HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rl24@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert Lamoureux)
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: 3 Sep 92 14:23:55 GMT
Reply-To: rl24@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert Lamoureux)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <mykes.0da8@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>In article <31AUG199219482343@gergo.tamu.edu> dave@gergo.tamu.edu (Dave Martin) writes:
>> With all the argument over whether Bush could have legally sent troops to
>> Florida, and the claims that he was sitting by the phone waiting for the
>> call from Florida's Governor (any pictures?), nobody has pointed out how
>> simple it would have been for Bush to call Florida and say, "It looks as
>> though you have a tough situation on your hands. Could you use some help
>> down there? I've got some troops ready to roll if you want them."
>> As far as I have heard, Bush did not make any such offer. Bush has means
>> for getting reports (don't know if he trusts the TV :) and could have
>> decided that the people of Florida were in serious need and made that call
>> to the Governor.
>
>Bush was there IN PERSON the day after.  Do you doubt he offered all the
>assistance he could muster?  If he trusts TV so much, he wouldn't have
>gone there, twice now in fact.
>

Ironic, isn't it, that Bush spends his days whining about government
bureaucracy and how much he wants to eliminate it, but he's perfectly 
willing to hold out Federal aid for people who desperately need it
until protocol is observed, or "bureaucracy" is followed, in the 
form of a letter from the Governor.

>> It is less important how "prepared" Bush was, or how concerned, or how
>> long he sat up at night waiting for that phone to ring -- the fact that
>> he didn't take the initiative in a domestic disaster is very telling,
>> particularly if you compare his initiative in foreign wars. You can be
>> sure he wasn't just sitting by the phone waiting for Saddam to call.
>> And you can be certain that the people of Florida and Louisiana will
>> take this into account come November.
>>
>
>Foreign policy is what the president is there for.  It explicitly says
>so in the constutition.  Don't people take civics classes in school
>anymore?  Sheesh.  He did take the initiative - he's been there twice
>and even made a RARE speech on TV.
>
>Here's one for you:  Where was Slick Willy?  He didn't send the troops
>from Arkansas to help, did he?  Why aren't you not flaming him?
>Same prinicple applies to Bush.
>

Unless I'm very much mistaken (and I might be, but I don't think so),
Clinton has no authority to send National Guard troops from his own
state to other states.

>>  -                                                                     -
>>  - Dave Martin - Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M -


Rob L.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:2939 talk.politics.misc:41997 alt.politics.clinton:3024 alt.politics.elections:11586
From: rbw3q@helga9.acc.Virginia.EDU (Robert B. Whitehurst)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Offended at being called a racist and hatemongerer!!!
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:11:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <1992Aug25.194423.3538@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark Taylor Evert) writes:
>
>Triva deleted regarding name calling by Republicans....
>
...[fairly rational, decent discussion of why he is conservative, etc.]
>nothing could be further from the truth.   I've had to dismiss liberals 
>attempts to apply these labels as desparate acts to discredit Bush, with 
>little real substance.  It is my opinion that the liberals, who stick 
>everyone in cubbyholes labeled black, hispanic, female, and gay and then 
>tell each group how repressed they are, and how poorly they are treated 
>are the real divisive force in the country.
>My bet is that the Republicans know that most people realize that claims 
>of hatemongering and gay-bashing are ridiculous and not worth the effort 
>to directly refute.
>
>Mark T. Evert

	The problem, Mark, is that the LEADERS of the GOP are not
currently exhibiting the good common sense and a little milk of human
kindness (CHRISTIAN brotherhood, perhaps??) that you do.  If Pat
(Buchanan or Robertson) had spoken as you do now, not nearly as many
people would be upset.  Unfortunately, YOU are not running for office
or steering the party; the nutcases who ARE running the show give all
conservatives (whatever that is...sorta like just what is liberal...I
hate labels too) a black eye.


-- 

Brad Whitehurst    |   Aerospace Research Lab
rbw3q@Virginia.EDU |   We like it hot...and fast.
From: stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu (Catherine Stanton)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:33:14 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Aug26.135803.10046@sinix.UUCP> ian@sinix.UUCP (Ian Malone) writes:
>Ya just got to love the thinking behind the reactionary right.
>
>Abortions - 	Immoral, we can't allow killing those innocent children.
>Death Penality  Kill the criminals before they can reproduce and try an
>		abortion.
Well, it's all a matter of timing you see.


>Flame On, Rednecks!
Hey! I live in Georgia,I am surrounded by pickup trucks, gun racks
and ol' Dixie wavin' high, but I don't think I'm a redneck.  (Why,
I haven't been to a square dance in months! ;-) <---MAJOR sarcasm
please don't let it get spread around on the net that I ever went to
one. :)

Catherine Stanton
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: RNC platform please
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 21:05:12 GMT

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.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.abortion
From: keithd@versyss.com (Keith Doyle)
Subject: Re: Genetic Code != Human
Reply-To: keithd@versyss.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Organization: VERSYSS Incorporated, Torrance, California
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:25:50 GMT

In article <180erqINNm7o@agate.berkeley.edu> martyg@ocf.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>Sperm and the eggs, by themselves, are not humans.  They are cells created
>by the male and the female which are merely messengers of their respective
>chromosomes.  If an egg, were human, then women should be pregnant
>about every month.  And about every month, there would be an "abortion."

It might be interesting to note that the majority of FERTILIZED eggs do not
attach and are ejected during menstration.  In a sexually active woman who
is not using birth control it is not unusual that she is "pregnant" every
month and every month there is an "abortion".  Its perfectly natural.

Perhaps we should consider a law mandating a Christian burial of tampons.

Keith

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3530 talk.politics.misc:42882 alt.politics.elections:11983
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Scary thought for the day
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 23:21:05 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 <1992Aug30.135542.18156@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:

>(1) Consider Mary Matalin, George Bush's deputy campaign manager.

>(2) Consider George Bush's personal devotion to the related concepts
>    of (a) being loyal to one's friends and (b) rewarding successful
>    service by one's devoted underlings.

>(3) Consider the possibility of Mary Matalin holding a position of
>    real power in a second Bush Administration.

So what's wrong with that?  What do you have against Mary except that
she savaged Slick Willie?  Personally, I think Bush could do a lot
worse than Mary Matalin for an important post in his adminsitration.
He should also get out of the goddamned way and let her hang Slick
Willie out to dry.

>And the Republicans tell me that I'm supposed to be scared of Hillary
>Clinton... 

Because of her positions and her influence on Willie.  What do you
have against Mary Matalin?  Got something against female politicians
who don't toe the liberal line?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
From: cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark Taylor Evert)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Clinton in Arkansas
Date: 26 Aug 1992 13:41:37 GMT
Organization: Loral Space Information Systems

In article <1992Aug25.041910.9038@midway.uchicago.edu> 
wagner@newton.uchicago.edu (John Wagner) writes:
>         Not too long ago I called my family and learned that state 
workers
> would go on 'furlow' for one day of the week(no pay), because of a
> budgetary constraint.  Someone had misplaced some money or something, and
> there was an old law that requires Arkansas government to balance the 
budget,
> so the Guv laid everybody off for one day of the week. You honestly
> want him to run our government?

Clinton keeps bragging that HE was responsible for balancing the budgets 
in Arkansas when as you correctly point out, he had no choice because of a 
law called the "Revenue Stabilization Act" which was in effect long before 
he was governor.   Any budget balancing he did was through tax increases.
>   

Mark T. Evert
Friendswood, TX

My opinions are my own.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: uday@adobe.com (Uday Kurkure)
Subject: Woody allen and Family Values
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:54:22 GMT

    Just curious:

    Is Woody Allen a democrat or a republican?
From: cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark Taylor Evert)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: President Bush
Date: 31 Aug 1992 20:16:41 GMT
Organization: Loral Space Information Systems

In article <1992Aug30.181022.21289@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> 
bx822@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ben Hansen) writes:
>  Is there a Republican out there who can tell me that the 
> "no new taxes" pledge was not a cynical manipulation at best
> and a lie at worst?
> 
> Vote this year. It matters.
> -- 

Is there a Democrat out there who can tell me that Clinton kept his 
promise COMPLETELY intact for a middle class tax cut which he made early 
in his campaign???

Compare the attitudes of the 2 candidates towards taxes.   Bush 
reluctantly increased them to appease Congress and admitted it is a 
mistake after Congress failed to keep it's end of the bargain and reduce 
spending.  Clinton can't wait to raise them and says nothing about 
reducing spending.  In fact, he wants to increase it.

Mark T. Evert
Friendswood, TX

My opinions are my own.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:30:44 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.180212.275@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:

>I can't say that I'm suprised to see Bush's opponents jumping in on a
>catastrophe to try to make him look bad.

	Nobody has to try, Bush pulled it off all by himself. 

	I could care less about the people in florida - life sucks and then
all your stuff gets washed away. This is about winning an election, and
George Bush is not doing a very good job.

>This he did.  Once it was apparent that the emergency may be of record
>proportions, he offered the military's help.  And nothing is "immediate"
>when it comes to logistics in the military.  It can take a week to get a
>fully functioning tent-city up and running, and that's once all the 
>supplies *get* there.  Moving all that stuff is not a trivial operation.

	I was listening to a pentagon spokesman telling how they've been 
tracking the storm for two weeks, and were ready to roll before the storm 
even touched down. This is not an excuse.

>Wrong.  He was waiting by the phone for the governor to ask for the
>military's help, if he needed it--not a forgone conclusion at the time.

	From the perspective of winning the election, that was stupid.

>And the Democrats' strongest weapon is that Bush is perceived not to care
>about domestic issues.  Do you think they are going to play fair and 
>give him credit where it is due?  I think not.  With a little help from
>the media they can keep this alleged bungle going for weeks.  Lets have
>a congressional investigation...

	You got it - but thats the way the game is played. Dukakis didn't
like those rules either, and look what happened to him. Maybe the residents
of florida will see it your way, but I wouldn't bank on it. Bush set himself
up to get fried on this one.


-- 
                               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
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3127 talk.politics.misc:42234 alt.politics.clinton:3188 alt.politics.elections:11700
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: George Will on the GOP
Date: 28 Aug 92 23:02:09 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug28.202323.19394@afterlife.ncsc.mil> acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams) writes:
>If a man who is as strongly conservative as Will is questioning the
>direction of his party, than its time for all of the moderate Republicans
>to wake up. 

 George Wills articles are carried quite often in Conservative Chronicles and
he has been taking some rather strange positions lately. Two weeks before the
GOP convention he joined the feeding freenzy and suggested that President Bush
step down. Where was George 12 months ago when all the Conservatives came down
hard on Bush and threatened to desert if he didnt move back to the right ?

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3383 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4893
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Bush/Florida/Hurricane Andrew
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 16:11:54 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS, New Orleans, LA

athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:

> In article <BLLDqB3w164w@mintir.new-orleans.la.us>,
> elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) wrote:
>
> > > Once Gov. Chiles asked for help from the military (only he can ask) the
> > > military responed within 24 hours.
> >
> > Right.  So that means that Bush's going down to FL last Monday was just a
> > photo-op?  Does this mean that Bush is really that shallow?  I can't possib
> > believe that Chiles didn't ask for help last Monday.  That's ridiculous.  T
> > whole issue of 'asking' is a smoke screen to cover a slow federal assistanc
> > system.
> >
> > That's 100% Bush's fault.  If nobody else, his campaign people should have
> > realized how important getting stuff down there is to willing FL in Novembe
> > and should have sat on the bureaucrats.  They didn't, and they left their b
> > holding the bag.
>
> Hello?  Hello?  The Governor of a state has to FORMALLY ask for help.  That
> means he doesn't just walk up and say "Hi, help."  He has to submit a
> request.  When he did that, Bush sent troops within 24 hours.  The system
> was designed that way so that states kept *some* degree of sovereignty
> (sp?).
>

Get real.  You'd make a great bureaucrat.  When people need food and water,
waiting around for a FORMAL request, as you put it, is only going to show how
out of control the bureaucracy really is.  Bush blew it.  He could have had the
stuff staged and called a press conference while down there saying "I've got
all this stuff waiting for the OK."  He didn't do that, but rather let the
system spin its wheels.

As to states' rights, that's a complete joke.  Most of the people in Homestead
are federal troops (Air Force) and their dependents.  It would have been no
violation of states' rights to fly a mobile hospital and some field kitchens
down to an Air Force base.  That wouldn't have been regarded as an infringement
on anyone's rights.  It would have been simple common sense, and good political
sense.  It's amazing that a campaign team as cynical as Bush's wasn't able to
figure this out.



|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,alt.politics.elections
From: maxwell@fnala.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: Put some spin on this...
Organization: What does *this* button do!?
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:40:57 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnala.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes:
> Well it seems someone is better off under Reagan/Bush.  This is from the
> August 31 issue of Time.
> 
> % of black families in the U.S. with incomes
> over $50,000
> 
> 1970:  9.9%
> 1980: 10.9%
> 1985: 12.3%
> 1990: 14.5%
> 
> 
> Yep must be tough!



O.k. Paul, try this:
$50k in 1970 was worth a hell of a lot more than in 1990.
[hint: how much did a nice car cost in 1970? A nice house?]

Times *are* tough.
Be glad you're not a black man-- they'd be tougher.

jerk.



repulsed.max
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey S Linder)
Subject: Re: Clinton blunder
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:42:01 GMT

How did President Bush screw up the hurricane relief effort?

Jeff.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Reflections on this evening...
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:11:36 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.044405.22000@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <1992Aug22.161047.14729@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>>In article <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.
>>
>>Really?  On whom?
>
>Er, the state suppliers who haven't been paid, and may have to close
>down?  The prison inmates and mental hospital patients, for whom
>supplies would be cut off?

State suppliers who haven't been paid aren't obligated to provide
anything either.  They're always subject to being cut off, so ....
Remember, there's no "right" to make money off of selling to govt.

CA has a very agressive de-institutionalization program, so there
really aren't many mental hospital patients.  In any event, it isn't
obvious that their supplies, or those of the prisons, are being cut
off, as a number of state agencies are paying their bills with checks,
not IOUs.

The average person in CA isn't being affected much, if at all.  As
exemptions for "essential services" are passed, the validity of the
"we're really hurting" argument will decrease even more as the
experience demonstrates otherwise.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:3503 alt.politics.clinton:3509 alt.politics.elections:11971 talk.religion.misc:15219
From: grue@csa.bu.edu (Philip Libin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:37:30 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Computer Science Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <1992Aug26.135803.10046@sinix.UUCP> ian@sinix.UUCP (Ian Malone) writes:
>Ya just got to love the thinking behind the reactionary right.
>
>Abortions - 	Immoral, we can't allow killing those innocent children.
>Crime - 	Tougher laws, put those criminals in jail, more police.
>Guns - 		Hey, A God  <the Christian God, only one we tolerate, right?>
>		Given Right.
>Welfare -	Fuck the poor.
>Death Penality  Kill the criminals before they can reproduce and try an
>		abortion.
>

[Much rational discourse ommited.]

>
>I really don't get it.  Some one please explain it to me.  <man, if that
>doesn't turn out to be an unnecessary request>  Make sure that kid is
>born.  Don't give a shit about him until he uses the guns you make sure he
>has access to for purposes of crime.  Pour money into the police.  Catch
>that fucker and put him in The Chair.
>


It's really quite simple.  The Republican party is a coalition of
people who REALLY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER.  The supposed rationale or
"philosophy" is as follows.

	1) Let people do whatever they want.
	2) Hold them responsible for it.

Now this might not sound like a bad program.  In fact, I've always
tended to like this approach.  If you'll pardon the shallow analogy, 
it's sort of like programming in C.

However, the approach becomes corrupted when you look at the types of
people that like to CONTROL groups like the Republican party.  The
religious right, the greedy businesses and the red-neck racists.  
The new platform becomes.

	1) Let US do whatever WE want.
	2) Hold THEM responsible for it.

The sad state of the party today is that it is dominated by hatered
and held together by fear.  There ARE decent, respectable and (even)
open-minded Conservatives (gasp) and Republicans.  However, not having
the murderous, foaming at the mouth, venom of the above mentioned
groups, they are pushed to the side. The result is the convention in
Houston.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush