HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight)
Subject: Re: Taxing & Spending
Organization: Network Equipment Technologies, Redwood City
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:41:58 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.174403.29344@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gplong@nyx.cs.du.edu (George Long) writes:

>I tried to figure out what Mr. Galvanek was trying to accomplish with
>this patronizing, half-baked diatribe and I think I have some answers:

>Those who disagree with Bill Clinton now "have no recourse to the law"?

>Clinton promises to diminish "[our] ability to govern ourselves"?

>The "power all rests with an elite few"?

>From what Mr. Galvanek is saying, I suppose that there is no longer any
>hope for conservative Republicans.  He is saying that there is nothing
>that anyone can do ("no recourse to the law") now that Clinton is
>president.  

>I wish that people would take some responsibility for their lives and
>not blame things so easily on the government.  

>If you don't like things, change them.  Don't bitch about not having
>an "advocate" in Washington.  That's a sorry excuse.
 
Sounds almost exactly like the arguments that many a Demmie put forth
prior to the election. However, I do think it is somewhat poetic justice
for Mr. Galvanek. Seeing as how he beleives that Americans no longer deserve
the democratic process. 


Stan Knight
|Do-ers do, whiners bitch|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: DOWN
From: ndb070@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:49:25 -0600
Organization: Mankato State University

Hello I'm Swedish student wich is very interested in  the world. My wonder is
about what you like and dislike about Clinton and what you think of the future.
Will he change a lot, what will he change and so on. It will be very
interesting to read your answers!
					Jan-Olof Andersson
					NDB070@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21248 alt.politics.elections:25170 talk.politics.misc:69785
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Money Supply (Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE)
Date: 26 Jan 1993 01:52:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) says:

>
>     If 5 or 10,000 people have no real answers, yet everyone is 
>     hopping around, greeting the new age, then yes, indeed, I'm 
>     not worried about people not listening to me anymore.
>

   Okay, okay, I take this back.  Ted gave me an insight like 
   a lightning bolt, I truly am grateful.  Up until Sunday, the 
    idea of "Escape from the U.S." was just that.  An idea I had
    been investigating.  There's no doubt in my mind anymore that
    I'll have to leave now.  "Clinton will save us".  Like putting
    another puppet in will matter.  And *I* am supposed to be the
    irrational one. 

    Look deep into my I!


>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>"Duff Beer for me, Duff Beer for you"
>>	"I'll have a Duff's, you have one, too...."
>>
>
>
From: cobarruvias@asd2.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: DAY TWO: MORE LIES
Date: 25 Jan 93 15:23:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA/JSC

In article <1jnvtoINN2tq@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
(Richard A. Mulac) writes:
>
>In opposition to his PROMISE to cut the deficit in half in five years,
>President Clinton today relaxed budget constraints which would have cut
>spending across the board by 11% in order to meet his PROMISED goal.
>The lies are pouring in.  I guess Clinton takes 'sacrifice' to mean
>the common people suffering ever increasing taxation in order to 
>support the Democrats ever increasing pork barrel spending.  Gee, I
>wonder what promise he'll break tomorrow.

GEEZ! It is amazing to see how many people on this net actually believe
campaign promises. I bet you really fell for the "Read my lips" bit back in
'88. Get a grip on what is happening, and what it takes to get into office. The
last democrat to run stated upfront that taxes need to be raised. He lost. Read
My Lips Bush lied through his teeth about taxes. He won. So now the Democrats
have learned how to get into office. And they won. And YOU expect him to keep a
campaign promise? Get a grip. Maybe if our debt wasn't as bad as it is, the
promise could be kept. 

