HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Reflections on this evening...
Date: 25 Aug 92 20:14:59 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <5m+nw3-.esprit@netcom.com> esprit@netcom.com (Alan F. Perry) writes:
>California has been without a budget for well over a month now because
>no one will compromise.  The effect here is fairly serious.

>Being able to work out an agreeable compromise is a good thing.

>alan

When only one side is willing to compromise, the result is no longer
compromise, it is capitulation.


-- 
--Mark

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil)
Subject: Re: RNC platform please
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:38:20 GMT

andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:

>In article <1992Sep2.173615.18460@aosg.gsf.dec.com> yackel@ccvax1.aosg.gsf.dec.com (Dan Yackel) writes:
>>I dont know if this is the right place but could someone post the
>>RNC Platform please???

>It's 90 some pages.  Get your own copy by calling (202) 863-8500.

True, but if someone at the RNC would take the time to scan it, it would be
all over the net in no time!  If you ask me, it looks like they don't want
people to read it because the Democratic platform was online in about a day!

Not that the Democratic platform is all that short either.  I think it comes
about to 30 or 40 pages on my word processor, after I take the hard returns
out of it.

Besides, some of us would like to have it on diskette.  

Furthermore, does the Republican party /charge/ for copies, given how 
thick it actually is?  I don't want any of my money going to the Republicans.

I just want their platform.

Heck, the sites that are carrying the political files (info.umd.edu is a good
one) also happen to have entire novels (which have passed into the public
domain) online.

Sharon
oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3985 talk.politics.misc:43585 alt.politics.elections:12346
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
From: jdonald@us.oracle.com (John R. Donald)
Subject: Re: New poll results
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:37:46 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Sep2.105858.1@vxdesy.desy.de> forbush@vxdesy.desy.de writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.225210.993@nuchat.sccsi.com>, lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher) writes:
>> Newest poll results...printed this morning in Houston Chronicle of a
>> ABC poll, or was it CNN or CBS, or whatever...but anyway(I could go get
>> the paper but I am lazy), the results were as follows.....
>> Clinton - 56%
>> Bush    - 36%
>
>I really wonder what the demographic and regional samples
>are for the different polls that are taken. Am I the only
>one, or did anyone else notice that one poll has a
>consistent 6-8% difference while the other has a consistent
>20% difference?
>
These polls are meaningless - i want to see polls by state, showing 
electoral votes.  Anybody seen anything like that?
-jd



-- 
"Good Idea, Boss."	- Homer Simpson

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3259 alt.politics.elections:11802 alt.fan.dan-quayle:3057 talk.politics.guns:20259 talk.politics.misc:42458
From: grue@csa.bu.edu (Philip Libin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Date: 28 Aug 92 02:19:37 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Computer Science Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <17hesjINNgqc@agate.berkeley.edu> fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary) writes:

>5/6 of the guns used in crimes come from the black market. Please explain
>to me how laws governing _legal_ sales of guns will affect _illegally_
>obtained guns.


Let me explain the intricate inner-workings of the gun "black market".


1)  Get into a van.
2)  Drive to Florida
3)  Buy several score of assorted fire arms
4)  Load them into said van.
5)  Drive back to whereever you came from and
6)  Sell your guns (with a value-added charge).

Congradulations!  You are now a "black marketere".

It seems that laws restricting the _legal_ sale of arms would have
QUITE an impact on the _illegal_ market.



Phil Libin

 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Aug26.225301.24877@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
	<17hesjINNgqc@agate.berkeley.edu> <94800@bu.edu>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 19:02:23 GMT

<In article <94800@bu.edu> grue@csa.bu.edu (Philip Libin) writes:
<   In article <17hesjINNgqc@agate.berkeley.edu> fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary) writes:

<   >5/6 of the guns used in crimes come from the black market. Please explain
<   >to me how laws governing _legal_ sales of guns will affect _illegally_
<   >obtained guns.


<   Let me explain the intricate inner-workings of the gun "black market".


<   1)  Get into a van.

	Ok, no problem.
	
<   2)  Drive to Florida
 
	Ok, no problem.

<  3)  Buy several score of assorted fire arms

	Well, you may have a big problem. Depending
	on the State you are from, you may or may not
	be able to purchase shotguns and/or rifles
	in Florida. Some States have reciprocity agreements
	with adjoining States that allow residents of each
	to buy long-guns in the other. If you are, say,
	from Georgia or Alabama, you MAY (I repeat, *MAY*)
	be able to buy long-guns in Florida, assuming that
	the law allows.

	However, I suspect you want to buy handguns; in
	which case you have a Big Problem. 

	First of all, you are going to have to
	produce a Florida drivers license with a street
	address. Second, you will have to pass the Florida
	instant background check. Since you are presumed
	to be from out of state, either you have a forged
	license (which is a crime) or you are using an
	old Florida id to obtain firearms (also a crime,
	and a Federal one at that). You will be lying
	on Form 4473, which is a Federal Felony all by
	itself, punishable by up to 5 years in prison
	and a fine of $5,000.

<  4)  Load them into said van.
 
	Ok, fine....assuming you were able to buy them....

<  5)  Drive back to whereever you came from and

	Crossing state lines....
 
<  6)  Sell your guns (with a value-added charge).

<   Congradulations!  You are now a "black marketere".

	If you are selling handguns, you are absolutely
	violating the Gun Control Act of 1968; you could 
	receive 5 years and a fine of $5,000 for *each*
	handgun sold.

<   It seems that laws restricting the _legal_ sale of arms would have
<   QUITE an impact on the _illegal_ market.

	Guess again....


Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3194 talk.politics.misc:42361 alt.politics.clinton:3251 alt.politics.elections:11757
From: st1lv@elroy.uh.edu (McLeod, Stephen)
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 17:52:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.144510.26149@tamsun.tamu.edu>, fred@johnd.tamu.edu (Fred Seals 5-2298) writes...
>In article <1992Aug28.140743.21281@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>|> In article <1992Aug27.220758.879@u.washington.edu> rons@hardy.u.washington.edu (Ronald Schoenberg) writes:
>|> 
>|> >The Soviet Union collapsed because of extensive internal corruption.
>|> >This occured partly as a result of very widespread cynicism which
>|> >essentially provoked an everybody-for-themselves attitude.  The same
>|> >thing could happen here.  For example, we have a tax dodger for
>|> >president.
>|> 
>|> 	How is Bush a tax dodger?
>|> 
>|> 	I've never heard _that_ one before.
> 
> 
>Haven't you heard anyone who calls a low tax state home is a tax dodger.  Bush a long
>time resident of TEXAS (becoming TAXES with liberal Democrat ann richards) pays
>less taxes because he claims Texas to be home.  If we carry this argument through
>Clinton is a tax doger to because he lives off of ( i mean in) Arkansas instead of claiming
>NY home.
> 
It is amazing that Bush is able to *own* a house in Maine and stay in a hotel in
Texas four or five days a year and is still able to claim that he *lives* in
Texas.  Could it be because he would have to pay 3-5 thousand dollars in state
taxes if he lived in Maine?  (to give him a break, he probably cares less about
the 3-5k than the 32 electoral votes.)
It is great seeing the republican convention:
"And casting 7 electoral votes, the great state of Maine, home of our nation's
next president, George Bush, ...
"And casting 32 electoral votes, the sovereign state of Texas, home state of 
our nation's next president, George Bush, ...
"And casting 17 electoral votes, the home of liberty, Pennsylvania, and the
home state of our nation's next president, George Bush, ...
'And ...
---
Stephen McLeod         Lotteries: Taxes on the stupid.
The Eternal? Student
From: fox@cs.nyu.edu (David Fox)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Congress Bashing
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:06:21 GMT
	<1992Aug24.160032.12448@news.uiowa.edu>
	<1992Aug24.183344.7330@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences

In article <1992Aug24.183344.7330@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco) writes:

   >House Banking Scandal -- a bipartisan screw up.  A lot of extremely busy
   >people take advantage of de-facto overdraft protection.

   >Savings and Load failure -- Congress deregulated under the Carter
   >administration, but the problem was made much worse by a Republican
   >executive branch that refused to enforce the regulations that
   >remained.  How many of the executives who torpedoed S&Ls at the
   >taxpayers' expense were Democrats?

   >Pork Barrel Politics -- we all know what that is; stuff that
   >benefits other people's districts more than ours.  And Republicans
   >NEVER get involved in that, do they???

   It would be great if everyone involved in these outrageous scandals
   were voted out of office, Democrat and Republican alike!

   I think we can all agree on that, can't we?

Using de-facto overdraft protection is not a scandal.  Pork
Barrel Politics is not, in itself, a scandal.  Deregulating
the S&L industry is not, in itself, a scandal.  We don't
know exactly who you are talking about.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: bnolte@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Bill Nolte)
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 21:56:37 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

I hate to say this, well not really, but are you nuts?
The one issue the Constitution strives to maintain throughout is 'States'
Rights".  If there could be a more fundamental violation of the constitution
than sending troops unasked for into a State, I don't know what it is.  You
want to get mad and blame somebody, which it seems you always do, blame the
governor for his slow reaction.  You say he wasn't playing politics with
lives (but of course Bush was) and YOUR tone implies that he isn't an
incompetent (but once again, Bush is), but he knew the rules.  Yes, the
pentagon was tracking Andrew for a long time (even though our weather
services constantly told us Andrew would be no problem even if it did
make hurricane status), but he had access to that information as well.
Seems to me that once again the double standards of the left are oozing
yet again.

> -- 
>                                Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
> The feminist agenda is a socialist, anti-family political movement that 
> encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice 
> witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians. - Pat Robertson 1992

Thank God someone said it, even if it was Pat Robertson.

Bill Nolte

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:20:27 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.061345.21992@lonex.rl.af.mil>, jft@lonex.rl.af.mil (James
F. Tims) writes:
> If you are male, you should have nothing to say about it.
> Childbirth poses no immediate physical risk to the father.

   Hockey pucky!!!  YOU try living with an woman for the third trimester (60%
of normal sleep, while finishing a PhD in math) and then holing her hand (so to
speak) for a 26 hour labor.  Then factor in the health effects of paying
$8000.00 so you can't eat right for the next six months.  I have two kids, love
'em both, and we had the first one without insurance.  The health effects on my
wife were much worse but they were decidedly non-trivial for me.

   Also would you abortion debate guys PLEASE EDIT YOUR SUBJECT LINE TO EXCLUDE
ALT.FAN.DAN-QUAYLE!!!!

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: jacksonk@rolls.cs.rpi.edu (robertso@700.club.bible.thump (Pat Robertson))
Subject: Jesus wins the lottery
Organization: Bible Thumping Far Right
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 18:22:58 GMT


	UPI :

	(HOUSTON) -- The Texas Lottery produced its first hometown
	winner yesterday when a Houston man walked away with the big
	money in the weekly drawing. Jesus Almaguer of Houston chose
				     ^^^^^
	the right door to win one-million dollars. The 40-year old
	Almaguer was immediately surrounded by dozens of relatives and
	hometown well-wishers after the drawing held in the grand foyer
	of the Gus Wortham Theater Center in downtown Houston.

I thought I saw him on the floor at the Republican National Convention

;^)
-- 
            ^  >
            O o                                                 \_O
           >=-=<        Keith Jackson == jacksonk@cs.rpi.edu      |O
             U                                                  _/ \_
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
From: csuah@warwick.ac.uk (~WISP at CU~)
Subject: Re: Anti-religious fanatics (Was Re: School Choice )
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 23:46:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.222615.4507@mcs.anl.gov> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:
>All this about Christians killing and hating etc. is very interesting. I guess
>we all know that the Atheists never persecuted anyone. They never sent
>people to siberia, or tortured them for holding different views. They never
>put people in mental hospitals because the had different beliefs. It's
>only the Christians that hurt others. And you know all Christians are alike.
>What a crock!
>
 You said it, Mike, what a crock! That is the saddest piece of misdirection
I've ever seen in my life. The issue was Marxism, of which atheism was a tiny
part. Now, if you're going to tell me that the Inquisition was not a Christian
organisation, rather it was a militant Eco-Nazi Party, part of whose agenda
was Catholic, then OK, maybe we got it wrong. Otherwise, stop dribbling:
you'll short out your keyboard...

Later,

The Wisp. [born again w*nker, more like...]
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Chris Williams <csuah@uk.ac.warwick.csv> aka <csuah@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
"Tony Greig in the slips, legs apart, waiting for a tickle"
                                      Brian Johnson (thanks to A. Simha 8^>)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.religion.misc
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:59:00 GMT

In article <94800@bu.edu> grue@csa.bu.edu (Philip Libin) writes:
>Xref: utkux1.utk.edu alt.politics.elections:10349 alt.fan.dan-quayle:576 talk.politics.guns:25164 talk.politics.misc:52732
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!utkcs2!darwin.sura.net!mips!decwrl!bu.edu!csa!grue
>From: grue@csa.bu.edu (Philip Libin)
>Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.misc
>Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
>Message-ID: <94800@bu.edu>
>Date: 28 Aug 92 02:19:37 GMT
>References: <1992Aug26.135803.10046@sinix.UUCP> <1992Aug26.225301.24877@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> <17hesjINNgqc@agate.berkeley.edu>
>Sender: news@bu.edu
>Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
>Organization: Computer Science Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
>Lines: 27
>In article <17hesjINNgqc@agate.berkeley.edu> fcrary@ocf.berkeley.edu (Frank Crary) writes:
>
>>5/6 of the guns used in crimes come from the black market. Please explain
>>to me how laws governing _legal_ sales of guns will affect _illegally_
>>obtained guns.
>
>
>Let me explain the intricate inner-workings of the gun "black market".
>
>
>1)  Get into a van.
>2)  Drive to Florida
>3)  Buy several score of assorted fire arms

     Felony number one.  (And probably two since you'll have to forge
a Florida ID.)

>4)  Load them into said van.
>5)  Drive back to whereever you came from and
    
     Felony number three.

>6)  Sell your guns (with a value-added charge).

     Felony number four.     

>It seems that laws restricting the _legal_ sale of arms would have
>QUITE an impact on the _illegal_ market.

     Perhaps they would affect *this* avenue.  However, I have yet to
hear a good explanation why, when local sources dry up, South American
drug smugglers won't just include a few guns in their shipments to
sell on the streets.
     Restricting one avenue is useless if you can't cover them all.
     

>Phil Libin

===========================================================================
|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
===========================================================================

Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 03:18:21 GMT


In a previous article, kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) says:
>
>Or a responsible woman who is not enslaved by her lusts.  Apparently
>those who are [so enslaved] seem to be in a perpetual state of denial.

Remember, Theodore ... Peace on Earth ... Purity of Essence ... Keep a
close watch on those Precious Bodily Fluids, now, y'hear?
-- 

              "You got the right ta-ta, but the wrong ho-ho"

                              -- New Orleans attorney Dean Andrews
From: detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Email address needed: Rush Limbaugh
Date: 1 Sep 92 03:35:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight) writes:

>In article <17lup3INN8tr@agate.berkeley.edu> martyg@ocf.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>>

>The e-add. for Clinton HQ is 75300.3115@compuserve.com

The only address you need: 70277.2502@compuserve.com - RUSH LIMBAUGH


-- 
David De Trolio - (detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu)
__________________________________________________

"We're sailing on the wind of better days"
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3622 alt.politics.clinton:3619 alt.rush-limbaugh:4137 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4948
From: mjb@acsu.buffalo.edu (Matthew J. Bernhardt)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Date: 31 Aug 92 21:40:14 GMT
Organization: UB

alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:

>	That said, I think it's irrelevent. If the president had violated
								 ^^^^^^^^
>the law and sent the troops in early, the political remifications would
 ^^^^^^^
>have been nil, vs. waiting for the governers call, which carries the
>obvious consequences. The fact stands that bush had a great oppertunity
>to show himself as sympathetic to domestic issues, and he blew it.

	If the president had violated the law, impeachment proceedings would
be underway in the House right this very minute for "high crimes and mis-
demeanors", as prescribed in the U.S. Constitution.  The president takes office
with an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.  I think you
underestimate the "political ramifications" of impeachment.
-- 
Matt Bernhardt
University of Buffalo             THIS SPACE FOR RENT.
mjb@acsu.buffalo.edu
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Distortion of facts
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:15:10 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS, New Orleans, LA

ppandit@rekha.esd.sgi.com (Parimal Pandit) writes:

> In article <1992Aug28.165745.1214@meaddata.com>, king@meaddata.com (Mike
> King) writes:
> |>      I'm predicting that George Bush's plan will backfire on him.
> |>      Just as he did four years ago, he is misrepesenting information
> |>      to the American republic.  Case in point:  Bush telling everybody
> |>      that Clinton has raised taxes over 100 times.  It's just not
> |>      true.  Even the Wall Street Journal said that.  He has proven
> |>      that he has no scruples.  His theory of trickle-down economics
> |>      isn't working.  His pro-right wing view does not reflect the
> |>      opinions and attitudes of American Republic.  He is not the
> |>      choice for the future.
> |>
>
> I would like to believe this but I remember in 1988, I thought people were
> too smart to fall for that Willie Horton, wrap in american flag, pledge of
> alligence, tough on crime, environmental prez, educational prez, .. bullshit.
> It was so obvious, so lacking in credibility, especially coming from a wimp
> like Bush and coming from the Reagan administration. He had no track
> record for
> any of these issues, esp. environment and education. Mike Dukakis should have
> fought back but I don't know if that would have made much of a difference.
> Judging by the content of some of these postings, people are as stupid as eve
>
> It amazes me that no one remembers Bush constantly saying "STAY THE COURSE".
> Now he is supposed to be an agent of change? I wish I could run ads proclamin
> "READ MY LIPS, NO MORE BULLSHIT".
>

There is quite a big difference between this year and '88, namely that the
Democrats have a candidate who is fighting back.  In '88, Bush threw out all of
those attacks, and they stuck right on Dukakis.  Not only did he not try to
throw some of it back at Bush, he never even tried to defend himself!  Now,
some are actually worried that the Clinton people are almost *too* quick to
respond to an attack from Bush and Dano.

A good example:  remember last week when Bush visited that plant that
manufactures lights for police cars?  Here's George, standing in front of those
flashing red and blue lights.  The symbolism was almost as good as the flag
factory in '88.  This year, however, he's running against a governor who has
signed death warrants and has watched prisoners in his state get executed.  All
of that neat symbolism the Bush people were looking for vanished after that
day's newscasts.



|Edward J. Branley                         elendil@mintir.New-Orleans.LA.US|
|Seashell Software                                UUCP:  rex!mintir!elendil|
|3508 North Woodlawn Avenue                          Compu$erve: 71237,2227|
|Metairie, LA   70006       voice: +1-504-455-5087     bbs: +1-504-455-8665|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush