HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dtiberio@csws18.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio)
Subject: Re: Perot drives Limbaugh NUTS!!!
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 23:11:30 GMT


>|> Do you really expect a majority (or even a plurality) to vote for
>|> a 50 cent per gallon tax hike on gas?  Poor people would get a whole
>|> lot poorer, since EVERY commodity comes to us via gas-operated
>|> vehicles at some point.  

	And why is it that we are still using gas operated vehicles? Might
it be because the largest companies in the world, General Motors, some oil
companies, and Goodyear, bought out all of the transportation systems in 
Americas 50 largest cities in order to replace them with gas powered vehicles
as opposed to electric?

	Might that be considered a self centered point of view on their
part? Might gas and oil be a big cash cow for certain powerful people?


	And one of these 50 cities is my hometown, Syracuse, where the rail
system and trollies are non-exisant, although there is an occasional
gas powered Amtrak and a bus that looks like a trolley driving around the
city...


-- 

 ***** * ****  ***** ****  *  ***    * *   *    ***   ***   Make the Choice!
   *   * *   * *     *   * * *   *   * **  *   *   *     *    Don't Vote!
   *   * ****  ****  ****  * *   *   * * * *    ****    * 
   *   * *   * *     *  *  * *   *   * *  **       *   *      NO NEW SIGS!
   *   * ****  ***** *   * *  ***    * *   *   ****   ****
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: Perot's Plan (1/4)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:51:21 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <BERG.92Sep29151543@malice.cass.usu.edu> berg@malice.cass.usu.edu (Glenn Berg) writes:
>In article <7n+p#jf.mpye@netcom.com> mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye) writes:
>
>>Unless we take action now, our nation may confront a situation similar to the
>>Great Depressionand maybe even worse. Our economic growth has been sluggish
>>for nearly two decades. The unemployment numbers remain depressing, while the
>>Federal Reserve worries about inflation.
>
>The Federal Reserve, a private corporation, does NOT worry about inflation.
>They love it!  It gives them the chance to print more money (nearly free to
>them) to loan to the banks!
...

    That's backwards. The Fed's primary concern is keeping inflation low.
    BTW, the Fed does not print money, nor does it loan to the banks.

    You might want to take some economic literacy classes while in college.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: all opinions are mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: D.
Subject: Re: Ross for What??
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 06:17:01 GMT

OK, OK, I can see that the argument that "Ross should not be president because
he does not want to be president" does not have much of an affect on the 
die-hard Ross fan.

But you have to admit that he has run a pretty disasterous campaign.  First
he gets a pretty good standing in the polls, then quits (getting a lot of 
people P.O.'d).  Then, he slinks back (I still don't know why).  His choice
of vice president (aside from the fact that he seems like a fine man) does
not show much area for political gain.

When Ross used to say that he would be working all hours of the night 
on fixing the nation's problems, he was probably speaking to the fact that
he would need that much time to just get up and running in this new job.
I don't know how productive for the people that will be.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:1702 alt.politics.elections:14696 talk.politics.misc:48680
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot's Plan (1/4)
From: berg@malice.cass.usu.edu (Glenn Berg)
Date: 30 Sep 92 09:55:13
Distribution: world
Organization: The Center for Atmospheric and Space Science, Logan, UT
In-reply-to: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com's message of Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:51:21 GMTLines: 44

In article <BvEBxL.Foq@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:

> In article <BERG.92Sep29151543@malice.cass.usu.edu> berg@malice.cass.usu.edu (Glenn Berg) writes:
> >In article <7n+p#jf.mpye@netcom.com> mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye) writes:
> >
> >>Unless we take action now, our nation may confront a situation similar to the
> >>Great Depressionand maybe even worse. Our economic growth has been sluggish
> >>for nearly two decades. The unemployment numbers remain depressing, while the
> >>Federal Reserve worries about inflation.
> >
> >The Federal Reserve, a private corporation, does NOT worry about inflation.
> >They love it!  It gives them the chance to print more money (nearly free to
> >them) to loan to the banks!
> ...
> 
>     That's backwards. The Fed's primary concern is keeping inflation low.

That's what they'd like us to believe anyway.  You may be right, however.
Inflation is a double-edged sword to the FED.  Although it increases the demand
for loans, it also reduces the profits on the loans it has already made.  They
are plenty happy to encourage inflation, however, as they have done in the
past, when it benefits their agenda.

>     BTW, the Fed does not print money, nor does it loan to the banks.

Huh?  Where have you been?  Do you think I'm deaf?  All that talk about the FED
lowering its lending rate to the banks, so popular in the news right now, is
just a bunch of bull?

Oh yeah, strictly speaking, you're right--the FED doesn't print money.  The
U.S. treasury prints the money and sells it to the FED for the cost of
printing, currently 3 1/2 cents per bill, regardless of denomination.

>     You might want to take some economic literacy classes while in college.

Too late.  They already kicked me out of college.  And the economics class I
did take, taught by a democrap, surely didn't teach economic literacy :).

Cheers,
--
Glenn A. Berg (berg@logan.cass.usu.edu)
Center for Atmospheric and Space Sciences, Utah State University

"We've got one more hill to take... Capitol Hill!" - Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: drudetb@infonode.ingr.com (Ted B. Drude)
Subject: Re: Perot's spine
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 22:01:43 GMT

In article <168716403.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com> JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
>When he first came to GM, we were all pretty excited because of his public
>pronouncements.  Then he followed with public insults to the GM leaders.
>We all started to wonder about his style, but thought "hey, he's a
>billionaire, maybe he knows what he's doing".  Then, he engineered
>a buyout in which he had to be silent.  He could have stayed the course,
>fought the good fight, taken some hits, but influenced the improvement
>of GM.  But he chose to quit and flee.  Nothing changed, except Ross
>got richer.

Yup.  And remember how he came out after the buyout and said "I'm just
doing this to protect the GM workforce (his ultimatims to Smith and the
board).  I'm giving GM's board x number of days to reconsider this thing
(his $200+million buyout from GM)."  I think he really thought the board
would back down and take his side over Smith's.  When the board didn't back
him,  all he could do was take the money, shut up, and leave. Which is
what they wanted and what he did.  Of course,  he could have given the
money to all those laid-off GM workers he was so concerned about,  or at
least he could have started a new company to employ them all. ;-)  

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: Glenn Stauffer <stauffer@cc.swarthmore.edu>
Subject: Re: 1-800-925-1300
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A6EE539E69014364@mac1.termigator.swarthmore.edu>
X-Xxdate: Tue, 29 Sep 92 23:40:30 GMT
Organization: Swarthmore College Computing Center
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d11
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 22:41:26 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.165240.13112@infonode.ingr.com> Ed Baggott,
eab@geneab.b20.ingr.com writes:
>I just called Perot's 1-800 number to tell him not to run,
>and guess what?  I got a recording saying my call will be added to
>the talley of those requesting that he run, and "Thank you for your
>support!".  Has this happened to anybody else?
>
>I think that's a pretty deceitful way to treat a caller.  No doubt
>this is an indication of how his "electronic town meetings" will
>be conducted.
>

The fact that this number was set up for supporters to register their 
vote in favor of Perot re-entering the race was made very clear - to me 
anyway - during the Larry King interview.

Setting up an anti-Perot number would be pretty pointless.  Perot never 
said that he needed to win in the poles in order to run.  There are 
enough supporters to get him on the ballet in 50 states - that is all 
that matters.  Of course, if he were really clever, he'd setup 
1-900-NO-PEROT.  I'll bet he'd make a fortune!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona)
Subject: Re: bend over...
Organization: gte
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 16:04:48 GMT

In article <Bv51vo.7H1@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com>, dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
> In article <1992Sep25.121707.25761@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
> >The in's and out's of Perot's candidacy will be nothing compared to the reaming
> >out the country will get if people take him seriously.
> >
> >Please, people, don't vote for Perot unless he guarantees not to transfer any
> >electoral votes he receives to either Clinton or Bush.  If he puts on a good show
> >between now and Nov. 3, he could well have enough electoral votes in his pocket
> >to select either Bush or Clinton.  Don't give him the power to decide this
> >election.
> >
> >-- 
> 
> Please, people, don't vote for Bush unless he guarantees not to 
> transfer any electoral votes he receives to either Perot or Clinton.
> 
> Please, people, don't vote for Clinton unless he guarantees not to 
> transfer any electoral votes he receives to either Perot or Bush.
> 
> Just balancing it out, dontcha know... :^)
> 

Yo, Dave, neither Bush nor Clinton has said "I don't want to be 
President."  They both want to.

Neitehr Bush nor Clinton has said "Well, Perot looks like he's
starting to address the issues."

Perot has made it clear that he'll be out if either part starts
dealing with the issues.

What's to stop Perot from deciding on Nov 4 that Slick Willy (tm) 
is "dealing with the issues?"   Then what's to stop those
elecotors picked by Perot from voting for Clinton?  

(In most states, nothing.)

That's why it is important to get Perot's word that his electors
will vote as directed by the poeple, not as directed by Perot's
opinion of the other candidates.

-- 
"25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with
no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy.  However, 4 out of 5 US murders are 
committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?"   -  Andrew Ford
gtephx!forda@enuucp.eas.asu.edu  OR  !uunet!samsung!romed!enuucp!gtephx!forda
From: fay@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: life-long republican
Date: 5 Oct 92 12:46:21 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

If the reason to vote for Perot is because he represents change, then there is
an even better reason not to vote for him.  

GHWBush is clearly not the one to change things.  Yet, every vote that is not
cast for Clinton is helping Bush and Quayle to stay in office for four more
years.

Besides, how much different will it be to exchange one life-long republican for
another?




Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: Perot: Getting it done?
Organization: George Washington University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 16:28:55 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.181202.17010@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> azzarito@cse.fau.edu (Doug Azzarito) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.161044.10886@news.columbia.edu> rl24@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert Lamoureux) writes:
>>
>>How can Ross Perot get anything accomplished, exactly, given the
>>fact that neither political party is willing to support his agenda,
>>and the US Senate and House of Representatives will still consist
>>entirely of Democrats and Republicans? 
>
>We've seen one thing from Perot that we haven't seen from the other would-be
>presidents.  He can motivate the people to ACT.  Perot supporters have gone
>through more for their man than either the republicans or democrats.  If
>Perot can continue to motivate the people, we have NOTHING to fear from a
>half-thousand dolts in Washington.  Remember, they are OUR servants up there,
>and if Perot can show us how to "fix things," the people sitting on the hill
>had better listen!  Sure, it will be difficult.  But Perot has said this, and
>his supporters know it.  That means we're ready to fight for what we need,
>in spite of the fact that we've sent some lard-butt to Washington.
>

Excellent point about the Perot candidacy. The most important concept
that Perot has 'introduced' (or perhaps I should say reminded) to the
public is the fact the inside-the-beltway-crowd is only there for the
purpose of service for the rest of the country. I beleive that even 
if he does not get elected this year, the process of increased voter
involvement in politics and the fundamental issues the country is
facing will continue to effect future elections in years to come. 
Even though one may not think that Perot would be a "good president", 
one can be positively  impressed with the millions of volunteers
getting together to stop the business as usual two party politics.

John Korman


Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:1742 alt.politics.bush:7381 alt.politics.elections:14824
From: jdooley@maemaster.eng.uci.edu (John R. Dooley)
Subject: Re: 1-800-BEND-OVER
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 1 Oct 92 16:25:14 GMT

In article <1992Sep30@cnsvax.uwec.edu> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:

>  If some of Perot's volunteers are working 20+ hours a week, I'd HOPE that
>Perot would at least have the common courtesy to pay them.
>

But, how can you call them volunteers if you are paying them.  (Unless
they all graduated from the University of Tennessee.)


John D.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye)
Subject: Re: Perot: Getting it done?
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 21:59:50 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

rl24@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert Lamoureux) writes:

>Just a question for Perot supporters, and an honest one, not at all
>intended as a flame:

>How can Ross Perot get anything accomplished, exactly, given the
>fact that neither political party is willing to support his agenda,
>and the US Senate and House of Representatives will still consist
>entirely of Democrats and Republicans?  Without *any* kind of 
>support in Congress for a large portion of his ideas, wouldn't
>we just be setting ourselves up for four more years of logjam in
>Washington (i.e. President Perot proposes something to Congress,
>Congress shoots it down, nothing substantial gets accomplished, and
>nothing at all changes)?

>Just wondering,

You're underestimating Perot for one thing.  For another, suppose 
Perot wins.  His book, United We Stand has sold a LOT of copies.
People are paying to read his plan.  If all these people then go out
and elect him President, don't you think that's a fairly strong 
support for his plans as well?  And if congress then decides to 
throw a wrench into the works, won't they be telling the American
people "we don't CARE what you want, we know what's best for you"?
And don't you think that the American people will get just a little
bit pissed at that?



Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: RUN Ross RUN
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 17:44:33 GMT

sidnag@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (siddhartha.nag) writes:
>Anyway, here's the slick one, he at least thought he could play: He quit the
>race in July, just when his past was being investigated (a la US-media style),
>and all the skeletons in his closet were coming out, and his poll numbers 
>began to wane. He figured he would come in at the very end so that the 
>media would not have time to investigate any further into his past, and by
>riding on his "renewed" crest of popularity, he could crack the elections !  

One thing I agree with VP Quayle on is that Perot is a "tempermental tycoon."
He really can't take the heat, whether it's for 4 months or 1 month. I
suspect that 32 days is long enough to rake his ego over the coals
completely. End result: 5% or less, popular vote.

The NYT fired a warning shot yesterday with several negative articles on
Perot. More to come, I'm sure.

---
Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: kde@boi.hp.com (Keith Emmen)
Subject: Re: 1-800-925-1300
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:49:29 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1scd1 PL4

>      Here's a question: is it true that the purchaser of an 800
> number can obtain all of the phone numbers of the calls made
> to that number?  I thought I heard that somewhere...

Yes.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: jeffh@pisces.sps.mot.com (Jeff Heilner)
Subject: Re: Perot's spine
Organization: SPS
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 22:35:17 GMT

In article <16870CCBE.JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com> JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
> I know all you brainwashed Perot supporters will say "he doesn't play by
> those rules - those are the rules of the old status quo" etc.  But if
> a man cannot stand up to the scrutiny of a free press, his ideas aren't
> worth the paper they are printed on.
 
> Perot was a paranoid when at GM (EDS) and he is a paranoid now. If you
> had seen the way he blustered at GM and then melted away when the GM
> leaders didn't buckle, you'd understand how most of us who've seen this
> pitiful act before feel about the little man.

Speaking of brainwashing.....how long have you worked for GM?

I expect the upper tier management there is not composed of people with  
nice things to say about Mr. Perot....have they been talking to you?
 
--
------------------------------------------------
Jeff Heilner
Motorola SPS - Tempe, AZ 
Email: jeffh@pisces.sps.mot.com (NeXT)
From: falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: bend over...
Date: 25 Sep 92 12:04:55 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <1992Sep25.121707.25761@ornl.gov>, de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
> The in's and out's of Perot's candidacy will be nothing compared to the reaming
> out the country will get if people take him seriously.
> 
> Please, people, don't vote for Perot unless he guarantees not to transfer any
> electoral votes he receives to either Clinton or Bush.  If he puts on a good show
> between now and Nov. 3, he could well have enough electoral votes in his pocket
> to select either Bush or Clinton.  Don't give him the power to decide this
> election.

  Dave, let me tell you something.

  Even if he doesn't "transfer" the votes to Clinton or Bush, he could still
well have that power that you fear.

  For example, suppose Clinton fades, big, and the results end up such as

  Elec. Coll.
  Perot     200
  Bush      175
  Clinton   163

  and he doesn't transfer his votes.

  What happens??  The Electoral College hangs, the election goes to the House,
and Clinton will be elected President.

  This scenario can be played out with the candidates switched, but all he
would need to do is win states so as to hang the E.C.  He wouldn't need to
switch his votes to anyone.

  So he could still have the power which you fear.

						Mike Falkner
From: clifton9220@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: gas tax
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:28:02 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <4OCT199223044991@acad3.alaska.edu>, ksjwr@acad3.alaska.edu (REDELSS JOHN W) writes:
> Some are squawking about the burden on the poor of a tax hike on gasoline.  I
> fail to see how economic collapse in this country is going to help the poor. 
> That is what we are going to eventually get if we don't raise taxes and cut
> spending enough to balance the budget.  A tax hike on gas has the added benefit
> of reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
> 
> We can't keep voting for those who promise us "something for nothing" unless we
> want to see our country become a piece of fecal material.  Eventually we have
> to decide we are going to pay for the government spending we demand from our
> lawmakers.
> 
> Perot understands this.  So do his followers. 

I find it very interesting to see the spoiled bat feeling of our culture.  We
have one of the lowest costs on gas in the whole world.  We could put up with a
little more.  We did in the war.

Ken.
>
From: brewer@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (James P. Brewer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Perot drives Limbaugh NUTS!!!
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:36:07 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


>	Actually, 10 cents per year for five years is a 50 cent a gallon
>tax hike. The five years give people time to buy more fuel efficient cars
>when the finally get around to buying a new car, reducing their gas consuption
>and reducing their expenditures.

Unless inflation is 0% over the next five years, the 10 cent a year increase 
will equal less than 50 cents in current dollars over the next five years.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
Subject: Re: 1-800-BEND-OVER
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 12:58:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.100638.7724@gibdo.engr.washington.edu>, bobk@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Bob) writes:
>  To vote for Perot resuming the campaign, call 1-800-925-1300.
>
>  This is more of a show of support than a vote.  Please call.

Right...  I think this gives us a hint of how Perot would work as president. 

He only wants to hear the good news.  Where's the number for Perot supporters
who *don't* want him to run to call?  Unless nobody bothers to call the
support hotline, Perot will have a mandate to enter the race, and no real
measure of what the majority of his supporters want.

Bend over, folks...

-- 
Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)           For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick.
Martin Marietta Energy Systems     For every Bill Gates there is a Richard
Workstation Support                Stallman.                     --Paul Graham
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:1610 talk.politics.misc:47952