HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN::"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:00:15 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      who's who in a Clinton administration
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

Hi, y'all:
It must be time to start guessing, 'cause CNN had some short lists the
other evening.  So who's likely to be involved in a Clinton administration?
I'm hoping your responses will include brief blurbs on individuals, because
I don't know who anyone is :)  But I'm trying to get a head start.

One thing my partner and I noticed about CNN's short list (which didn't
even cover all Cabinet positions, so it wasn't close to inclusive) was that
only one individual mentioned was African-American, and none were women,
Hispanic, etc.  Inasmuch as Clinton has "promised" an administration that
"looks like America", I look for more diversity to come.

So, whaddya say?

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 09:14:24 CST
From:         erteltsa@ALPHA.HENDRIX.EDU
Subject:      RE: Poor losers!
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

America will be in WORSE shape when Clinton enters office. I'm not whining
about his victory. I'm terrified of how his plans will utterly destroy the
economic fabric of our coutnry. Yes, Clinton WILL "run the country the best
way he knows how" . . . he'll run it into the ground. Pride? No, no pride here.
I didn't like Bush as much as others. But I know that our country would have
fared far better under his guidence than under the depraved policies of Clinton.
We'll see what you have to say come '96...
--Steve
From: jse2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JASON STEVEN EUCULANO)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Saddam Hussein & his little PARTY
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:20:00 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

Did anyone else out there see the pictures from Iraq when Bush (& America)
lost?  Kind of depressing, huh.  Also, I heard Iran just bought two nuclear
submarines from an ex-Soviet state and that they may have NUKES (bought from
Azerbaijan) as well.  Who ever said that there probably won't be another
global crisis now that the Cold War is over?  Just remember which guy you
folks selected to handle these delicate situations.  Can you see Clinton
smirking and shaking his head at other world leaders as he did in the debates
towards President Bush?  I can.  Think it'll HELP our country?  I doubt it.
Another question:  Why is he going to send a special envoy to Northern
Ireland?  I didn't think he would want to alienate England, but I guess I'm
wrong.  Another fact:  China is building up their military by purchasing
ex-Soviet left-overs.  How is Slick Willie going to handle that one, during
the campaign he started to tick them off as well.  Is this a good idea?  NO!
                                                Jayce

                                                
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 7 Nov 1992 14:06:14 -0400
From:         MIKE <8612775@SSCVAX.CIS.MCMASTER.CA>
Subject:      Re: Calooh! Callay!

>race of the majoity of welfare recipients
            WHITE

>location of majority of welfare recipents:
       Rural

Don't see what this has to do with the level of social assistance in NY
The fact is that that welfare and unemployment are higher in New York
than the national average.

Also the welfare expenditures as a % of GNP was highest under the Carter
Administration. We can expect similar heights under Clinton. The only way
that he can avoid showing this will be through government mandates on
businesses that will drive small business into bankruptcy.

--mike...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 8 Nov 1992 02:32:08 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: 1996
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>We should remember that Jim Baker also helped Bush lose to Reagan in
>the primaries in 1980 -- in 1988, it was basically the Willie Horton
>attack ads which won Bush the election- Bush ran on the "I'm not

	Bush didn't run any ads that mentioned his name or displayed his face.
Willie Horton's race never would have been revealed if the Dukakis campaign
hadn't cried RACISM! when Floyd Brown ran his face on cable (once, before the
Republicans told him to stop).

>Dukakais" platform and it worked, and then, for awhile, Clinton was
>running on the "I'm not Bush" platform, but eventually he developed
>his own voice.  I think a lot more people voted _for_ Clinton than
>against Bush, because of Perot's involvement in the race.  A lot of

	Almost everyone I've spoken to who voted for Bush in 88 said their vote
was against him this time.  (As opposed to people who would vote Democrat/other
anyway.)  Not scientific, but we'll never really know until someone does a
study.

>considerably different.  I'm waiting for the "week in review" in
>tomorrow's paper which should have lots of nifty polling data to
>give me some more insight.
>--Julie

	Post it!

Brett'
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: Libertarians
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 12:40:31 GMT

>On the subject of the Libertarians, does anyone out there know how many
>votes they received on Tuesday?  All the papers over here concentrated on
>the main three candidates, and surprise, surprise, their percentages added
>up to 100.  I refuse to believe that no other candidates got any votes, so
>if anyone has the stats, I'd be grateful if they would post them.

280,000 votes nationally for the Marrou/Lord president-vice.president ticket.

Many local candidates did much better, percentage-wise, leading one to
believe that many of the 'protest votes' that the Libertarians usually
get went to Perot instead.

I don't think that the Libertarians were particularly pleased or
distressed about the results.  They were about as expected.

I'm not involved with the Libertarian Party, so maybe someone else has
more comprehensive information.

--Jimbo
From: DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU (The Integral Differential)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: na na na na na na na na hey hey hey good-bye...
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:55:28 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>me:
>> 	Us too!  (Ohio.)  Although Cokie had the gall to say "it's probably
>> unconstitutional".  Hmmmm, I seem to remember the phrase "those powers not
>> granted to the federal government are given to the states, and to the
 people".
>> Or something like that :)
>Peter:
>Yes, but don't forget that the qualifications are defined earlier in
>the same document.  It took an amendment to set term limits for the
>President, and I expect it will take the same for Congress.  After
>all, you wouldn't expect the states to have the power to change the
>number of Senators they're given, would you?

	Yes, but since the power to change them wasn't explicitly enumerated
for the federal government I would grant the states the power to change the
conditions under which their representatives serve.
	Since it doesn't affect any other state, I don't see it as a national
issue.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: E7L8RAF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 4 Nov 1992 18:47:44 -0500
From:         Steve Rafferty <E7L8RAF@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: This "12 years" thing

>yes, you can be dubbed "other brett". or, the other brett could be other brett.
>whatother, i mean ,  whatever.

Ahem.  I must comment on behalf of my ex-running mate.  -other Andy is the
final arbiter in all matters of otherness. (Jus' l00k at 'im)  newbrett can
be other brett if -other Andy says so.

>-linda

And, along with thanking james for his able handling of the election process,
I'd like to thank everyone for running campaigns the listship can be proud
of.  Certainly, the least of us did better than those guys in the "real"
election.  Except me, of course.  I did it, I'm afraid.  Jenna, I'm sorry
that I introduced the shameful circumstances surrounding your marriage
to the verbiage comprising the virtual campaigns.  ;-)

BTW, I don't know Jenna.  I'm just a sick little perverted man who
watches everyone's business.  I'm on *every* list.  Remember that.

Congratulations to the tall tots.  I'm sure they'll handle their duties
ably.  In case the list denizens don't know, they're duties are to provide
beer and lodging to any list member who arrives in their state - for the
asking.  Really, check the bylaws.

Steve

PS - I'm just curious.  Does anyone still correspond with our former
dictator Ramon?  I don't know Ramon, I'm just a sick little perverted
man who wants to know where everyone is.  ;-)
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:03:50 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Just when you thought it couldn't get any weirder...

In article <01GQYI658Q0I9OF8I9@SSCVAX.CIS.MCMASTER.CA>,
8612775@SSCVAX.CIS.MCMASTER.CA (MIKE) says:
>
>Andy
>>this being Canada, burning of the US flag is not only tolerated, it's
>>occasionally encouraged:
>This act should not be encouraged no matter we you are.

You deleted the smiley, it was a joke based on someone elses comment

>
>I don't know if you watched the world series but you surely heard of the
>incident. How did you feel when the Colour guard carried the Canadian Flag
>upside-down. Another point is it not the socialist NDP government of Ontario

 ^^^made me feel the marines were somewhat overrated, we took it in good humor


>that brought forth a bill concerning the desecration of the flag. The only
>good thing they ever did.

No they didn't, there is no such law in Canada, it would be unconstitutional

Good things the NDP did: anti-scab legislation, legislation automatically
deducting alimony payments from the cheques of recalcitrant husbands,
extend family benefits to Gay partners, scrap the oath of allegiance to the
Queen in some instances, stand up to Mulroney, Put an environmentalist in
charge of Ontario Hydro, propose legislation to ensure minorities are
represented on juries, require police officers to file reports whenever they
draw there guns in public, appoint Susan Eng chair of the Police Services Board
Respond swiftly to riots following King verdict, extend full funding to
abortion clinics, appoint more women/minority judges, raise the minimum wage,
appoint a Lesbian to the Police Services Board, environmental bill of rights,
punish polluters, appoint Peter Herndorff to head TV Ontario,
>
>The flag is a symbol of a country, respected and honoured and loved by        .
>millions
>   How would you feel if one of the symbols that you respect were burned.

I wouldn't go out and try to change the rights outlined in my constitution.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 4 Nov 1992 13:22:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      RE: Small things first

Jamie:

        It's getting real tiresome responding to you - we seem to agree on so

much but I feel [not an opinion - a feeling] that there's a lot more behind

your "argument" than just that.  I don't know - I don't get a good feeling when

I read your stuff.   Comment as you will, it's because the spirit is nasty.

I leave definition of terms to people in whose field those terms are most

often used or whose field created the term - not to people who feel like making

up a new definition.  Medically, psychologically, sociologically - you are

completely incorrect in your use of the word gender.  You want to continue in

your error?  Fine.  Please don't misrepresent THIS opinion as fact, though.

It's just wrong.

        I find it rather conceitful that you would *take offense* at a

particular criticism of mine.  Have you been granted some sort of patent on

truth?  What's the deal with that?  That really got under your skin, eh?

I think a little moderation is in order.  I mean, we're all subject to

criticism on just about anything - unless you're immune on that truth deal.

You certainly seem to feel that way.   Relax.  You'll learn a heck of a lot

more AND you'll live longer.

-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:18:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      RE: The Youngest Science

Jamie:

        Thank you for your recent inquiry.  I AM, as a matter of fact, having
trouble balancing the humours.  Dr. Schuppach was just here, and believes it is
time for syrup of pale roses, some pearls, and a little digitalis.
        I await his analysis of urine to determine which, exactly, is out
of balance.  From the way I have been ranting of late, I believe it is the
black bile.  Any thoughts?


(Deepest apologies for the personal post )

(However, the JrN may learn something - after the stop scratching their heads)

-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:32:51 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      RE: I'm going to regret this, I just know it
              11 Nov 1992 09:48:58 -0500 from <STK1236@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU>

From:         STK1236@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU

> If someone doesn't like the country, they are free to leave[.]

Before you flag burners get all upset, read it one more time.
It didn't say that "they are FORCED to leave," it said, "they
are FREE to leave."

That is yet the most generous offer I have received from that
crowd.

> -Rich

--KAT
From: CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET (fred)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: final thoughts on flag waving
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:59:43 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

I think patriotism is a virtue. However, failure to be an informed
member of society, while widespread is not a virtue. After reading
the very thoughtful post on the Vietnam war and listening to the
names of the dead being read at the anniversary of the dedication
of the wall, there is one point that makes me very sad. Our country,
which allowed these men the opportunity to die for freedom did not
provide them with a monument. The vet's had to raise their own funds
for a memorial. Why was their sacrifice less than that of other heroes?

fred
From: YEA003@MARSHALL.MU.WVNET.EDU (Michael J. McCarthy)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Recycling Democrats
Date: 6 Nov 92 19:30:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: Marshall University
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: _IN%"POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:14:33 GMT
From: "(JASON STEVEN EUCULANO)" <jse2@NS1.CC.LEHIGH.EDU>
>
>Seems to me that Mr. Gore should be very happy.  We have just recycled the
>dispair in this country with their election.  I've seen these guys before....
>where?....  That's right.  Johnson and Carter.

        Well History Czar staff, looks like we have the first infraction of the
proposed policies regarding the use of history on this list, a "reckless use of
historical analogy."  The argument (?) above does little to explain why the
writer believes that Clinton and Gore are similar to Johnson and Carter.
Implied, of course, is the contention that all are Democrats and all are
Southerners.  This alone, however, is insufficient to prove a link, let alone
serve as the foundation for a criticism of Clinton.

        I'm not sure if our virtual administration has adopted the policies I
proposed, but if they have, it looks like Mr. Euculano owes us a report on
the book, _The Uses and Abuses of History_.

-------------
Mike McCarthy                   LADY ASTOR: Winston, if you were my husband, I
Marshall Univ. History Dept.      should flavour your coffee with poison.
Huntington, WV 25755, USA       CHURCHILL: Madam, if I were your husband, I
YEA003@Marshall.WVNET.EDU         should drink it.
YEA003@MARSHALL
From: DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU (The Integral Differential)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Saddam Hussein & his little PARTY
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:10:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>Did anyone else out there see the pictures from Iraq when Bush (& America)
>lost?  Kind of depressing, huh.  Also, I heard Iran just bought two nuclear
>submarines from an ex-Soviet state and that they may have NUKES (bought from
>Azerbaijan) as well.  Who ever said that there probably won't be another
>global crisis now that the Cold War is over?  Just remember which guy you

	The (only one I know of) submarine is diesel (Iran couldn't get fuel
for a nuke, even if Russia sold it one) and will probably serve the same
purpose as India's aircraft carrier: a paper threat to parade around for
propaganda purposes.
	As the Soviets/Russians discovered, you can't simply buy new types of
naval ships, you also need to learn how to use them.  Given the relative state
of Iran's military, I don't see them using large amounts of money to practice
using a submarine that has little practical value in the Gulf region.

>wrong.  Another fact:  China is building up their military by purchasing
>ex-Soviet left-overs.  How is Slick Willie going to handle that one, during
>the campaign he started to tick them off as well.  Is this a good idea?  NO!
>                                                Jayce

	Russia is selling to whomever is buying to raise cash.  I think it
might be better if the UN followed the example of stateside police forces and
"buy" weapons of war (so they can destroy them).

Brett'
P.S.  The US can always kick butt again if Iran/Iraq/etc gets out of line.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 10:59:17 -0800
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Term Limits

>It can be hard to reconcile the 14 to 0 passing of term limitations with
>the +95% return of incumbants in those same states.  Some have likened it
>to the voters crying "stop me before I vote again".

Those "some" are wrong/dishonest.

Since the system supposedly rewards districts that reelect incumbents,
reelecting your incumbent is rational even if you think the system
should be changed.  (It isn't clear how big those rewards are.  I've
seen hints of evidence that only two "districts" benefit from
disproportionate spending.  Those "districts" (one is a state) elect
the chairmen of the House and Senate appropriations committee.  I
expected Ways and Means to have the same effect.)

I'm not convinced that term limits are appropriate for
Congresscritters from low-population states, but the high-population
state delegations should have term limits.  Perhaps the appropriate
way to pick "large" is to pick the smallest subset of the states
necessary to create a majority in Congress and term-limit critters
from those states, or maybe that subset minus the smallest pop state
in it.  (Either works out about right as long as there are huge
differences in representation.)  The reps from those states can limit
incumbency.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:17:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: transition -- the lighter side

Whoever posted the bit about Nancy wanting to redecorate:

You have to be careful.  We have a lot of JrNazis here who were still infants
when the Reag's rode into town.  All they remember is a lot of hooey from
Buchanan-types who tremble at the whisper of Ronnie's name; they never actually
experienced LIFE under the Ron-man. They have all their info from Reagan-
worshippers.  So give them a break.  Ease into it.  We wouldn't want to flood
their little minds with all the truth about Nance & Ron; at least not all at
once, would we?

So start with something simple - like, how Reagan stole Carter's briefing
book before the 1980 debates.  Yeah.  That's a nice little start.


-T.
From: acm@Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: abortion (was Calooh! Callay!)
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:39:02 GMT
Reply-To: acm@Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: grendal.corp.sun.com

In article <92315.0556142893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
 > In article <01GQYSUZJBWW8WWGO7@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>,
 > JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU (Song Weaver) says:
 > >Once again, I ask you: SHOW ME SOMETHING.  You have this Reaganesque knack
 > >for stating "facts" without any clear basis in reality and no proper
 > >references or resources to back up your claims.  Are you going to keep
 > >_dodging_ me on this, or are we going to see something CONCRETE.  Put
 > >up or shut up.
 > 
 > Isn't Reagan the one who said "facts are stupid things"?:)--andy

I believe Cervantes (speaking in the character of Don Quixote) who
said "Facts are the enemy of truth".

						Andrew MacRae
						
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:36:22 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: bounced checks

Brett'
>       Yes and no.  It's certainly their money to spend.  I'm not going to
>follow them around making sure they go to Wal-Mart instead of Saks :).
(stuf deleted)
>Pretty much if they can't manage their own money, why on Earth should I let
>them manage the country's?
>       How many people would pay a bankrupt financial service firm to manage
>their money?  (Ok, my number is 1-800... :)

That makes sense.  Thanks.
Kerry

OK, I'll bite.  What does that other symbol (which I can't replicate) mean?
From: CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: flowers and hill
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:18:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

Sorry, Jason - but when you have financial committments to honor - when you have
a family top raise - when you NEED your job - and someone tells you that you

have to sleep with them in order to save that job, that's a very SERIOUS

crime.  Whether the threat is of violence or loss of income, forcing someone

to have sexual relations under threat is a serious crime - you may have heard

of it: Rape.

-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU