HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Quayle is VP
Date: 22 Jul 92 23:06:28 GMT
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Jul22.220545.17970@m.cs.uiuc.edu> barbehen@milton.cs.uiuc.edu (Michael Barbehenn) writes:
>
>UPI-Radio: >US & World headlines (Jul 22 2 pm PDT)        Wed, 22 Jul 92 14:28
>           -0-
>        President Bush today dismissed speculation that he's dropping Vice
>President Dan Quayle from his re-election ticket. During a Cabinet
>meeting called to quell the rumors, Bush said Quayle's position is 
>``very certain.''

Didn't Bush also say he had every confidence that Sununu would continue
as chief-of-staff.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: Bush's accomplishments
Organization: DEC Palo Alto
Distribution: usa
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:00:14 GMT

john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:
>You are sure confused! Global warming has NOTHING to do with ozone
>depletion.

Pretty bold statement.  So there's NO impact from the change in the
radiation signature of energy reaching the surface of the planet?
They're TOTALLY unrelated?  Hmm...


--
==============y=o=u='=r=e===a=l=l===s=t=e=a=m=e=d===u=p===j=o=e================
   Mike +   Software +   Digital Equipment +   Western Software +      mcnally@
McNally +    Laborer +         Corporation +         Laboratory +   wsl.dec.com
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
From: dong@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Don M. Gibson)
Subject: Re: Tsongas Economic Plan
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:32:28 GMT

>I think its valid to suggest that labor, not capital, is the true source
>of wealth.  Capital is sort of like a labor savings account - you put a
>bunch of labor into making something, and it becomes "capital" which you

i prefer to think of labor as a type of capital.  you have machines, money,
physical labor, educational training (intellectual capital),....  
different balances of capital are needed for different types of business.
farming uses lots of natural resources and labor.  electronics takes lots
of machines and intellectuals.  Money could be considered just a
representation of capital that is convenient for exchange purposes.

my $0.02, worth.
From: cah@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Allen Halsell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Predictions for USA campaign
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:13:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NASA)

In article <1992Jul26.042714.26072@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>Keywords: 
>
>In article <1992Jul24.162018.15509@bradley.bradley.edu> pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman) writes:
>]I guess all those homeless people, who's populations increased immensely
>]during your 8 years of "economic growth", are my imagination, right?
>
>A large percentage of homeless people are mentally ill or substance
>abusers. This is hard to blame on the Reagan economic policies.

You don't seem to think very hard here about the origins of substance
abuse, or the treatment of the mentally ill.  Or about Reagan's record
with the mentally ill.

Does it seem more reasonable to help and educate people early in their
lives so that they don't develop problems, or to stint on education
and support them and their descendants indefinitely on welfare?  Which
one makes you feel more proud of yourself?  Of your country?

-- 
 the only thing that speaks the truth is the eloquence of passing time
                 the spoken word is a jacket too tight
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Pro Choice stats
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 16:33:10 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <suL7NB1w165w@major.panix.com> dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea) writes:
]Exactly. Only a minority is in favor of completely banning abortion, and 
]an equally small number is in favor of abortion on demand in every case. 
]Most people are somewhere in the middle. The bell curve wins another one. 

Which shows the complete lunacy of having this an election year issue.


-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Tree Hugger's Nightmare: Mt. Graham Red Squirrel Stew ...
 - - Have you ever tried looking at the stars through a squirrel? - - -
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.activism,nj.politics,alt.rock-n-roll
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Winner-take-all elections
Date: 18 Jul 92  14:47:00 EST

There are some interesting ideas floated in the new issue of THE ATLANTIC.  The author favors proportional representation in Congress, in which several congressional districts would be bound together and representation would be based on the percentage of the vote received in each region (superdistrict?)  The way I read this, you might have 9 representatives for one  "super district". Kind of like the Israeli system, except that there would still be direct election of the President.  I don't buy into this, 
because I like the idea of one representative being responsible to me for what he does, although I'm sure the intent is to have several representatives responsive instead of one.  The idea also seems a little too party-responsive rather than individual candidate based.  Still, it's interesting, and worth a look.

Pax,

<<<Tom Cavender>>>

 * Origin: Aether (1:112/2020)
20 
20 
20 

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: New conflicts overseas and the election
Organization: Texas Instruments, Inc
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:29:53 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.005719.25762@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> pat@news.gsfc.nasa.gov (patrick m. ryan) writes:
>
>	Point well taken.  I don't subscribe to it either.  George
>Bush is probably a pretty decent guy.  I just don't think he's been
>a very good president.

And on that, particularly with regard to his positions on domestic
issues and personal liberties, I think we can agree.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Republican Convention
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:21:44 GMT

In article <saurav.712516948@cory.Berkeley.EDU> saurav@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Saurav Chatterjee) writes:
>
>Just read in the papers that Barbara Bush has been drafted to speak
>at the RNC convention. She will speak on Wednesday night about
>family values. 

She'll be up there with all the pups and grandpups, too.  Photo-op-rama!

>
>They are so desperate that they have to get the prez's wife to
>speak (paper states that she has higher poll ratings than Bush).

She has more hair, and her lap dog Millie is more likeable than Dan-O.

>
>Also heard that Bush will be coming out with positive ads in
>the next few weeks before the Convention to portray his accomplishments
>and what he plans to do next. I guess his accomplishments will
>be 1% of the ads. 

Closer to 2%, but whose counting?

Hey, anyone in Houston want to put up signs like, "Star Trek
Convention: Astrodome!  William Shattner and Leonard Nimoy!  Patrick
Stewart!"  Hundreds of Trek fans who don't look at the political
calendar can mob the RNC.  Quayle can be photographed addressing
people dressed up as Spock.  Guys dressed up in Red Uniforms can have
running battles with the Secret Service in the streets of Houston.
Bush can say, "I will be the Star Trek President."


Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: blosser_cy@lrc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: ERADICATE CONGRESS!
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:38:45 GMT
Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC

The true culprits behind the impending recession and the rising deficit
are the greedy bastards in Washington who spend countless hours arguing
with each other, wasting our tax dollars & voting themselves pay raises

...namely, Congress. 

If they were so concerned about the plight of the homeless & minorities
and paying off the national debt, they'd give themselves a cut in their
salaries & divert a portion of their income to re-vitalize our economy.

'Nuff said. 

Flame at will. I'm ready for a bar-b-que!!!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: MrEd@GreenAcres
Subject: Re: Bill Clinton's OLD Covenant
Organization: McGill University
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 23:09:05 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.182814.2054@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>  
ejalbert@jaameri.gsfc.nasa.gov (E. Jason Albert) writes:
> In article <1992Jul24.174706.28337@cbnews.cb.att.com>, jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com  
(joseph.m.knapp) writes:
> > Here is a flyer being passed out by the Ohio Republican Party:
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> >                         Bill Clinton's OLD Covenant
> > 
> > Bill Clinton says he wants to do for America what he has done for Arkansas.
> > But he has failed to move Arkansas up the ladder during his years in the
> > state house. Arkansas' labor conditions, environment, and conditions for
> > children rank among the worst in the country, according to studies by the
> > Southern Labor Institute, Institute for Southern Studies, and the Center
> > for the Study of Social Policy.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >                                    Labor:
> > 
> >         49th in overall worker climate;
> >         46th in labor opportunity; and
> >         50th in youth employment.
> >
 
[ omitted numerous depressing statistics]

> > 
> >                    Don't buy Clinton's "New Covenant" until
> >                         you've seen his OLD Covenant!
> >
> 
> Yeah, but what were these numbers BEFORE Clinton became governor!  I
> think you'll see a big improvement.
> 
> Jason

Yep, I'm sure Arkansas was 50th in overall worker climate before Clinton took  
office and he pushed them up to 49th :) 
He's been governor for (I seem to recall) 10 of the last 12 years. 
If he stayed on for another 10 years, maybe he could push then all the way up  
to 48th or even 47th :)





Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.censorship,alt.rock-n-roll,nj.politics
From: shea@ntmtv.UUCP (Ray Shea)
Subject: Re: Tipper Gore for Vice Lady!
Organization: Northern Telecom, Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 17:55:13 GMT

In article <CINDY.92Jul19143202@solan10.solan.unit.no>, cindy@solan10.solan.unit.no (Cynthia Kandolf) writes:
>However, i agree that this shouldn't be government controlled.  I
>would, however, favor a voluntary system where the film companies warn
>parents of things they might not want their children to see.  

Why should it be the film companies' responsibility?  There are already 
tons of film reviewers out there; if you can't get an idea about
whether a movie is appropriate for 8-year olds from reading a few
reviews, you're not really trying very hard.  There are already
many religious watchdog groups (even the Catholic Church) who
publish family viewing guidlines for movies.

The only thing a rating system does that isn't already done by the
free press is categorize movies into easily identifiable groups which
are then more easily legislated against.


-- 
Ray Shea			
DoD #0372, '88 Hawk NT650, 	...and a card carrying member of the ACLU...
founder, Team Twinkie	      		you got a problem with that?
ntmtv!shea@ames.arc.nasa.gov  
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Bill Clinton's OLD Covenant
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 05:58:19 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.203631.3513@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:

[ad by some Republican organ commenting on Clinton's Arkansas record
deleted]


>
>This sort of attack is prone to backfiring. If Clinton can come out with
>a counter ad that shows improvements then it knocks a hole in the
>Republicans case. 

Last month's Harpers asked Democratic ad strategists to design their
material.  In response to something like the deleted ad, they
suggested something like this: commenting that ALL governors, both Dem
and Rep, have had problems over the past few years.  The voice-over
will ask, "Did we make fifty mistakes, or just one?", while having the
White House as its final image.



Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:49:09 -0400 
From: "Donpaul C. Stephens" <ds8k+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Bounty Hunters?


foy@aero.org (Richard Foy) posted:

>Bush ought to get the UN to hold a Nuremburg like trial of Saddam for
>war crimes, in absentia if necessary. When he is convicted. Put a 
>$1,000,000,000 reward for his capture dead or alive.
> 
>That would solve Bushes Iraq problem.

Put that high a price on his head and you'll have a lot of people
interrested, unless the US Govn't issued the reward, then we'll be
wondering if we'll ever get it :-)
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:9024 talk.politics.misc:35594
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Causes of the "Cultural Elite"
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:10:55 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: bagchi@eecs.umich.edu (Ranjan Drzzzzt!  Bagchi)
In article <1992Jul17.030135.15820@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:
>>
>>This reminds me of a story about a conservative professor who once
>>gave a talk entitled (more or less) "Why are so many intellectuals
>>attracted to socialism?"  On one of the posters advertising the talk,
>>someone scrawled an answer: "Because we are smart!"  Well, that
>>clears things up.
>>
>        But suppose it would.  Then the failing's not in the
>economics, it's the anthropology.  And, ironically, it would explain
>why intellectual types are into it.  Because they (we, or at least me,
>to some extent) are into simplifiying people's behavior to
>that of automata.  How often do we hear "why don't people act
>sensibly?" coming from our lips?  I do it a lot.. perhaps socialism's
>failing is precisely that people _don't_ act sensibly.

I would say that in today's world libertarianism has taken the
place of socialism as the trendy ideology. The same sort of
nerdy types who a few years ago would have been loony
socialists are today loony libertarians.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
Subject: Re: A clear choice
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 19:08:17 GMT

In article <2A78C6AA.8910@noiro.acs.uci.edu>, cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:
>
>Sorry for not being clearer. When I said that Gore was the biggest spender in  
>the Senate I meant that in the years 1989 and 1990 the total of all spending  
>which Gore voted for was larger than the total of any other members of the  
>Senate.

And...

>But to beat 99 determined Senators in spending requires a devotion  
                                       ~~~~~~~~
>to this pursuit which I find hard to imagine without malicious disregard and  
>contempt for the rights of the american people.

I find it hard to imagine without malicious disregard and contempt for the
rights of Senator Gore that you continue to label "voting to spend" as
spending.

Gore is an intelligent man.  I'm sure he realized that many of the things he
was voting for would fail to win in the Senate, fail in the House, or be
vetoed by Bush.  Many of his "expenditures" (votes for bills authorizing
expenditures) were made as statements of support, and might well have been
different if they'd had a chance of passing.

It might be interesting to look at who voted for the most spending legislation
that actually passed, though.  But then Bush's signature would be on each and
every one of them, wouldn't it?

-- 
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
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: darlene@flash.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Darlene Wiedman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Whadya gonna do about it?
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:54:45 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections,alt.politcs.perot,talk.politics.misc
Distribution: usa

In article <yvonne.711852660@well.sf.ca.us>, yvonne@well.sf.ca.us (Yvonne Lee) writes:
> 
> 
> While I agree with the general premise of your posting: actively participate
> in government, I disagree with one of the sub-premises: posting to the net
> doesn't do anything.  Posting to the net is discoure discourse is what
> drives democracy.  I'm sure people have been able to air grievances,
> discuss, their beliefs, and maybe even change a few opinions here.  That's
> what people mean (I think Merton said it, but I'm not sure) by the
> "marketplace of ideas."
> -- 

I agree, discourse does drive democracy.  Airing grievances, and carrying
out discussions if fine.  However, unless you contact the powers that be
about how you feel, what have you contributed to change the situation?
                                                 ^^^^^^
Do your local, state and federal reps read the net?  Maybe, maybe not.
Why take a chance?  Write/call them directly and let them know exactly how
you feel.  Get their responses, carry out a dialog with them.  They
are the ones who are voting on the issues that effect us.  

Again I say, posting complaints to the net is exactly that...posting to
the net.  I doubt this will bring about change in Washington or on the
local levels.  Do you?




++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Darlene Wiedman                      "If you're not part of the solution,+
+ darlene@flash.ATC.Olivetti.Com           you're part of the problem."    +   
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:8941 alt.politics.clinton:357 alt.politics.bush:66
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: New conflicts overseas and the election
From: chen3@husc10.harvard.edu (Hung Chen)
Date: 22 Jul 92 19:10:01 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Harvard University Science Center
Keywords: Iraq, Yugoslavia, election

In article <1992Jul22.144156.10133@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>
>Frankly, I've always found the whole idea that George Bush would start
>a war to get reelected just a bit incredible (as in not credible).
>People have been saying this sort of thing ever since Desert Storm.
>Personally, if we found ourselves once again in the position of
>attacking Iraq, I would probably wind up voting for Bush.  Not because
>of that, but because we would immediately see all these people on the
>other side coming out with claims about how starting the war again was
>a 'political ploy'.  I would probably vote for Bush in reaction
>against those people.
>
>I personally don't think starting a war to get reelected would even
>occur to George Bush (although it might occur to some of his
>'advisors'), and I find it rather scary that it occurs so easily to
>folks who support the other side.
>

Why do you think this idea (starting a war to get reelected) would not even
occur to Bush?  And why might it occur to his advisors?  What do you think
is the difference?  I am not advocating Bush started a war to get reelected
here, I simply want to know your reasoning.

Hung-Yut
From: cah@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Allen Halsell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Time/CNN poll 18th July
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:20:15 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NASA)

In article <14vmd8INNdh6@agate.berkeley.edu> bks@garnet.berkeley.edu () writes:
>
>What would be more interesting would be to see statewide polls!  It is
>electoral votes that will determine the election.  For example, one
>of the CNN talking heads today said that Clinton was ahead in Orange
>County (CA)!  If this is true, then as long as Clinton doesn't wrap
>aluminum foil around his head and start muttering about doppelgangers
>from Dogon, the contest is over.

This might give him an edge in LA County, however. :-)
-- 
 the only thing that speaks the truth is the eloquence of passing time
                 the spoken word is a jacket too tight
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Winner-take-all elections
Date: 30 Jul 92 08:58:39 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: Tom.Cavender@iphase.UUCP (Tom Cavender)
>the vote received in each region (superdistrict?)  The way I read this, you
>might have 9 representatives for one  "super district". Kind of like the
>Israeli system, except that there would still be direct election of the
>President.

>I don't buy into because I like the idea of one representative being
>responsible to me for what he does, although I'm sure the
>intent is to have several representatives responsive instead of one.
>The idea also seems a little too party-responsive rather than individual
>candidate based.  Still, it's interesting, and worth a look.

The Israeli system is not a good example of proportional
representation, because it's entirely party based. Take a look,
instead, at the system used in the Republic of Ireland, the
"Single Transferrable Vote", which is also the system which
supporters of proportional representation in the UK would like
to introduce here.

The idea is that you have your "superdistricts" but electors
cast their vote for one candidate rather than a party. A
candidate with a quota (defined as (Total no. of votes)/(N+1)
where N is the number of seats in the superdistrict) is
declared elected. Electors are allowed to indicate second ,
third and so on preferences, and if their favoured candidate gets
so few votes he'll never be elected, or so many that he exceeds
the quota, their votes are transferred to the next preferred
candidate.

Since there is no requirement for a representative's votes to
come from all over the superdistrict, a candidate can campaign
exclusively in part of it so long as it's large enough for him
to get a quota of votes, and if elected regard himself as the
representative of that part.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Subject: Re: Query...
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 03:47:10 GMT


In a previous article, john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) says:
>
>My question: When was the last time there was a Republican President
>and Congress? (1981-1987 don't count - the house was democrat controlled).

1952-54 (first half of Eisenhower's first term)
-- 
"The new designer CLUB colors are the          |       When the axe came 
perfect complement to today's lifestyle."      |       into the forest,
                                               |       the trees said, "The
       -- television advertisement             |       handle is one of us"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections