HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dusek@rtsg.mot.com (James Dusek)
Subject: Re: To the Clinton supporters
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:27:33 GMT

csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN) writes:
>Yes, we won!!!  Doesn't it feel great?!!  

	Don't get so happy, Clinton failed to get over %50 percent of the
popular vote. More people don't like him than do. If he starts screwing
up, he'll be hit hard.

>Personally I forgot how it feels to get up the day after the election and
>feel that tomorrow is going to be actually brighter than today.  Feels 
>good not to have the millstone of doom around my neck after every
>election the Republicans won.

	Millstone of doom? Its people like you that cause these problems.
You nor the democratic congress NEVER gave the Bush a chance. At these
Bush threw his support to Clinton after he won, instead of saying
"The Americans have the millstone of doom around their necks, don't
support Clinton." 

	Democrats are sore loosers.

>But with this excitement and good feeling comes a different type
>of responsibility.  Instead of saying when things go wrong "they

	For everybody, Perot and Bush people should also try and help
William along, and don't be like democrats and throw wrenches into the
works.

>We don't want Baker, Quayle, Kemp or someone else being able to
>challenge a record of broken promises.  

	What in the hell has Jack Kemp done to you?

>How can we even talk about healing a nation, when we divide it by our 
>words?

	So true, to bad when the Democrats lost four years ago they didn't head 
these words. 

>"Four more years" begins TODAY

	In two years if nothing changes, William could be looking at a congress
fully of republicans and independants.

James Dusek
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,soc.college
From: ar12@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard Nixon)
Subject: MAILING LIST FOR INFORMATION CONCERNING RECESSION, DEBT & JAPAN!
Reply-To: ar12@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:13:00 GMT

DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR ARTICLES ABOUT US FOREIGN TRADE PROBLEM, FOREIGN
AGENTS AND THE NATIONAL DEBT....NOW TAKING NAMES.
 
This is a note to inform all of you about a distribution list we run 
which distributes about once a month, articles about the U.S. trade, 
political and debt situation. This newsgroup may not be around much 
longer, so we're doing our best to set up a distribution list now 
before we all lose contact with each other. If ever you wish to be
removed from the list, I would delete you immediately.
 
Recently you may have seen some articles on this group
(one about Japanese trade policy (JAPANYES), and other was a list
of 'foriegn agents' who are high level government people who sell 
you out to foreign companies for bribes and 'fees'. 
 
These articles are usually not available via other media which is why
we run this list.
 
These files were first sent down our receiver list before they were posted 
generally. (These files (the Japan ones) are currently at anonymous FTP 
site monu6.cc.monash.edu.au   in    pub/nihongo    
(read the INDEX file in that directory for details)).
 
In the future, we won't be posting these as often, but rather sending
them down the distribution list. If you would like to be on the
distribution list for these articles (one every month or so), please
send me a note and I will add you. 
 
 
Andre,
 
ar12@quads.uchicago.edu


Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Re: To the Bush (It's nice, believe me)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:28:03 GMT

In article <100630@bu.edu>, jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) writes:
|> In article <Bx7JDL.6z@nic.umass.edu> csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN) writes:
|> 
|> >No, the world is not coming to an end, and the USA will survive even if
|> >Clinton isn't a good president.
|> 
|> No not immediately. It's also not clear that the USA will survive in the
|> long run if Clinton and his Democratic congress spend us into eternal
|> hell during the next four years.
|> 
|> There's also Europe, which by '96 may have already blown the US away
|> economically (not to mention the Japanese)...

Which Europe is this?  The Europe with industrial policies, universal
health care, high consumption taxes, strong infrastructure investment,
strong social programs?  Or some other Europe?  And which Japan is this?

(Of course, we must exclude the Sick Man Of Europe; the one whose Prime
Minister followed supply-side economics for the last 12 years, and has an
imploding economy).

|>                 DON'T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR ROSS PEROT

Oh, sorry.  I guess you agree, then.
-- 
David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
Open Software Foundation			uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
From: gaf5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Gail A. Fullman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: To the Clinton supporters
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:46:19 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov8.090916.23179@wam.umd.edu>, sorsha@wam.umd.edu (Laurie Beth
Brunner) writes:
>
>1)  People live in societies, not as hermits who all happen to
>live in the same area of land.  You can't live in a society and
>expect that everything will go your way and that everything
>that happens is for the individual's self-interest alone.  To
>keep a society going, each member has to sacrifice something.
>Believe me, life is much easier when you can depend upon other
>people than when you only care about and rely on yourself.
>
>2)  In the last 12 years, and in other administrations too,
>the government HAS done un-Constitutional, immoral things.  The Supreme
>Court just ruled that the gag order on gov't family-planning
>clinics is un-Constitutional.  Need I also mention Watergate
>and the Iran-Contra scandal?  If you have evidence that C/G
>are going to try something illegal and immoral, then say what
>it is and name the source.  If not, then don't sling accusations.
>
>3)  I find it amusing that the Rep. party keeps talking about
>how they want to reduce gov't, and that C/G want to expand it
>into our personal lives.  This, from the party of the president
>who wants a Constitutional amendment banning abortion.  They
>want to put gov't in my uterus, and this is supposed to represent
>their commitment to reducing gov't?  I think not.
>
>The Giver Goddess
>--
>~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>Send burnt offerings to....."If love is a grenade,.........Ahead groove......
>..sorsha@wam.umd.edu......I'll pull the pin." B-52's....factor five! -Holly..
>~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>
Let's not forget the consitutional amendment to "protect" the flag.  If
passed, we would have had a whole flag bureacracy;  most likely with the same
inane autocratic powers of the IRS.
-- 

------------------------
|   Gail A. Fullman    |
|   Manager - ADMO     |
|   Ext. 83113         |
------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.election,talk.politics.misc
From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: To the Clinton supporters
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 13:02:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.163601.9595@news2.cis.umn.edu> prabhak@giga.cs.umn.edu (Satya Prabhakar) writes:
>(David Scharfe) writes:

>>I agree, Brian.  Clinton has incredible audacity to speak of "healing"
>>the nation while he plunders one group of people ("the rich") to 
>>influence the voting of another ("the poor").

>>This bald-faced promotion of class conflict, combined with shrill 
>>rhetoric about "healing", is the epitome of hypocrisy.

>Not quite! All nations in the world have agreed that taxation should
>be progressive, 

And if all the world agreed that you should jump off a bridge would that
make it a good idea?  Not so long ago, all nations of the world agreed that
slavery was acceptable too.  Did that make it right?

Here's the REAL question:  Should there be taxation?

Another is whether taxes ought to approximate service fees, or whether they
ought to be used as a method to redistribute wealth from those who earned
it to those who have not.

A secondary question is whether or not taxes should be progressive.

A third is what the proper extent of the progressive nature ought to be (say, should all income over $100K be taxed away?)

>which is why we all pay a fraction of our income
>towards taxes. If your notion of justice and non-hypocrisy were
>to hold, everybody would be required to pay the same amount because
>all of use the resources to the same extent, more or less. 

Actually, one could make a case for a certain amount of progressivity on the 
grounds that people who buy and own a lot require more protection for those
transactions and bits of property.  That's not the real issue here though.
In the US today, most of the money spent is on something other than the 
protection of life and property.  

The supermarkets don't charge people more for bread if they are rich.  Why
should the government charge more?

>So,
>according to your metric even Reagan and Bush were hypocrites 
>because not only the richer paid more in terms of absolute amount
>but also in terms of a fraction of their income. 

Of course they were.  Do you think I'm a republican or something?

>Clinton is just
>saying that he would increase the fraction for the richest.

So?  What makes being rich a punishable offense?  It really burns me when 
people so callously assert the justice of taking money away from people just
because they aren't poor.  Why is robbery more acceptable when committed
against a rich person than a poor one.

Of course, Clinton WILL increase taxes on more than just the rich, but even
if he didn't he would still be wrong.  I'm for lower taxes for EVERYONE, rich
poor, and in-between.

--Brian
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.election,talk.politics.misc
From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: To the Clinton supporters
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 13:10:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.193425.14200@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade) writes:
>In article <BxAxtv.F2M@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com> dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
>>In article <Bx9L5F.39I@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>>>In article <Bx7KE9.wu@nic.umass.edu> csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN) writes:
>>>
>>>>How can we even talk about healing a nation, when we divide it by our 
>>>>words?

>>I agree, Brian.  Clinton has incredible audacity to speak of "healing"
>>the nation while he plunders one group of people ("the rich") to 
>>influence the voting of another ("the poor").

>wow now,,,since when does he say he is a viking that wants to plunder?
>he said he wants to raise the top bracket from 31 to 36% on those who make
>over 200k and he wants to eliminate many loopholes that only the rich take
>advantage of...like mortgage deduction on 2nd homes or limit that amount..
>like only homes under 250k or something.

Even if that's true, so what?  Is any tax increase justified as long as it 
is taking the money of people richer than yourself?  Would it be bad if he
wanted to take 36% of middle-income people's pay?  What's the difference?
What do you have against the rich?  Why do you hate them so?

I should also point out that tax increases on the rich can't generate 
much money because there are not many rich people.  If he's going to raise
much, he's going to have to tax the middle-class too, but I think higher
taxes are bad no matter what bracket you are in.

--Brian




Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: davec@Davinci.Concordia.CA (Dave Chu)
Subject: Re: Do they have bigger dicks in USA?
Organization: ECE - Concordia University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:29:26 GMT

>>Yes we do.
>> 
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Jeffrey T. Hazelwood                    Universitt Heidelberg
>>EMAIL: y41@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de       Heidelberg, Germany 
>>            "God is dead." - Nietsche    "Nietsche is dead." - God
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You sure do, but I think dick heads is more like it, not dicks.

Xref: sparky soc.culture.usa:8449 alt.politics.clinton:16886 talk.politics.misc:59647
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Censorship. (was re: killing of Japanese exchange student)
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:05:30 GMT
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

In article <1d9uktINNo7c@morrow.stanford.edu>, silva@pangea (Holly Silva) writes:
>	Yannis, you are apparently blind to the double standard vis a
>vis religion that permeates your response to my post. The implication
>of your reply is that religion-based _total_ bans on alcohol in the 
>Islamic world are to be respected on the grounds that they are a 
>product of religious tradition. Yet American laws restricting the 
>distribution and use of alcohol are likewise based on religious tradition,
>as you've acknowledged above, and you feel comfortable ridiculing us
>for the existence of such laws.

I'm afraid I will comment anyway although Holly thinks I have no right
to say anything critical of USA in soc.culture.usa because I am not an
Usonian and I haven't spent many lifetimes studying U.S. culture.

There is no double standard in the statement if you look at it from
the claims of the countries themselves.  Usonians say their country is
free and acknowledges and respects many different viewpoints - and
remember for example the first amendment, where it says no law can be
made to support a religion.  The Islamic countries apparently make no
such claim, so there's no problem with them having prohibition.

However, it is very hypocritical to try to _both_ claim the Usonian
tradition of freedom and respect for different lifestyles and
religious prohibitions.

//Jyrki
From: gaf5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Gail A. Fullman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: The Presidency
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:06:34 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov5.141216.25561@exu.ericsson.se>, ebupaf@ebu.ericsson.se (Pat
Fargo 6266) writes:
>I am still amazed by the presidential result. Our
>government is made up of the executive and judicial
>branch and congress. The primary role of the executive
>branch is foreign policy, and commander of the armed
>forces. The congress is the primary base for new laws
>and the economy, and finally the judicial branch interprets
>the laws and policy relative to the constitition. They all
>balance. The president proposes the budget, and the congress
>submits bills to spend it. The president has veto power, but
>can be overriden.
>
>Now for my issue. How can we elect a president from a small
>state, with no federal experience to be in charge of foreign
>policy and the defense of our country? The budget and economy
>are the responsibility of the congress. Congress always spends
>more than they take in, therefore our deficit. What qualifications
>does this guy (who 4 out of 10 people voted for) have to run
>this country?  Back to Jimmy Carter days, buy your cars and homes
>now, because its just a matter of time before inflation starts
>all over again.......
>
>---
>Patrick A. Fargo               Ericsson Business Communication
>                               Anaheim, California
>
The primary role of the executive branch is to enforce laws made by the
legislative branch.
-- 

------------------------
|   Gail A. Fullman    |
|   Manager - ADMO     |
|   Ext. 83113         |
------------------------
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:17:42 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: The Presidency
Distribution: usa
 <1992Nov9.194349.13857@news.Hawaii.Edu>

In article <1992Nov9.194349.13857@news.Hawaii.Edu>,
gerard@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer) says:
>
>In article <1de6ojINN8iv@morrow.stanford.edu>, BL.JYC@forsythe.stanford.edu   n
>(Jo
>Corelis) writes:
>|> In article <1992Nov5.141216.25561@exu.ericsson.se>,
>|> ebupaf@ebu.ericsson.se (Pat Fargo 6266) writes:
>|>
>|> >I am still amazed by the presidential result...
>|> >
>|> >           ...    How can we elect a president from a small
>|> >state, with no federal experience to be in charge of foreign
>|> >policy and the defense of our country?
>|> >
>|>
>|>    I'd be curious to know if you were equally amazed when the American
>|> people elected as their president a has-been B movie matinee idol who
>|> once co-starred with a chimpanzee.
>
>That's easy.  The presidency is a schizophrenic position.  The office
>holder has to be both a Prime Minister and a King (or "President" in
>the Eastern European tradition).  People who voted for Reagan were
>voting for King, and for that position he was undoubtedly the best
>qualified.  Unfortunately as Prime Minister he was a disaster.
>
>Of course, GHWB was neither Prime Minister nor King.

Not a bad golfer though:)
--andy
>--
>Gerard Fryer  (g.fryer@soest.hawaii.edu)
>School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology
>University of Hawaii at Manoa
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: giovin@medr2.ecs.umass.edu (Rocky J Giovinazzo)
Subject: Re: To the Bush (It's nice, believe me)
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:44:41 GMT

In article <jyc.720941494@Leland> jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:
>jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) writes:
>>           ...      It's also not clear that the USA will survive in the
>>long run if Clinton and his Democratic congress spend us into eternal
>>hell during the next four years.

>   Now, now.  This is a time for reconciliation.  The election is over,
>and Republicans should not be bitter that the entire Bush/Reagan agenda
>has been repudiated by the American people for the ludricrous farce it
>was, nor should they feel downcast that that agenda's leader has been
>expelled from office in disgrace.  
    One's beliefs are not justified because of the fact that one's
vote happens to go with the winning candidate.  For your information,
ABC says that more than half (no number was given) of the electorate
says they are "scared of a Clinton presidency" and 25% of those
people actually voted for Clinton.  This and other polls imply
that people voted for change more than they voted for Clinton.
Because of this, the claim that "the Bush/Reagan agenda was repudiated
for the ludicrous farce it was" really holds little water.  
It sounds like Jon Corelis has been bitter and is now telling others
not to be.  How weird...
    Regardless of the finger pointing, Clinton does have a plan
to pay for new programs with cuts elsewhere (or least he has the
intent since his preliminary figures don't add up).  Because of
this, the recovering economy, the slightly refreshed Congress, 
and the pressure for Clinton & Congress to cooperate, it seems
unlikely to me that we will be spent into "eternal hell".  

>As for those of us who opposed Bush,
>we should not be arrogant and exult over the spectacle of George Bush
>having to slink back to Texas whimpering with his tail between his legs:
>it would be ungenerous and ungracious of us to congratulate ourselves on
>his having been consigned forever to the cesspool of history's failed
>reactionary ideologues.  Instead, let us all join hands and look to the
>future in a spirit of fellowship. 

This of course is a farce since you're doing what you tell others
not to.  If you did some reading you'd see that Clinton's inheriting
an economy stronger than the one Bush inherited and you'd realize
that regardless of whatever political differences you have with
the president, he has had a distinguished career and that the above
description is truly inappropriate.

Rocky Giovinazzo
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,misc.education,comp.edu
From: demerit@vms.macc.wisc.edu (J. DeMerit)
Subject: Re: Searching Addresses
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 13 NOV 92 10:38:08    

In article <BxnAs4.GB3@dei.unipd.it>, marco@lia.dei.unipd.it (Marco Pontil 259243) writes...

> 
>Hi people !
> 
>	I'm writing here to ask for a favour:
> 
>	I need the address (postal or E-Mail address)  of the office
>	of admission of these universities:
> 
>	University of Wisconsin Madison.> 

The Univeristy of Wisconsin at Madison is:
     211 Bascom Hall
     500 Lincoln Drive
     Madison, WI 53706-1380
     (608) 262-7341
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine)
Subject: Re: To the Bush (It's nice, believe me)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:39:06 GMT

>In article <jyc.720941494@Leland> jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:
>>jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) writes:
>>As for those of us who opposed Bush,
>>we should not be arrogant and exult over the spectacle of George Bush
>>having to slink back to Texas whimpering with his tail between his legs:
>>it would be ungenerous and ungracious of us to congratulate ourselves on
>>his having been consigned forever to the cesspool of history's failed
>>reactionary ideologues.  Instead, let us all join hands and look to the
>>future in a spirit of fellowship. 

Boy, doesn't this sound like slightly warmed over Communist Propaganda.

I expected to hear a "Workers of the World Unite" after the last
comment.

Please stop sounding like such a far left Bolshevik (unless you are one...):)



-- 
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+ ^  ^  ^
| Brent L. Irvine         |  "Love is blind ... and stupid." | {\{|}/} CLAN
| irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu |                      -M.P.       |  {{|}} IRVINE
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+  o/|\o OF DRUM
From: gaf5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Gail A. Fullman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Thanksgiving Day
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:40:45 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov11.183459.21548@ugle.unit.no>, mortenny@idt.unit.no (Morten A
ndersen Nyg}rd) writes:
>A question for you Americans out there:
>
>Is Thanksgiving Day tomorrow, next Thursday, or the last Thursday in November?
>I just thought it was the second Thursday in November, but I'm not sure.
>Please answer.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>Morten.
>
It's the fourth Thursday in November.

Your welcome.
-- 

------------------------
|   Gail A. Fullman    |
|   Manager - ADMO     |
|   Ext. 83113         |
------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,misc.invest,misc.entrepreneurs