And its funny, if he did have an 11% cut, and it stifled the economy, then you
would be complaining again. Everyone with a lick of sense knew that cutting the
deficit in half in five years was horse hockey. Shoot, if the US can JUST STOP
the deficit from growing in four years and stimulate our economy the US would
be very happy. (except those who are of the "read my lips" mentality)


>
>By the way, let's all cry BOO HOO HOO for poor Zoe.  Things aren't 
>going well for her.  It seems strange that a President who claims that
>'friends are the most important thing you can have in life' doesn't
>treat his very well.  He hid all day in the White House playing tour
>guide instead of publically supporting her.  And a hint for George
>Stephanopolous - get a shave and get some clean clothes on before
>you hold a press conference.  You looked like you just woke up with
>an innaugural hangover when you met the press this afternoon for 
>more 'Zoe' questions.
>
>-- 
>Richard Mulac                                      
ck347@cleveland.freenet.edu
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>       1996 election countdown - 1383 more days         | These pontifications

> until the Democrats are thrown out of the White House  |      are my own!    

>



*****************************************************************
John R. Cobarruvias, Texas A&M Class of '78, 
NASA Johnson Space Center Houston Tx.
(713)483-9357

"And to think..................I hesitated" (Hellraiser II)
*****************************************************************
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21008 alt.politics.elections:25091 talk.politics.misc:69298
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: DAY TWO: MORE LIES
Date: 22 Jan 93 21:32:08 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

bermes@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Terry Bermes) writes:
=ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac):
=> By the way, let's all cry BOO HOO HOO for poor Zoe.  Things aren't 
=> going well for her.  It seems strange that a President who claims that
=> 'friends are the most important thing you can have in life' doesn't
=> treat his very well.  He hid all day in the White House playing tour
=> guide instead of publically supporting her.  And a hint for George
=
=	And if he made any attempt to publically support her, you
=can be damn sure that the Republinistas would have been all over
=him for that.  Willie can't win on this one.

I don't remember, but wasn't Joe Biden more critically asking questions
to Baird than ... was it Cohen? (It was some "Republinista.")

-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	BSE in BME in 1993
"You just can't promise something like that just to get elected if you
 know there's a good chance that circumstances may overtake you."
	- Bill Clinton, East Lansing MI debate, Mon Oct 19 1992
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,misc.education
From: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness)
Subject: Re: Why can't the liberals just admit that public education has failed?
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin TX
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:51:40 GMT

In article <1jklqnINNgiv@gap.caltech.edu> kloomis@cco.caltech.edu (Kate E. Loomis) writes:
>niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>
>stuff deleted
>
>>It's the inner city schools, which have holes in the ceiling, 5
>>textbooks for a class (which are all out of date), and teachers that
>>have to buy their own supplies for the class, which suck.  The
>>difference between the best and worst school district in Texas is
>>*bigger* than what you said.  In 1991, the richest district spent, yes,
>>$19300 per student.  The poorest spent $2100.  

The "poorest" schools != the inner city schools. Most big
city schools districts have per-pupil expenditures above the
national average.

The New York school chancellor makes around $200,000 a year,
and he has several dozen assistant administrators making 6 figure
salaries.  Add to that the several thousand bureaucrats in
the central NYC education administration, and you have a huge
overhead involved in education in New York City. The cost to
education there is well above the national average.  The output
quality (unsurprisingly) is not. 

That New York city may in fact have schools with holes in the ceiling
only reinforces the point that there is massive misallocation of
funds in the public school monopoly, especially in these
larger districts.

Pat
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: brent@syacus.acus.oz.au (Brent Davies)
Subject: Re: Pick and Choose? (was Re: God is intolerant of sin!)
Organization: Australian Centre for Unisys Software, Melbourne
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 05:57:18 GMT

smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:

>ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>> I think it's perfectly okay for someone to quote Leviticus about
>> homosexuality, as long as s/he follows it himself/herself.  So has s/he
>> given up:
>> Diapering his/her granddaughters?
>> Blended clothing?
>> Rare meat?
>> Shaving and cutting the hair at his/her temples?

>Evelyn, what is your religious upbringing?  Were you taught any of 
>the tenants of Christianity, from the point of view of any denomination
>in particular, or any at all?  Do you really not have any understanding 
>as to why laws like those from Leviticus are not still followed, while 
>sexual morality/conduct ones are?   

WHAT?! You gonna try and tell me that the injunction against looking upon
"the nakedness of thy son's daughter or thy daughter's daughter" was a
*ceremonial* injunction and not a *moral* one?

You better check again, bub. Get an Orthodox Rabbi's opinion too; after all
the OT is the Jewish Bible as well. Meanwhile, best not to spout off about
others' lack of knowledge of the "occupants of Christianity".

-- 
 _--_|\    Brent Davies                    ACSnet:    brent@syacus.acus.OZ
/      \   Aust Centre for Unisys SW       Internet:  brent@syacus.acus.OZ.AU
\_.--._/   700 Blackburn Rd                Voice:     +61-3-550-1640
      v    Melbourne, Australia 3168       FAX:       +61-3-550-1599
From: bill@ais.org (William Lindberg)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: WANTED: Clinton's inaugural speech
Date: 21 Jan 93 20:35:19 GMT
Organization: UMCC

I NEED an electronic copy of the speech. PLease, can somebody tell me where
I can either FTP it or save it from some conference?

Thanks.
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: gays in the military
Date: 27 Jan 93 13:13:02 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department

In article <1993Jan26.102934.19049@cis.uab.edu> bayram@willis.cis.uab.edu (Zeki Bayram) writes:
>
>
>On the matter of allowing homosexuals into the armed forces of the
>U.S.A., a few points to consider:
>- This is not just a matter of principle

There are already homosexuals in the armed forces of the USA...the
issue is not whether there are or not, but whether the armed forces
are going to throw out those serving honorably merely because of
their status, and not because of any conduct.

>- American soldiers will probably not be wellcome anymore in foreign
>  countries, especially Islamic countries
>- Motivation is a great factor in the effectiveness of soldiers in
>  combat. Soldiers have to "believe in" what they are asked to do.
>  They have to believe that they are fighting to protect the high
>  "values" and principles of America. They have to believe that they
>  are morally right. How can they feel this way when they will see the
>  armed forces to which they belong as being fundamentally flawed, and
>  immoral?

Does this mean the United States will no longer be a reliable ally
because several NATO members no longer seek out or throw out homosexuals
serving merely because of their status?         

>- American soldiers will be ridiculed as being "a bunch of faggots"
>- Will definitely harm any alliance with Arab countries such as Saudi
>  Arabia. Public pressure in those countries will force their rulers
>  to sever ties (at least militarily) with the US

And who exactly are the Saudis and Kuwaitis going to turn too to protect
themselves...Iraq, Iran, Israel...they have no choice but the mercenary
protection of the West.

Gerald
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21314 alt.president.clinton:1837 alt.politics.bush:16388
From: paul@hsh.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Not a Middle-Class Tax!  A "Loophole"!!
Date: 26 Jan 93 19:20:31 GMT
Organization: HSH Associates


   Clip 'n Save time, folks!

The New York Times, January 26 -- Page One:

"LOOPHOLE LEFT OPEN, CLINTON WEIGHS TAX ON MIDDLE CLASS"
"by Michael Kelly, Special to The New York Times"

"At a time when the public has repeatedly shown its distaste for the
maneuvers and machinations of politics, President Clinton's White
House is banking on a five-word loophole to save it from voter
outrage should Mr. Clinton propose a broad-based energy tax.

"During the campaign, Mr. Clinton promised tax cuts for the middle 
class.  Now Mr. Clinton and his chief economic advisers are backing 
away from the tax cut and strongly hinting that an energy tax will 
hit the middle class the hardest.

"'They campaigned on a middle-class tax cut and then four days into
a new Administration the chief economic spokesman is talking about a
middle-class tax increase,' said Robert S. McIntyre, director of
Citizens for Tax Justice, a liberal research group.  'That's a
flip-flop.'" 
[...]

"...some Clinton advisors say they are not worried about public
outrage. They say the President built himself an escape hatch a
little less than a month before Election Day.

"'Every time Clinton said "I'm not going to raise taxes on the
middle class", he always added the phrase "to pay for my programs,"
said a chief political adviser to the President, who spoke on
condition of anonymiity.  'He never, never said just, "I will not
raise taxes on the middle class."  He always said "I will not raise
middle-class taxes to pay for my programs."'

"By this logic, the adviser said, Mr. Clinton's legalistic construct
was a 'distinction with a difference' that allows him 'the
opportunity he now has' to raise taxes without incurring voter
wrath." 

[regrettably, much deleted] 

But: "On July 13, speaking to reporters in New York, Mr. Clinton
said flatly, 'I'm not going to raise taxes on the middle class,'
according to reports by The Chicago Tribune and the Reuters news
service.  On the same day, in an interview shown by CNN, he said, 'I
don't think we should raise middle-class individuals' taxes, because
their income went down and their tax rates were raised' in the
1980s." 

...some of his better quotes.  Clip 'n Save!

------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 

Paul Havemann   (Internet: paul@hsh.com)

   * They're not just opinions -- they're caffeine for the brain! *
         ** (Up to 50 milligrams per cynical observation.) **
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: brent@syacus.acus.oz.au (Brent Davies)
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Organization: Australian Centre for Unisys Software, Melbourne
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 05:54:13 GMT

markc@eomer.hw.stratus.com (Mark Christensen) writes:
[as a Christian defending the "moral sin" of homosexuality]

>I, as a free citizen, should have
>the right to hire, rent to, exclude anyone I so desire.  I
>have the right to be a bigot, racist, homophobe, etc. (This is
>all hypothetical...I am none of the above as far as I know).  But
>I do believe that government should stay out of EVERY portion of
>our society except for common defense, monetary policy, and a 
>judicial system.  

Great. Attitudes like yours have allowed the KKK to flourish for more
than a century. Ever thought of moving to Idaho? You'd be well-liked up
in the Panhandle Country.

As a Christian, you claim to have a right to be a BIGOT, a RACIST, a
HOMOPHOBE? Dear me, how I'd love to see what Christ would say to *that*.
Or, y'know, St Paul. The one who wrote 1st Corinthians. That's the book with
the famous 13th chapter all about bigotry and racism and hatred and fear and
how they're all fruits of the Spirit.

Yeah. Right. And you presume to show *us* the way?

-- 
 _--_|\    Brent Davies                    ACSnet:    brent@syacus.acus.OZ
/      \   Aust Centre for Unisys SW       Internet:  brent@syacus.acus.OZ.AU
\_.--._/   700 Blackburn Rd                Voice:     +61-3-550-1640
      v    Melbourne, Australia 3168       FAX:       +61-3-550-1599
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: cornell@inoc.dl.nec.com (C.J.K.)
Subject: Re: Will Zoe be charged?
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: Not very organized
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:39:45 GMT

butleri@ac.dal.ca writes:


>     I do have one question about Zoe. Is she going to be charged for
>knowingly hiring illegal aliens, and failure to pay the Social Security
>Tax? Or is she going to be allowed to get away with it?

She already has been fined for this hasn't she?
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
What I write does not necessarily represent the view of my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE. WHERE'S THE PLAN???
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:01:32 GMT


If the people get angry enough, perhaps Clinton will have his own 'thousand
points of light"..

Of course, those 'points of light' will be the torches carried by the angry
mob coming after him.

:-)

Simon
From: sfreedkin@igc.apc.org (Steve Freedkin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The first promise comes undone...
Date: 23 Jan 93 08:01:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:1993Jan12.203556.1240@cs.wayne.e:486095946:cdp:1588800082:000:386
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!sfreedkin    Jan 23 00:01:00 1993


Clinton's Haiti policy is *not* "exactly" Bush's.  He has begun posting
more U.S. Embassy staff in Haiti to process asylum requests.  He has said
the boats should not be sent out without asylum requests being processed
first because of the danger of the boats.  This is a big change from
campaign statements but the creation of more avenues to apply for asylum
*is* a change from Bush.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: glass@adcalc.fnal.gov (Michael Glass)
Subject: Re: Susan Getzendanner, Attorney General
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, AD/Controls
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:23:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.205117.13265@midway.uchicago.edu>, Jeff Sweeney
wrote...
> 
>Now that Zoe Baird is out of the picture, I suggest that Susan
>Getzendanner would make the perfect Attorney General for Bill Clinton.
>Getzendanner was a respected Federal judge in Chicago for many years.
>She retired recently to join a loop law firm....

   And she returned to private practice, as I recall, for the money.
Not a hopeful portent, but perhaps it is possible.

-- Michael Glass
From: gerberrl@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Richard L. Gerberding)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: RE: M. Python's Inauguration
Date: 21 Jan 1993 15:04:03 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department at Rose-Hulman
Reply-To: gerberrl@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Richard L. Gerberding)
NNTP-Posting-Host: o200c-1.nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

In article <1993Jan21.070441.5118@memstvx1.memst.edu>  
kebarnes@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
> In article <21JAN93.00286376.0046@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>,
> W9C9000 <W9C9@UNB.CA> writes:
> 
> > In article <3796.448.uupcb@ehbbs.gwinnett.com>  
curt.tucker@ehbbs.gwinnett.com (Curt Tucker) writes:
> >>Did you notice the martial music played right before Clinton took
> >>the Oath of Office?
> >>
> >>I'm sure it's an old traditional military march, but to most
> >>people in my generation, it is instantly recognizable as the
> >>loopy opening theme music for "Monty Python's Flying Circus."
> 
> Darn, and I was really looking forward to the Inauguration being
> rudely interrupted by Terry Gilliam's animated "foot" too...

The music was perfect, wasn't the whole theme of Clinton/Gore "And now for  
something completely different."  It's change, man, change.
--

\===================================================================\|||||
|\  Richard Gerberding              Disclaimer: Like I even know     \||||
||\                                           what they think!!!      \|||
|||\ gerberrl@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu                                 \||
||||\===================================================================\|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: snm6394@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.N. Mozumder )
Subject: Will Hillary help the children?
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:10:09 GMT

I hear that Hillary Clinton works a lot for children's rights.  Is this
the case?  Will she help the orphans of Bosnia?  Its the saddest thing
in the world to see a kid witness his/her mother's rape and fathers
and mother's death.  And the kid himself is probably raped and killed by
the Serbians.  And teenage girls being kidnapped and raped repeatedly
for months by the Serbians.  All this happening thousands of times over
to Bosnians.  Will she support a military intervention,
or lifting the arms embargo so that the Bosnians can defend against Serb
aggression?  And what will happen to the children?  Can anybody help?
I'd like to, but how?  Anybody know how to contact Hillary?

-Bobby Mozumder
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler)
Subject: A small wager for Mulac (was: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE...)
Organization: Superseding Information, Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:14:24 GMT

In <1jkblvINNg2q@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu sez:
>
>                           PREDICTION
>
>In one year an attempt will be made to hold a recall election for
>the office of President of the United States.
>
>Richard Mulac


I have 365 dollars here, and they all say you're a gutless blowhard
who isn't willing to stake a bet on his words for the low, low price
of a dollar a day.

Terms: 

1) Winner may direct loser to pay $365 to a charity or advocacy group
from a preselected list.  My list includes the Legal Aid Society,
NARAL, and the ACLU.  Name yours, Mulac.

2) Bet is payable after 11:59 p.m. on Jan. 20, 1994.

3) "Attempt" means an actual national referendum, or even a vote by
the full membership of both houses of Congress.  It does not include
bug-eyed letters to the Editor of _National Review_ or _American
Spectator_, nor floor speeches by Bob Dornan.


Well, Mulac?  Willing to put your cojones on the chopping block?  Or
have you none?


-- 
			Sold by weight, not by volume.
  Some settling of contents may have occurred during shipment and handling.

	   Mark Eckenwiler    eck@panix.com     ...!cmcl2!panix!eck
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21478 alt.politics.homosexuality:10424