HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pa56680@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (P. Ialamanna)
Subject: Clinton's BS economic plan
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:56:40 GMT

I'm getting really irritated at these Clinton supporters who claim that
his tax increase won't affect the middle class. If I understand it corectly,
Clinton wants to raise tax on the top 2% of wage earners and not to the
middle class. Okay fine, but what gets me is that middle class people beleive
that this won't affect them. HOW CAN IT NOT AFFECT THE MIDDLE CLASS? Let's
face it, the top 2% of wage earners are usually providing some goods or service
to the general public(i.e. middle class). If their taxes are increased(cutting
into their profits) what do you think will happen?
The price of those goods and services will go up. Who ends up paying for it?
Not the top 2% but the middle class, again. Who benefits? The government who
will get the increased tax revenue paid for on paper by the upper class but
in reality is subsidized by the middle class in the form of higher costs
of living. Don't fall for it folks. Let the money stay in your pocket;
Let you be the one to decide what governmental expenditures (or personal
expenses) be paid for with YOUR money.

We need less government spending, not more!

If you support Clinton's economic policy, be aware of the big picture.

-- 
*********************************************************************************   - P. Ialamanna -    " I think you hear me knocking, and I think I'm coming *
			  in, and I'm bringing my big, bad opinions with me"  * 
 I represent the Univ. of Illinois. (Along with 50,000 others)===DISCLAIMER== * 

Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16663 talk.politics.misc:51605
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won (NOT!)
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:29:10 GMT
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1bg24gINNsmh@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis) writes:
>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>>Yup, I think Our Man Dan actually won.  He came out there shooting,
>>was aggressive with the occassional little fact, and didn't make an
>>obvious gaffe.
>
>Quayle made many obvious gaffe's.  The very first one came the first
>time Gore was allowed to speak, and he continued on making an ass of
>himself through the entire debate.  I do believe that Quayle came out
>stronger than Admiral Stockdale, but he totally failed to make any
>substantive points.

I disagree.  If nothing else, Quayle shed his caught-in-the-headlights
aura when he came out with guns blazing.  Yes, he made an ass out of
himself at times, but Gore didn't hit him for it, and taking an
aggressive stance was more important for Quayle's rep.  As you noted,
Gore was too rehearsed.  Quayle left openings that should have been
exploited.  They weren't.  Falling back on pre-planned speeches was
not a way for Gore to win.

I'm hoping Al's performance isn't an early sign of Democratic
complacency.  Getting overconfident is a painful way to lose a lead.
When you have an advantage, you should exploit it.  This didn't happen
tonight.


--
"Moors."  "Moops."  "Moors."  "Moops."  Psssssssssssss.....
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Raising taxes on the poor.
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Distribution: usa
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:36:30 GMT
X-Posted-From: eng-nxt10.cso.uiuc.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:

: Can someone from Arkansas please comment on the current sales tax rate on
: groceries?  (BTW, I was just in Tennessee, where the rate was about 5% !)

Where in Tennessee?  In Memphis, you pay 8.25% sales tax on groceries.
But, there is (currently) no state or local income tax to speak of there.

--
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.elections:16753 talk.politics.misc:51720
From: foy@aero.org (Richard Foy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: GEORGE HERBERT WALKER JOSEPH McCARTHY BUSH
Date: 14 Oct 1992 19:52:59 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aerospace.aero.org

In article <67675@cup.portal.com> atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman) writes:
>>Eh, be fair, anyone who advocates legalization is committing political
>>suicide...
>>
>>Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
>
>So the avoidance of "political suicide" is a blank-check excuse for
>hypocrisy.
>
>And people wonder why things are FUBAR.
>
>
>    Alan T. Furman         | VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!  Marrou/Lord in 92!!
>---------------------------+----------------------------------------
>  atfurman@cup.portal.com  |   (800)682-1776 for more information


Remember that it is the people who make it political suicide!

Richard Foy  Redondo Beach, CA         Standard Disclaimer






Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: The Games Are Basically Over, and Clinton Will Win BIG!!
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:58:49 GMT

In article <5427@rosie.NeXT.COM> Bill_Steinmetz@NeXT.COM (Bill Steinmetz) writes:
>In article <1992Oct9.143453.1649@cnsvax.uwec.edu> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu  
>writes:
> I believe that the voting, at this point, shall turn into no more
>> than a mere formality of what we have been seeing over the course of the last  
>8
>> weeks; Clinton with sizable leads nearly everywhere.
>
>From this post and others like it, the following message is conveyed:
>Gee, everyone else is voting for Clinton so I may as well do so too - I am  
>voting for a winner.  This thought pattern is well demonstrated in sports.   
>Everyone supports the local professional team if it is winning, but only a  
>handful of people support the local professional team if it is losing.
>
>When will people have their own opinions?

The analogy is pretty bad: people watch sports teams when they win
because the team is playing well.  It's painful to watch, say, the
Mets over the past two years missing the cut-off man.

If I were Clinton, I'd be more worried about the previous post than
happy.  People who support him may start thinking that there is no
need going to vote, because the outcome is decided.  This is very bad,
as it leaves the field to Bush.  I think in '88, Dukakis thought he
had NY sewn up, and didn't establish a presence there.  He lost 10
points in the polls from morning to evening during election day for
that mistake.  I don't think the Democratic campaign is taking this
lead for granted, at least I hope not (I'm nervous because of Gore's
performance: he seemed to be sitting on the lead, falling back on the
prepared answer.  If this is complacency, then it's worrisome.  I'd
rather not sweat on Election day.)


--
"Moors."  "Moops."  "Moors."  "Moops."  Psssssssssssss.....
From: kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: New quayle quote list
Date: 8 Oct 92 20:18:52 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group


"This Election is about who's going to be the next President of the
United States"

		-Vice-President Quayle
			9/2/88


Well, I thaught Quayle became the Vice-President on Jan. 20th, 1989.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: glhewitt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Gary Livingston Hewitt)
Subject: Dan Quayle on speed?
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:00:59 GMT

I knew that DQ would be a hemmoraging asshole, but I couldn't predict
how much of a hyperactive frat-boy jerk he would be.  Anyone who
relentlessly changes the subject and then complains when Gore changes
the subject -- wotta jerk.  I, for one, am glad that Gore didn't rise to
DQ's idiotic bait -- the whole debate to me seemed like one enormous
effort to avoid talking about anything substantive.

Why does someone turn off his hearing aid in the middle of a debate?
Was that a joke about not wanting to hear the other participants, or am
I reading too much?

Gary
-- 
  ++====+========+==========+=======+===++
  ||    |    Gary| L. Hewitt|       |   ||  HELP!  I've been imprisoned
  || glh|ewitt@ph|oenix.prin|ceton.e|du ||  by my .signature!  HELP!
  ++====+========+==========+=======+===++
From: kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: USA Today/CNN daily tracking poll, 10/14
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:48:34 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <1992Oct15.120056.14634@cbnews.cb.att.com>, jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
> 
> 
> USA Today/CNN Tracking Poll:
> 
> P = Perot,  B = Bush,  C = Clinton,  x = other or undecided
> 
>                           preference %                          % plurality
>       5   10   15   20   25   30   35   40   45   50   55    5   10   15   20
>       |----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|    |----|----|----|
>  9/30 |xP                           B                C       |           o  
> 10/01 |x P                          B               C        |          o   
> 10/02 | xP                           B            C          |       o      
> 10/03 |   xP                        B          C             |     o        
> 10/04 |   xP                        B          C             |     o        
> 10/05 |   xP                         B        C              |   o          
> 10/06 |   xP                        B          C             |     o        
> 10/07 | x P                        B               C         |          o   
> 10/08 | x  P                       B              C          |         o    
> 10/09 |x   P                       B               C         |          o   
> 10/10 |x   P                      B                 C        |            o 
> 10/11 |x    P                     B                C         |           o  
> 10/12 | x    P                    B              C           |         o    
> 10/13 |  x   P                    B             C            |        o     
> 10/14 | x     P                    B           C             |      o       
> 
> ---
> Joe Knapp    jmk@cbvox.att.com


Looks to me like the race is getting tighter. There are still 19 days left
and two debates!!!!

Ken
From: isbell@ai.mit.edu (Charles L Isbell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the First Debate
Date: 13 Oct 92 13:44:04 GMT
	<1992Oct12.005725.3468@news.acns.nwu.edu>
	<1763@aviary.Stars.Reston.Unisys.COM>
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
In-reply-to: munck@stars.reston.unisys.com's message of 12 Oct 92 16:01:14 GMT

munck@stars.reston.unisys.com (Robert G. Munck) writes:
|ssc@nwu.edu (Steven Chung) writes:
|> I thought that this was a great time (for Clinton )to just come out and say
|>"I made a mistake" (in opposing the Vietnam War.)  Goerge was practically
|>daring him to.

|But he didn't make a mistake.  His position was right then, and it's
|right today. 
|There is nothing whatsoever wrong with organizing demonstrations against
|immoral policies of the US government anywhere in the world.

I was waiting for Bush to denounce German nationals who protested
their country during WWII or Chinese students in America who protested
their govt over that square thing.

I find that whole line of attack pretty embarrassing.
--
Peace.
         "It's rural America.  It's where I came from.  
          We always refer to ourselves as real America.  
          Rural America, real America, real, real, America."
                      -- Vice President Dan Quayle
                                   -\--/-
    Don't just adopt opinions     |  \/  |       Some of you are homeboys
          develop them.           |  /\  | but only I am The Homeboy From hell
                                   -/--\-

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Subject: Re: Does He Get It?
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:14:14 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle

In article <1992Oct14.192402.4912@news.columbia.edu>,
egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) wrote:
> 
> Blurb on page A19 of today's NYT:
> 
> As Mr. Quayle stood on the stage after the debate taking the
> congratulations of well-wishing Republicans, a supporter raised a
> point.
> 
> "You did great, Dan, great," he said.  "There's just one thing.  This
> abortion thing.  You've got to realize that the Democratic position --"
> 
> "Is extreme?" Mr. Quayle said, nodding in anticipation.
> 
> "No, is supported by 72 percent of the people in this country," the
> man said.  "You've got to drop it, Dan."

Ah, yes, asking a leader to change his moral beliefs for politcal gain. 
I'd rather he didn't: it's more credible.
--
Rick Eames                               My Opinions Are My Own (not
Apple's)
athos@apple.com

HERSCHENSOHN for US Senate.  Just say "No" to Barbara Boxer.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: Lost some respect for CNN (was Re: Vice Shrub won)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:56:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.090221.14669@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:

>NATO we're still paying for because for some inexplicable reason,
>Bush/Quayle think we should.  

Un, you forgot to mention Clinton/Gore who also think continued membership
in NATO is vital.

   Allen
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------192 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Commander in Chief Clinton ?
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 03:57:46 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Oct14.011441.39580@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
]I'm sorry to disappoint you, but this is incorrect.
]
]Clinton was never called for military service.  He didn't "run away" to England.
Clinton has admitted, after first denying it, that he received an
induction notice.


CAUTION Slick when Clinton (hey, someone else had this in his .sig
and I like it)

-- 
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
       - - My gun is safer than Ted Kennedy's car - -
 - - - "It is better to be judged by twelve, than carried by six." - - -
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Perot and United We Stand, Inc. in 1969
Date: 7 Oct 92 15:06:30 GMT
Organization: AT&T

Perot was making national news in December 1969. The 39-year old 
billionaire had created an organization called United We Stand, Inc.,
which at the time was trying to deliver aid to 1,400 largely forgotten
POWs in North Vietnam.


**********
New York Times, December 25, 1969
Perot Plane in Laos

VENTIANE, Laos, Dec. 25 -- Sending up a cloud of dust a quarter-mile wide,
a green Boeing 707 nicknamed "Peace on Earth" landed safely on the city's
only concrete airstrip this morning, bringing tons of gifts for American
prisoners within 200 miles of Hanoi.

H. Ross Perot, the Texas businessman whose idea was to deliver food, 
clothing and medical supplies to 1,400 United States servicemen held in
North Vietnam, will await word from Hanoi that will decide the outcome of a
venture that has cost him $500,000.

Mr. Perot made a secret 10-hour round trip from Bangkok here yesterday on
a small chartered airplane. He met with North Vietnamese Embassy officials.
He described the talks as cordial and productive but refused to disclose
the nature of the response from the North Vietnamese.

                         Move Called Provocative

Last weekend Hanoi delegates to the Paris peace talks characterized the
Christmas airlift as a provocative action. Mr. Perot said that he was pleased
that the North Vietnamese now appeared willing to continue meeting with
him and said he expected new talks to be held here by Friday.

He has requested a meeting with Pham Van Dong, the North Vietnamese Premier,
to explain his motives.

"I'm satisfied with the progress made to date," Mr. Perot said. "I don't
want to say anything at this time that may jeopardize the talks, which have
so far been cordial and productive."

He said that he planned to pay a call this afternoon on Col. Sot Petrasi, the
second ranking Pathet Lao officer. Vientiane, the country's administrative
capital, has the unofficial status of an open city with both Government and
Pathet Lao forces in residence.

                          Plane Attracts Crowd

Mr. Perot's chartered jet, a Boeing 707, converted to carry both cargo and
passengers, was only the second aircraft of its size to ever attempt a
landing on the 6,580 foot runway, according to Laotian officials.

The pilot touched the plane down at the edge of the concrete runway after
the landing wheels skimmed over rutted farmlands and the reverse thrust
of the braking engines drove the baked red dirt into a towering column of
dust.

A crowd gathered to watch the landing and milled around the plane after it
had come to a halt. An airport official said it would be impossible for the
plane to take off with a full cargo, but the plane's American crew said no
risks would be involved. 

---
jmk@cbvox.att.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16852 alt.politics.bush:9205 alt.politics.clinton:10497 alt.politics.perot:2168
From: root@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Super-User)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Date: 14 Oct 1992 21:15:27 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: holodeck.csd.sgi.com

Cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark T. Evert) said..
>
>Gore did vote for the Carribean Basin Initiative according to his own 
>campaign manager.  To be fair, Quayle voted for it in 1983, but it was a 
>somewhat different program back then and had wide Democratic support.  So 
>Gore effectively lied.  (Quayle was never asked if he voted for it.)

 Not really.  Senator Gore has never supported the Caribbean Basin
 Initiative.  In December 1982, Gore voted against the program.  It
 passed 260-142 (house).  In July 1983 Gore opposed it again.  It 
 passed 289-129 (house).  

 So you might be talking about the Customs and Trade Act, which had
 proposals similar to the Carribean Basin Initiative, but focused
 on legislation to increase trade to Hungary, a ban on the export of 
 logs from federal lands; the reauthorization of the office of the 
 United States Trade Representative and a few other U.S. trade programs, 
 including CBI programs.  The Customs and Trade Act passed the Senate 92-0.

[Source:  Pgs 211-217 1990 CQ Almanac]

>I looked at page 304 in Gore's book.  Quayle was right.  Frankly, Gore was 
>very conservative in talking about his approach to the enviroment when you 
>compare it to what he wrote in his book.

 Quayle was right?!?!  This is patently false.  This also points out that
 the republican tactics seem to be working -- lie about something and
 eventually people will believe it.

 Here is the sentence in question:

	Charles Maier points out that the annual U.S. expenditures for
	the Marshall Plan between 1948 and 1951 were close to 2 percent
	of our GNP.  A similar percentage today would be almost $100
	billion a year.

 CNN reported: "nowhere in the book does Gore propose $100 billion of 
 foreign aid for environmental projects.  [...]Gore writes that the money 
 the United States spent on the Marshall Plan to rescue post-World War II
 Europe would equal $100 billion a year today, but he does not urge
 spending that much now." [Knight-Ridder, 10/13/92]

>Quayle was effective in pointing out passage of the Clean Air Act.  Gore 
>did not take advantage of the opportunity to criticize the act as some 
>enviromentalists have.

 Hah.  The Bush administration has gutted the Clean Air act, I'm surprised
 Gore didn't take advantage of Quayle's head being put squarely on the block
 on this issue.  Bush is being sued by Rep. Waxman, whose subcommittee
 initiated the Clean Air act, for violation of the statutes.  AND Quayle's
 "Council on Competitiveness" has proposed about 100 weakening changes
 to the act's regulations.

 [Source:  AP, 6/5/92; NYT, 8/4/92; Sierra Club, 9/4/92; Bush speech, 6/1/92]

Allan
From: kml@cellar.org (Scott Tiger)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:52:40 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) writes:

> In article <1992Oct14.163501.4938@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
> >In article <1992Oct14.150845.10882@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, Cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.g
> 
> >>Gore did vote for the Carribean Basin Initiative according to his own 
> >>campaign manager.  To be fair, Quayle voted for it in 1983, but it was a 
> >>somewhat different program back then and had wide Democratic support.  So 
> >>Gore effectively lied.  (Quayle was never asked if he voted for it.)
> 
> >CNN reported this morning that Gore voted against final approval of the
> >bill, or words to that effect.  So, although he might have at one time
> >supported an earlier version of it (they didn't say), in the vote that
> >counted he voted against it.  Gore was right.
> 
> When the bill was incorporated into a larger package he voted for it.
> This was reported on ``Nightline''
> 

BZZZZZTTT!!!!  Gore voted against it when he was a congressman.  When
it came a year or so ago, the continued funding for the project was
bundled into an omnibus bill, which passed the Senate 92-0.  

Looks like Gregg pulled a Quayle!

                  Something constructive should come here.
                  $dump ora_control1/blocks=(start:1,end:1)
                            Vidi, Vici, Veni!
  kml%cellar@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com - My other account is a Mercedes.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: barring@cs.washington.edu (David Barrington)
Subject: Re: Who are the "minor" candidates?
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 16:53:55 GMT

The "Natural Law Party" appears to be affiliated with the
Transcendental Meditation movement (Maharishi Mahesh Yogi).
They had several candidates on the ballot in the Washington 
State primaries.  Their platform, as I recall, wanted to 
apply "science" (meaning mostly TM) to solve all the world's
problems.

On this thread, where is Gus Hall these days?

The Larouchites distributed their newspaper at UW recently.
They seem to be going after the Hispanic and anti-Klan 
constituencies at the moment.  They noticed Felix Rohatyn,
one of their cheif bogeymen, in the Perot-Clinton talks and
had an article warning that Perot, like Clinton and Bush, is
a pawn of the international bankers.  Nothing new on the Queen
running drugs, but their headline was "Try Kissinger for Treason",
presumably over the MIA business (I didn't read the article).

Marrou and Fulani, perhaps the two candidates whose views are
most diametrically opposed, are scheduled to debate each other
in Richmond just before the big-three debate on the 15th.  No
word on media coverage, but no doubt the Libertarians will let
us know if it's to be on C-SPAN.

Dave MB

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections