,228,530
>>Andre Marrou -- Libertarian          234,413 <----- This is a disaster...
>>Bo Gritz -- Populist                  95,640
>>Lenora Fulani -- New Alliance         70,810
>>John Hagelin -- Natural Law           31,408
>>Howard Phillips -- Wash. Taxpayers    29,677
>>Lyndon LaRouche -- Independent        25,063 <-----------------------------
>>Ron Daniels -- Independent            24,997				    |
>									    |
>I had hoped better for Marrou.  He was hurt by Perot and the close race    |
>between Bush and Clinton.  But to get only .2% of the vote...ouch.         |
									    |
									    |
                                        ____________________________________|
					|
					|
					v
                  This looks like an even bigger disaster.
                  That many votes for this freak.

John Korman

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13643 alt.politics.clinton:16656 alt.politics.perot:5384
From: mike@gilligan.East.Sun.COM (Mike Roncadori)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Remember ...
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:31:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Vienna, Va.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gilligan.east.sun.com

In article <1992Nov6.171504.29961@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>
>	[Things about Al Gore's brain deleted]
>
>Ted

Wasn't this the same Al Gore that stood up with his Wife Tipper
about 10 years ago, and said that rock music has encoded satanic
messages, when listened to backwards? I think that they wanted
to ban certain genres of music, if I'm not mistaken.

Our VP-elect and this guy are the same person, correct?

-- Mike

-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just a question... no opinion express or implied.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: treilly@iastate.edu (Edward C Reilly)
Subject: Re: Mr. Waffle King (the Dodger)
Keywords: abrupt
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:30:07 GMT



     Part of the problem of this discussion lies in the definitions:
Hard line conservatism has not been around in presidential politics
since Barry Goldwater ran.  Bush and Reagan are Neo-conservatives, which
is distinctly different.  See Irving Kristol's "confesisions of a
neo-conservative for definitiions.   AS far as Nixon goes, a syndicated
article in the papaer last week sauid that in terms of social programs
and spending programs, Richard Nixon was the  most libral president in
the last twenty five years


Ted.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: jdooley@maemaster.eng.uci.edu (John R. Dooley)
Subject: Re: Hey! Now It's All CLINTON's Fault!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 6 Nov 92 05:48:34 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.031246.14163@pellns.alleg.edu> freshlt@quig17.alleg.edu (Timothy Freshly) writes:
>
>	So when Reagan/Bush were in office it was OK to bash them but now  
>that your candidate is in office NO ONE should criticize anything.  Don't  
>be so hypocritical.

Well, it would be nice if you'd wait for Clinton to actually do
something before you criticize him.

John D.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: treilly@iastate.edu (Edward C Reilly)
Subject: Re: Dilemma in Republican (Toga) Party
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:26:54 GMT

In <6851@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:

>Wilson in California and Gov. Thompson (?) of Illinois must succeed in
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
>passing their moderate agendas


Thompson stepped down in `90.  Jim Edgar, also a Republican now in
office.  Not nit picking- just responding to the question mark you put
after Thompspn's name.

Ted.











Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13092 alt.politics.clinton:15709 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7869 alt.rush-limbaugh:8972
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Mr. Waffle King (the Dodger)
From: sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 05:48:07 GMT
Organization: Cal State Long Beach

In article <Bx7x0C.Hx1@ns1.nodak.edu> csmith@plains.NoDak.edu (Carl Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.194407.9787@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
>>
>>Fine, go ahead and sulk. But, the majority has spoken. That is the
>>democratic way. 
>
>Yup.  The majority has spoken.  And the majority DID NOT VOTE FOR CLINTON.
>57% of the poeple voted for someone OTHER THAN Clinton.  So now we have
>a president elect that the majority of the people did not want in office.
>

  Faulty reasoning. The ballot only allows you to choose one candidate that
you prefer/want most. It does not allow second choices (presumably based
upon some weighting system). Therefore, it is invalid to conclude that a
majority did not want/would not find acceptable Bill Clinton, only that he
was not the first choice of a majority.



-- 
Jeff Sicherman
up the net without a .sig
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13225 alt.politics.clinton:15914 alt.rush-limbaugh:9074
From: vsg001@acad.drake.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Just for a moment
Date: 6 Nov 92 05:56:55 GMT
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA

In article <1992Nov6.011214.17471@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes:
>     What Reagan and Bush have done is to enable the privileged few like Neil 
> Bush and Leona Helmley to have "fun", while many other Americans lost it or 
> never had a chance to have it. Remember, the President is supposed to work for 
> all the Americans, not just for the Republicans or the rich few.

Ok. You are going to be a tough one. . 
"The privledged few" that your refer to... I hate to break this to you, but
MANY people prospered under Reagan. The effects AFTER the election is
debatable, but employment was at record levels. Under Bush, interest rates were
at the lowest, an the Stock Market climbed to unheard of levels. This qualifies
in my book as working for the U.S.
 
>       That's right, if Clinton screws up, such as if he only works for certain 
> Americans while excluding other people (for example, you and your friends), he
> is wrong.

 Bzzt. Recurring theme in flawed logic. You have yet to establish that
Republican favored only a select few. It is impossible for a public figure to
include only a select few in the benefits. Wow! Would I like to see that
legislation:

"Be it resolved that only registered Republican business owners will be exempt
from tax increase. Please display your Republican card at every department
store."
And the Democratic Congress would respond: "YEA!!! THAT'S PASSED"
So, if Reagan pandered to only one group, WHY then was he Re-elected in a
LANDSIDE both popularly AND electorally. Sorry, but concerning the Reagan
administration, nearly all the U.S. would disagree AT THAT TIME. As far as Bush
is concerned, I would have to see the reasoning (read:hard facts) why  you
think that Bush only pandered to one group of people.

Listen, I would love to discuss the issues of the future of which, like Simon,
I am uncertain about. In no way did I say I would stand in the way of Clinton's
administration, I will do what I have always done. But I will watch. I realize
that I jumped in whole heartedly in the "flame wars", and initiated a few, but
that fun is done, it is now time for all of us to use our collective wit and
political analysis that we use to impress our friends and debate the future. I
totally disagree with your assertion that Bush and Reagan represented a
fraction of the constituency. I fear you have not given me enough to address.
Please help me out so that we can carry this on!
Disclaimers. Disclaimers.
---------
Do you hear the people sing?
 Singing the song of Angry men?
It is the Music of a people who will not be slaves again!
----------
		A possible Republican Creed.
		Vince Goddard 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.bizarre
From: mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (REAL LIFE?!?!  HA!!)
Subject: Re: FOUR MORE YEARS!!!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:52:10 GMT

<RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>In article <1992Nov4.013750.10169@tc.cornell.edu>, mdw@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU
>(Matt Welsh) says:
>>
>Thank you Bill!  Thank you Bill!  Congratulations!!!!!  Our turn for
>12 years!!!!  Clinton '92 / Clinton '96 / Gore '00!!!!!!!!!!!  Way to go
>America!

Everybody knows that in 2000, Madonna and Ann Richards will be elected from
the Democratic ticket.  Gore doesn't get HIS turn 'til '08.  Mark my words.

And a great big :)
MTC
-- 
Michael T. Chaffee        |******BOYCOTT COLORADO******|  ______    
mchaffee@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu | Professional Slapthologist |  \    /     HATE
Member, Universal Life Church, Sect of Loons           |   \  /  can never be
Annoyance Theatre Platinum Member |     Evil Genius    |    \/  a FAMILY VALUE
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: budd@playfair.Stanford.EDU (David Budd)
Subject: Re: What is a Conservative?
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: us
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 20:08:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.230134.26099@Cadence.COM> phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel) writes:
>In article <1992Nov2.152813.21375@anasazi.com> best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
>>Conservatives believe in limited government and the empowerment of the 
>>individual (the sanctity of individual rights a la Locke) to allow people
>>the freedom to seek their own happiness rather than to stand in a line
>>at a federal office waiting to receive what the liberals have deemed as
>>todays portion of happiness.
>
>Unfortunately, there seem to be VERY FEW true conservatives around.  Rush is
>definitely NOT one.
>
>A True Conservative (tm) would be against the RICO seizure statutes, against
>keeping drugs illegal, against keeping prostitution illegal, against making
>abortion illegal, against forced prayer in schools, etc., etc., etc.


I can certainly concur that you are right when you say that Limbaugh is
not a true conservative. But, while agree that true conservatism 
does not ban prostitution, abortion, etc., I must beg to differ about
drugs.

The way I view a conservative govt is as follows. In one sentence, it is:

The government is not there to protect me from me. It exists solely to
protect me from you. Thus, for prostitution, abortion, etc., engaging
in these vices has few externalities. It is you who must suffer the
problens of venereal disease or face judgement day for your sins. So,
is you choose to indulge in such vices, you must pay the piper.

However, when it comes to drugs, you are creating rather extreme extern-
alities. For example, I believe that some drugs asre capable of
remaining in the body for years. And, while under their influence, 
one is much more inclined to do harm to me or my family. Thus, if one
could confine drugs and the damage that they do to the user alone,
then fine. Let him destroy himself. 


Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: What happened to ???
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:50:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.053237.19609@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.001628.25917@welchgate.welch.jhu.edu> davidk@welch.jhu.edu writes:
>>Does anyone know what happened to Mz. Fitzgerald, the woman that G. Bush had an
>>affair with?  I had heard something a while ago and forgot all about it until
>>a friend of mine asked.  So I will ask you all, Anyone knows where she went?
>
>Heh, heh.  She'll be on the unemployment line in about 72 days.

Gloating a little, aren't we??  :-)

Simon

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13335 alt.politics.clinton:16061
From: skywalke@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: James Carvile
Date: 6 Nov 1992 15:05:07 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Howard Hughes Medical Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu

I was listening to Torie Clarke on C-SPAN last evening and she and
the other speakers had some interesting things to say about what happened.

The people in the Rep. election team had only a few people that had run
a campaign in the last 12 years. In the Clinton camp we had Begala and 
Carvile who have been very active in large and small efforts across the 
country. This gave the Democrats a hands on feel for the pulse of the 
electorate. The Republicans were busy trying to decide rather this was 
80, 84 or 88, and how to approach the electorate, in the end they resorted
to the 88 strategy. Some thought that G. Bush could just coast to victory
and refused to engage in active campaigning but some saw the cracks in the 
castle walls back in the NH primary. The lack of a clear strategy doomed 
the re-election bid for the president. They all gave most of the credit to
Mr. Carvile for running a energetic campaign. Most also said they had 
underestimated the democratic canidates ability to run a non stop
20 hour a day campaign for ten months. They all agreed the second 
biggest mistake was the Rep. Convention, that one event ran many of the 
Reagan dems. right out of the party.

It was a very good show.

"It's time for us all to go up or down together as a people and
as a nation"
                President-elect Bill Clinton 


-- 
Timothy B. Reynolds
CLINTON/GORE volunteer
Election Campaign '92
Houston, Tx 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.perot
From: asoper@wyvern.twuug.com (Aubrey Soper)
Subject: Re: Election Results 11/3/92
Organization: Tidewater UNIX Users Group
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 05:01:32 GMT

korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman) writes:

>In article <adams.720979002@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>trif@bike.rad.washington.edu (To Run In Fear) writes:
>>
>>>Bill Clinton -- Democrat          43,713,885
>>>George Bush -- Republican         38,150,812
>>>Ross Perot -- Independent         19,228,530
>>>Andre Marrou -- Libertarian          234,413 <----- This is a disaster...
>>>Bo Gritz -- Populist                  95,640
>>>Lenora Fulani -- New Alliance         70,810
>>>John Hagelin -- Natural Law           31,408
>>>Howard Phillips -- Wash. Taxpayers    29,677
>>>Lyndon LaRouche -- Independent        25,063 <-----------------------------
>>>Ron Daniels -- Independent            24,997				    |
>>									    |
>>I had hoped better for Marrou.  He was hurt by Perot and the close race    |
>>between Bush and Clinton.  But to get only .2% of the vote...ouch.         |
>									    |
>									    |
>                                        ____________________________________|
>					|
>					|
>					v
>                  This looks like an even bigger disaster.
>                  That many votes for this freak.
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
		   Not really, that's probably the prison
		   population vote.

BTW, I registered to vote this year, and the registrar
mentioned that convicted felons [in Virginia, at least]
had to apply for the restoration of their voting rights.
Now I'm wondering if this can be accomplished from within
prison.

-- 

aubrey
---                              ;
><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>'  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:13381 alt.flame:14484