HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: shou1@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu (Roger Shouse)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Bill, Moscow and the KGB
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:53:12 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Chicago, SSPPCC

In article <MATT.92Oct12130546@physics.berkeley.edu> matt@physics.berkeley.edu writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.112224.1@azcc.arizona.edu> kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu writes:
>
>> No to both of the questions. The problem is the same old thing, character,
>> or lack of it. Why is Clinton not answering questions about Moscow honestly.
>
>What questions are there to answer?  Clinton went sightseeing in
>Europe during his Christmas vacation, and one of the places his tour
>went to was Moscow.  
>
>What more is there to say?  Do you want Clinton's opinion on whether
>Kodachrome 25 or Kodachrome 64 is a better film to use when you're
>taking pictures of St. Basil's Cathedral?
>--


Well, where did he go?  Who did he talk to?  He says he can't remember.
I don't expect him to remember specific names and times, but he should
be able to give a general accounting.  He remembers so much about the 
rest of his trip.  His selective memory is just another part of an
 overall pattern of deceptive responses to reasonable questions.

Roger Shouse 
The University of Chicago
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10735 alt.rush-limbaugh:7534 alt.politics.bush:9359
From: kb4c+@andrew.cmu.edu (Karin Brennan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: I will vote for Clinton if ... [REPOST]
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:31:10 GMT
	<1bjremINN18q@rave.larc.nasa.gov>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Design, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Subject: Re: I will vote for Clinton if ... [REPOST]
CC: 
<1992Oct14.140052.22484@cs.wm.edu>
<1992Oct14.162909.6653@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>
	<1bjremINN18q@rave.larc.nasa.gov>
Distribution: usa

 
 jcburt@gatsibm.larc.nasa.gov writes:

>Ummm...the government does have many regulations, but that's not the
>reason some public schools are ineffective...
>if you happen to know anything about public schools
>you would find that schools are run at the local level, with state
>and local funding. the fed does little to help one way or another...
>As far as the schools being ineffective, try asking some of the
>teachers and administrators why... a major cause for poor performance
>is that they have to teach at an "average" level...


How do you explain a  Private school's ability to run excellent programs
at a lower cost than public schools?
Also, Don't you think the NEA has  accountibility for the sorry state of
our system of Education? ( Isn't the N for National?)
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10119 alt.politics.bush:8933 alt.politics.elections:16494
From: cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Bush: "steering America"  (NOT)
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:11:34 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <1bes9iINNljh@fido.asd.sgi.com>, root@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Super-User) writes:
> Bush thinks we should "stay on course"..
> 
> [Holland, MI:  10/12/92]
> 	BUSH:  When it comes to steering America through 
> 	the new global economic challenges, America needs 
> 	a driver who knows the highway.
> 
> So he fires the people who have been doing the driving..
> 
> 	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- White House Chief of Staff James Baker, [...]
> 	has asked all members of the Cabinet and other high administration 
> 	officials to sign letters of resignation immediately after the 
> 	Nov. 3 election.
> 
> Sorry George, but when a team has a bad season, you don't 
> fire the team -- it just needs a better coach.
> 
     Are you suggesting we should keep the current team (Darman, 
Brady, Baker, Martin, Cheney, Kemp, etc.) but only with a better 
coach (Clinton)?  I thought most Democrats wanted to get rid
of both the team and the coach.

     C. Perttunen
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10504 alt.politics.perot:2172 alt.politics.bush:9213
From: micbill@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (William Wievers)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: 20 reasons TO VOTE REPUBLICAN (not)
Summary: yeah, right
Date: 14 Oct 92 23:23:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BvF4vo.4H1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Lost Boy) writes...
>Twenty reasons to vote Republican this year...
> 
>1) Republcans have been in the White House for twelve years. Four more 
>should send people rioting in the streets, which makes for cool television.
>2) This time, why not the *greater* of two evils?
>3) America's been on top too long...time for Germany or Japan to take over.
>4) Maybe "Family Values" means more of those McDonald's deals where kids
>eat for free.
>5) Unemployment is bad enough in the US; if Bush isn't elected, then he'll
>be unemployed too, and we need LESS people on the lines, not more.
>6) Do we really want poor Kennebunkport to have to suffer from Bush living 
>there year round?
>7) Dan Quayle has almost no power as VP, which is exactly as we want him.
>8) A thousand points of light will magically appear in the sky
>9) We didn't kick out Hussein; why should we kick out the other dictator?
>10) Even though I can't believe anything that Bush says, I'm voting for him 
>because he says that Clinton will raise my taxes (-Pfeifer)
>11) Tipper Gore
>12) Bush was nice enough to sell me this cool bridge in New York City
>at a cut rate.
>13) The State of Indiana is doing very well. Why screw things up by sending
>Quayle back there?
>14) Drug War very profitable for drug dealers who hike their prices up
>500%. Also is very profitable for the underground gun market, since dealers
>have a demand for armaments.
>15) New World Order, lacking substance, sounds really neat...almost like
>a Pepsi commercial.
>16) Our kids are learning too much Math, Science, English and History in
>our schools. If this keeps up, they might actually start thinking. Since
>it is unAmerican to think, it would be best to teach Religion and Phys Ed
>instead.
>17) We need more wars to cut down on our excess population.
>18) I played a Heavy Metal record backwards and it says to vote for Bush
>19) God told me to (-Some nut who preaches here a lot)
>20) It's easier to make fun of Bush than to make fun of Clinton.
> 
>Lost Boy 
> 
>email reaponses to:
>smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: We will not back down
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 06:07:09 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.202146.11793@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.204759.25725@news.columbia.edu > egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> >In article <1992Oct8.122145.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
> >>
> >>"The Wise man's heart inclines him towards the Right but,
> >> a Fools heart to the Left."
> >
> >Bush, being left-handed, must be just as much a fool :-)
>
>The quote doesn't say anything about handedness.  It is
>interesting however that it happens to parallel the difference
>between liberals (Left) and conservatives (Right).
>
>   Liberals want foolish changes
>   Conservatives want wise changes

Oh, no!  Here goes the "Conservatives think Liberals are
misguided/Liberals think Conservatives are stupid" thread all over
again!

In any case, I'm deeply, deeply impressed with this example of
Biblical prophesy on something so seemingly trivial as which side of
the aisle the Tories would sit on.  I'll convert tomorrow.

Hallelujah!!!  I'm saved!!!


--
"Moors."  "Moops."  "Moors."  "Moops."  Psssssssssssss.....
From: davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies
Date: 8 Oct 92 09:45:52 GMT
Distribution: usa,tx
Organization: Montagar Software Concepts, Plano TX

In article <1992Oct07.233318.18719@watson.ibm.com>, johniac@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
> Fred thinks that defaulting on the debt is a bad idea.  Fred doesn't
> feel like saying why.  Fred accuses me of not "understanding" why this
> is a bad idea, when I never said it was a good idea.  Fred does his
> little "superior dance" and chants his "I'm an economics god -- you're
> not worthy" mantra once again.

	Look, I'm not an economics major, but I can understand the idea.
Consider a person that borrows lots of money and goes bankrupt.  The creditors
lose money, and if they lose enough, they go bankrupt, etc, etc...  With all
the banks that have loaned the government money, bonds, services, etc and if
the government defaults on the loan, it will make the S&L scandal look little.
Only Uncle Sam, since it was the one that defaulted on the loan, won't be
there to bail them out.

> |> >|> Not allowing deficit spending for any reasn is a bad idea.

	I agree with this.  Companies do this all the time.  But as in
another post, the Fed deficit spends in good times, as well as the bad :-(  

> -- 
> John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
>         My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
>                 "Fight the real enemy" -- Sinead O'Connor
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
David L. Cathey		                |INET: davidc@montagar.com
Montagar Software Concepts              |UUCP: ...!montagar!davidc
P. O. Box 260772, Plano TX  75026-0772  |Fone: (214)-618-2117
From: gl1@cec2.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: incumbent
Date: 8 Oct 92 00:54:11 GMT
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO

In article <Bvrps0.Auy@oryx.com> xdedcj@atom.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (dave c jarzabek) writes:
>
>A plurality of electoral votes will throw the vote to the
>house which is controlled by Democrats.  I suspect they 
>would not be conscience bound to vote for the incumbent,
>Pres. Bush.  In that regard, a vote for anyone other than
>Pres. Bush is a vote for Slick.
>
>

That is true, but ONLY if Perot manages to win enough electoral votes to
make sure that neither Bush not Clinton obtains a majority.  That looks 
highly unlikely right now and will probably be even more unlikely on
election day.

So, the original comment about a vote for Perot, et al. is a vote for Bush
is correct since it will be a vote against Clinton and the others don't stand
a chance in hell of winning.

Greg


-- 
*******************************************************************************
Greg Lyon		             	         Student Union Attorney General
gl1@cec2.wustl.edu			                       Clinton/Gore '92 
Washington University in St. Louis - Site of the First 1992 Presidential Debate
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: dbrooks@penge.osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Re: Bill, Moscow and the KGB
Organization: Open Software Foundation
	<1992Oct12.112224.1@azcc.arizona.edu>
	<1992Oct12.202409.22544@athena.mit.edu>
	<FOX.92Oct14151833@graphics.nyu.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:37:21

fox@cs.nyu.edu (David Fox) writes:
> Its called Republican campaign strategy.  Luckily its not working,
> thought you'll hear a lot of it this month cause its all they've
> got left.

If only this were true.  I'm convinced the October Surprise is being
prepped, and it'll be pretty nasty.  These Republicans can't be allowing
themselves such a bad campaign unless they have a killer revelation that'll
make everything else moot.

The suspense...
--
David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
Open Software Foundation			uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
Three more months!  Three more months!
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10629 talk.politics.misc:52013 alt.politics.bush:9305
From: lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: ==> Rhetoric Vs. Reality--The First Debate
Date: 15 Oct 1992 15:26:04 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigbang.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Oct14.212240.20204@oakhill.sps.mot.com> pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:
>In article <Bw2u6A.832@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:

>The rich are paid a *larger* share of the income tax total revenue
>in 1990 than in 1980.  As Mr Nelson pointed out,

However, the percent of total national income received by the rich went
up FASTER than their share of income tax.

Your statistic does not measure tax fairness.

andy
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: jejensen@alfred.carleton.ca (John Jensen)
Subject: Re: Rhodes Scholarship - Frills and Frivolities
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 23:57:29 GMT

In <1992Oct15.164109.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:

>     I came across a few interesting lines in a book entitled
>_The Rhodes Scholarships_ by G.R. Parkin.  On pp. 219-220,
>a question was asked of President Teddy Roosevelt:

>     "Will the training of your young Americans at Oxford...help
>      or hinder them when they come back later to work out their
>      careers in their own country?"

Not many people stop to think where the money for Rhodes scholarships
comes from.  They are from the proceeds of the estate of Cecil Rhodes,
famous British colonialist (remember "Rhodesia"?) and violent conquering
racist.

It is somewhat ironic to read about liberal former Rhodes scholars.
Did they ever ask where the money came from? 

>     C. Perttunen

John Jensen
jejensen@ccs.carleton.ca
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Bush: "steering America"  (NOT)
Date: 14 Oct 92 14:16:27 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1bes9iINNljh@fido.asd.sgi.com>, root@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Super-User) writes:
> Bush thinks we should "stay on course"..
> 
> [Holland, MI:  10/12/92]
> 	BUSH:  When it comes to steering America through 
> 	the new global economic challenges, America needs 
> 	a driver who knows the highway.
> 
> So he fires the people who have been doing the driving..
> 
> 	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- White House Chief of Staff James Baker, [...]
> 	has asked all members of the Cabinet and other high administration 
> 	officials to sign letters of resignation immediately after the 
> 	Nov. 3 election.
> 
> Sorry George, but when a team has a bad season, you don't 
> fire the team -- it just needs a better coach.

	The team is pretty pathetic.  Then again Bush picked all the members. 
Best to get rid of the coach, the team, the system and the college. :)

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: TIME sues Bush/Quayle campaign
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:35:12 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <FOX.92Oct14211446@graphics.nyu.edu>, fox@cs.nyu.edu (David Fox) writes:
> In article <1992Oct14.154457.4793@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
> 
>    In article <Bw3BKC.FsD@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl) writes:
>    > Well, it's official.
>    > 
>    > I just saw the article come across the clarinews feed here.  Time
>    > magazine is suing the Bush campaign for copyright infringement (I
>    > think) because of the overuse of Time's cover story on Clinton.
>    > 
>    > I would repost the article, but I'm not a Republican.  I try and
>    > respect the copyright rights of others.  ;)
> 
> 	TIME will lose this one.  (In the ad I saw) TIME is clearly shown, thus
>    no conflict over where the picture came from.
> 
> The question isn't failure to acknowledge the source, it is
> the fact that Bush/Quayle stole the image (and the trademark).

	That's a little like saying I stole your text if I print it out and
show it to other people.

> I believe that that this type of behavior is exactly what they
> pretend to be so upset with the East Asian Gucci and Rolex
> knock off manufacturers.

	But they're not pretending to be TIME, or to sell magazines.  This is
free advertising for TIME to boot.

	The reason I think TIME will lose is because to rule in the other
direction means that TIME still owns the magazine, even after you buy it, and
can tell you how you may/may not use it.

	If I put the magazine on my dashboard, this is theft?  What if other
people see it?  What if I paste it on a Marrou/Lord campaign sign?

	I just don't see where TIME has any legal ground to stand on.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: You're a racist! statements
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:08:29 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

jcburt@cs.wm.edu (John Burton) writes:
: StarOwl@uiuc.edu writes:

:>Never mind the fact that they [white Anglo-Saxon Protestants] were NOT
:>THE FIRST to crawl ashore.  There were hundreds of thousands of people living
:>in what is now the US when the Jamestown colony was started.  They
:>had been here for thousands of years.  People keep forgetting that
:>little tidbit of information....

: Actually I think its was several million people living here...(at
: least that was before Columbus arrived to spread diseases that
: eventually wiped out a large percentage of the population)

"Several million" would be a correct term to describe the population
of the Americas, or even of what is now Mexico, pre-Columbus.  The most
reliable figure I've heard on the population of what is now the lower 48
pre-European settlers is on the order of 3-5 million people.  I thought 
about saying "several million," but decided to use "hundreds of thousands"
since that seemed a tad more accurate.  It all depends on how you
define "several."  :)
--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92



Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10719 talk.politics.misc:52110 alt.politics.elections:17076
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:34:27 EDT
From: <JFL4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: ==> Send a Card To Rich Bond?
 <1688014E56.PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu>

In article <1688014E56.PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu>, PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David
Veal) says:
>
>     Petty personal attacks versus pretty smoke and fantasy images.
>

Willie Horton vs. Morning in America?
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush
From: pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Subject: Re: Debate results
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 16:13:46 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.055354.14940@netcom.com> howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey) writes:
>
>Clinton maintained his image but failed to make any real ground.  Seemed 
>visibly surprised by Perot's influence on the debate.  Made good points
>on drug (non)-issue and defense.  Thwarted lame Bush attacks.
>
>Perot came off as the big winner.  Basically stole each of the other 
>candidate's thunder.  Elaborated on plans to enact immediately upon election.
>-- 

Several times in the debate, Bush mumbo-jumbo about the "stay the
course, four more years, thousand points of blight" led right into
Perot who promptly demolished Bush's whole premise. Clinton couldn't
have done this as well himself. Perot did all the dirty work and
hurt Bush badly which took the "aggression" away from Clinton,
but worth it since Clinton will keep his lead.

-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:9449 alt.politics.bush:8462 alt.politics.marrou:1523 alt.politics.correct:5646
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Legislation of morality
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 9 Oct 92 15:45:35 EST
Distribution: usa
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:
> glen@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Glen Sonnenberg) writes:
> >If all (or most) of the people who have AIDS engaged in some sort 
> >of irresponsible behavior then it stands to reason that if you 
> >stop the irresponsible behavior you can have a big impact on the 
> >spread of the disease.  
> 
> But "big impact on the spread of the disease" is fallacious.  

how is this fallacious?
    1. irrisponsible behavior is the primary factor in the spread of AIDS
    2. eliminating such behavior will slow the spread of AIDS dramatically.

unlike your silly baby-in-an-air-accident analogy, such a policy 
would save quite a few lives.

what is your point? are you in favor of irresponsible activity? or just
concerned about the -ways- such activity is eliminated? legislation
probably wouldn't work too well, but what is wrong with advertising the
fact that being careless in sex can get you killed just as dead as
weaving randomly across a highway?

jason "you play, you pay" steiner

--
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
`,`        Practice random acts of kindness and senseless beauty        `,` 
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.bush
From: deng@bunny.rhic.bnl.gov (dp)
Subject: Re: Debate results
Organization: RHIC: (Au^79+)-> Little BIG BANG <-(Au^79+) Upton, NY 11973
	<Bw0tE9.9yK@news.udel.edu>
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:06:25

>>>>> In article <Bw0tE9.9yK@news.udel.edu>
>>>>> "Dewey" == Dewey H Barich <barich@bach.udel.edu> writes:

  Dewey> Good observation.  Remember that one response (sorry, forget the
  Dewey> specific question) where he stood there for 10 seconds or so, then
  Dewey> seemed to remember his planned response, and started the tape
  Dewey> recorder in his throat?  It just seems to me that he a Bush were
  Dewey> playing the same old song, hurt the other guy.

That was about the definition of a family, I think.  Clinton just isn't
trustable, but if you trust Bush you get screwed anyway.




My friends, we can and we will, never, never surrender to what is
 right.
                -- Vice President Dan Quayle, speaking to Pat
                   Robertson's Christian Coalition.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:9119 alt.politics.bush:8223
From: wag5@quads.uchicago.edu (john peter wagner)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: blood
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:27:12 GMT
Reply-To: wag5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

How much blood do I have in my body? Lots?

	Take a little. There. It's only a mosquito bite. It will grow back.
You need it. It's ok.

	Why are you still drinking? Have I not given you blood to solve
your problem?

	What? Your friend wants a drink? Well...Ok. Only another mosquito
bite...

	[many mosquito bites later...]

	Hmm. I feel weak. Why are you all still drinking of me? I cannot
make more blood if you do not give me a breather. You are taking more
than I can produce....

	[death of the host, death of the parasites follows]

	Drive a stake through the hearts of the vampires; eliminate
the leeching Democrat party.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:10212 alt.politics.bush:9009 alt.politics.elections:16570