HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight)
Subject: Re: No looking at your neighbors' papers....
Organization: Network Equipment Technologies, Redwood City
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:18:51 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.124910.26308@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.181637.26841@unet.net.com>, stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct6.000021.14558@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:
>>>     A.  Man does not have the capacity to destroy the planet.

>>You CAN'T be serious. *Nobody* is this stupid!

>It's not stupid, it's true.  If you disagree, then simply provide a detailed
>scenario for the destruction of the planet by man with existing technology.  If
>Shackelford's claim is as stupid as say, this should be absolutely trivial, no?

Oh which of the 100s maybe 1000s of possible scenarios should I start
with that would enable us to destroy all life on this planet. Oh you mean 
the destruction of all life on this planet doesn't fit your defination of 
destroyed? Well when this world becomes a lifeless rock floating through space 
unable even to substain life then you can jump up and down and say "See I was 
right, the planet is still here". Oh wait you'll be dead too so I guess you 
won't be jumping up and down huh?

Stan Knight
|Reality:Just a concept for those of us who conside sematics stupid|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Subject: Mandate? (was: The Games Are Basically Over, and...)
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 12:39:13 GMT


<<< Please note the redirect(s) in the "Followup-To:" line. >>>

In article <1992Oct14.232555.8850@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>, 
cah@tyr.JPL.NASA.gov (Allen Halsell) said:

> It's not unreasonable to project that Clinton can get around 60% of
> the popular vote.  Talk about mandates.

If -- IF -- that happens, it still won't be much of a real-world
mandate for Bill Clinton or the Democrats.  Just as much of Reagan's
support in '80 came from the ABC ("Anybody But Carter") voting bloc,
so would a Clinton victory be primarily a repudiation of Bush rather
than a mandate for Clinton.

If Clinton wins, whether by a landslide, by a comfortable margin, or
in a squeaker, he'd do very well to keep the _why_ of his victory in
mind.

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: I will vote for Clinton if ...
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:41:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.220125.19909@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.173941.4357@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct12.050859.10782@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>>
>>>There will be ice floes on the River Styx if Clinton becomes President.
>>
>>Nah, that's Cocytus, fourth river of Hell, running through the 9th circle.
>>
>I didn't even know about Cocytus.  I knew of Styx and Acheron though.

Lethe.  Don't forget Lethe (irony intentional :-)

Dante's little travelogue had the Styx, Acheron, Lethe and Cocytus, I
think in that order.  It's been a while.


--
"Moors."  "Moops."  "Moors."  "Moops."  Psssssssssssss.....
From: aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Allan Schaffer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Rep. Bob Dornan (CA-R)
Date: 9 Oct 1992 03:23:47 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: holodeck.csd.sgi.com

jdooley@maemaster.eng.uci.edu (John R. Dooley) said..
>
>You'd think so, but actually Dornan represents the only "non-safe"
>district in Orange County.  It has slightly more Demos than Repubs.
>I don't know who he's running against.  He had a bitter primary fight 
>and won relatively easily.  He has a reputation for erratic behaviour,
>that may cause him trouble (his nickname is Bully Bob), but he gets
>plenty of money and always pulls it out.

"Erratic behaviour"??  John, you have a gift for understatement.

Robert Dornan is perhaps best known for physically assaulting another 
member of Congress, on the House floor, by lunging at him and trying 
to strangle him; an act for which Dornan was officially censured by 
the House.

Allan
-- 
Allan Schaffer   x2160                    "Things have been tough, but 
aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com              they haven't been that tough."
aschaffe@netcom.com                                   - George Bush   10/4/92
For a free copy of Bill Clinton's economic recovery plan, call (501) 372-1992
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao)
Subject: Re: At this very moment ...
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:55:43 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.155544.8844@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac) writes:
>  I would bet that as you are reading this, around the world dozens of
>people are searching the archives for a picture of Bill Klinton (Russian
>spelling {:^) ) at an anti-war rally in the 60's.  Double bonus if the
>location was Moscow.  Triple bonus if he's carrying a particularly nasty
>anti-american sign.  If they beat the clock it will be appearing soon in a
>Republican ad in your neighborhood.
>
 
  And I bet most voters will have the ability to see through the real matter
at issue here. 
 
  I believe it's the essense and the belief of this great country, that it is
okay for a student to freely travel, to Israel, to Canada, to China or to 
Russia, that it is okay for an individual to go on vacation in 1940, or 1972,
or 1998, that it is okay for a person to express his or her opposition to
certain policy of his or her government, whether he or she is in Main Street,
USA, or in the Red Square, USSR. 
 
  Why would Bush and the republicans want to bring this up ?
 
  If Bush doesn't believe the above principle, and he really thinks it's 
wrong for Clinton to go to Moscow, then Mr. Bush really should not be running
for the President of the country we know as USA, the United States Of America.
Instead, he should really try to win the favor of his old friend, the 
paramount leader of China, Mr. Deng Xiao Ping, so maybe Deng will make Mr.
Bush the Party Secretary of CCP, or the ceremonial President of the People's
Republic Of China. I know Mr. Deng will not allow the job of Premiere for 
Bush, for one thing, Deng knows the importance of economy and Bush doesn't 
know anything about managing a country and econommy. 
 
  If Bush believes the above principle, then it really becomes a "character
issue" for him to bring this up and try to make an issue of it. Mr. Bush,
you are pathetic and scary for us Americans !
 
  This campaign has turned into such a sorry affair for Bush and his 
organization. We voters are not only feeling sorry for him, we are also
becoming more and more disgusted and angry, to the point we want to slap
on his face and shout to him:  Stop insulting us Americans now !  Stop
insulting our intelligence and diginity, stop insulting our principle !
 
  Stop it and get out the White House, Mr. Bush !


 



Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac)
Subject: Republican campaign ad suggestion
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center [Cleveland, Ohio]
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:04:09 GMT

  Here's my idea for a winning campaign ad for Bush (assuming
Schwarzenegger goes along).  Republicans may feel free to use this if they
wish.  {:^)





DUM DUM DUM DUM ... duh duh ... DUM DUM DUM DUM ... duh duh ...










                      TERMINATOR 3 : ELECTION DAY








Los Angeles, California
Monday, November 2, 1992

Sarah Conner sits in her apartment watching TV.  Suddenly, a T800 cyborg
(Arnold) smashes through the door.

Sarah: "Why are you here!  I thought we saved the future when you destroyed
the T1000 terminator?"

Arnold: "Ve took car of zat problemo.  Der is anuder tret on de horizen!"

Sarah: "Not again!  What is it this time?"

Arnold: "Tomorrow de humans in der ignorance vill elect Bill Klinton as da
President of de United States.  He vill bring dem double digit inflation,
double digit unemployment, and double digit interest rates.  De US economy
vill be devestated.  Foolish humans!  Did you not learn anyding vrom de
Carter years?  History repeats itself."

Sarah: "Isn't there anything we can do?"

Arnold: "Dat ist why I have been zent back through time vrom de year 1995.
I hab brought proof ov de economic turmoil to come in hopes dat ve can
change da future.  Ve must hurry and get dis information to de public
bevore the election tomorrow!"

Cut to sequence of quick clips from Monday night's newscasts.

Final shot of Sarah in election booth on Tuesday casting her vote for Bush.

Sarah: "Hasta La Vista, Bill!"

THE END?

-- 
Richard Mulac                                     mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov
NASA Lewis Research Center, 21000 Brookpark Road, MS 5-9, Cleveland, OH  44135
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"With our combined strength we can end this destructive | These pontifications
conflict and bring order to the galaxy." - Darth Vader  |      are my own!    
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: young@ssdd475a.erim.org (Peter Young)
Subject: Re: I will vote for Clinton if ...  [REPOST]
In-reply-to: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu's message of Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:48:25 GMT
Organization: Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
	<1992Oct14.162909.6653@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>
	<1bjremINN18q@rave.larc.nasa.gov>
	<1992Oct15.164825.10958@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: 16 Oct 92 13:05:06

In article <1992Oct15.164825.10958@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) writes:

>   No! It *did* work! The eighties *were* properous! When Bush buckled in
>   and signed the Democrats 1990 tax code into law, the wealthy no longer
>   had a financial incentive to invest! What happens when there's no
>   incentive? THIS! Look at the late 70s: same problem. It works. History
>   has proven it to work. The Democrats love to say they are forward looking.
>   They have to be; they've been such a dismal failure in the past.

Somehow I wouldn't call the party of the eighties prosperous, since it
was built largely on the three trillion dollars that were pumped into
the economy during the decade.  And now that the pump has run dry, now
that the party is over and we are left with the bills, we are all
sobering up in a big hurry.  The printing pressses are not the
foundation for prosperity.  I don't have the answer, but it is clear
that providing incentives for real estate aquisition that forces
prices and stocks to artificially high levels does not work.  It is
clear that providing incentives for mergers and take-overs does not
work.  It is not clear that the revenue vs. tax rate curve is as
simple as the Laffer curve, or if it is, that the cuts in the eighties
represented the proper direction.

(And American products, at least GM cars, _were_ much shoddier in the
eighties than previously.  You don't have to believe me, just look at
ads that claim that they aren't building them like they were in '85
anymore.)

Keep it up, folks: this is kind of fun.
--
Peter Young
young@erim.org
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Friday, 9 Oct 1992 08:29:35 PST
From: <RAJA@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Bush- a sleazy scumbag!
 <athos-081092091339@kip2-30.apple.com>
 <Oct.8.15.59.13.1992.8416@gandalf.rutgers.edu>
 <athos-081092152600@kip2-29.apple.com>
 <Oct.9.11.03.50.1992.6983@gandalf.rutgers.edu>

In article <Oct.9.11.03.50.1992.6983@gandalf.rutgers.edu>,
shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) says:
>
>athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:
>
>>In article <Oct.8.15.59.13.1992.8416@gandalf.rutgers.edu>,
>>shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) wrote:
>>>
>>> athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:
>>>
>>> >In article <92281.231404RAJA@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>,
>>> ><RAJA@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> wrote:
>
>>Add to this that he refuses to come clean about it, letting bits of
>>information trickle out, and you get, in my view, sleezy.
>
>Since I already ranted about this in an earlier post, I won't do it
>again.  All I can say is if this is how you see things perhaps you
>should clean your glasses or get your eyes checked.  You would
>flunk miserably in detective school.  You connect things that do
>not connect, hear things that people don't say, and filter your
>information through your own warped preconceptions before
>coming to a warped conclusion.  Feeding you information and
>receiving a conclusion is kind of like playing a record on a phonograph
>with a bad needle.
>
>
>--
>Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu)
>Publications Coordinator - User Services
>Rutgers University Computing Services

This is to correct a wrong impression( maybe it is not there) that I was suppor
ting bush. The person ,Rick James , who followed up my initial article complete
ly eliminated it, replaced by "lots of screaming here", probably because I was
making sense! So susan I concur entirely.

These sleazoids from the republican party led by GHWB can go to hell!


rajagopalan......0nly 25 days!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.destroy.the.earth
From: locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu ()
Subject: Re: No looking at your neighbors' papers....
Organization: Campus Crusade for Cthulhu
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 00:28:23 GMT
X-Posted-From: titan.ucc.umass.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Oct7.124505.25930@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.162127.3657@sci34hub.sci.com>, gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct6.000021.14558@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:
>>
>>>     A.  Man does not have the capacity to destroy the planet.
>>
>>Famous last words......
>
>Truer words were never spoken.  We probably could destroy most of the larger
>life forms if we honestly tried, but nobody has been able to describe in any
>detail a scenario in which all life forms including bacteria and viruses
>would be destroyed.  And even then, as long as the planet is intact, there's
>no reason to believe life couldn't happen again.

I think tesla's Idea of resonating the earth's crust (like a wineglass & opera
singer) with nukes might be doable. This would effectively destroy its ability
to support life (if it worked)
I don't know enough geology to make a judgement...
Any arguments against this idea?
I suppose there might not be enough nukes available, but we _do_ have lots of 
nuke material hanging around, waiting to be used...
-Scott
From: belld@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (David Bell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Rep. Bob Dornan (CA-R)
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:34:12 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

I hear this guy is running for reelection this time around.

Who is he running against?  
What are the latest polls?  
How do I send money to his opponent?  

Dave
belld@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: sbtaves@icaen.uiowa.edu (Steven Bradley Taves)
Subject: Bush's Motivations
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:04:58 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Iowa Computer Aided Engineering Network, University of Iowa
   
Followup-To: sbtaves@icaen.uiowa.edu

Hello,
   I was thinking
yesterday of my conviction to vote for Clinton, Gore in November.  And 
I thought, why is it that I have trouble understanding why people would
vote for anyone else?  Well I decided that there was at least one primary
reason.  Being that Clinton is the one that truly is in line with what
I think the next president needs to do.

I think there are fundamental things wrong in the way we do things
now.  And the first criteria of choosing between two viable candidates,
is, for me, the question of whether they really believe what I do, and
are able to look at the problems and give solutions.  Bush does not even
pass my first criteria.  He first of all does not believe there is really
all that much wrong with our country, and that we are basically, 
fundamentally on the right track.  So I have trouble comparing his plans
and Clinton's
plans, because the plans that Bush has out is just to merely get votes.
Why would he have plans to change our country, like health care reform,
when he really believes that we are doing fine.  

I see health care alone
as being enough to say that our country is screwed up.  It affects our
economy, our well being,and so much more.  So on the healh care issue alone,
Bush should be saying, "hey, we are doing some fundamentally wrong things
in this country."  But Bush has a plan anyways.  How am I to even compare
his plan to Clinton's, when he truly has very little motivation for seeing
it through. It is the same with most of his 'plans'.

Again, my point is, how can Bush look at problems and give solutions,
when he does'nt believe in the problems?  People voting for Bush are
people do not think our country is on the wrong track.  And that may
be why he's behind in the polls.

Steve 

-- 
____________________________________________________________________
"A boy he was tangled in his fight forever, a girl was missing
 two fingers","Why do they kill children, and why do I wanna die"
-Throwing Muses 
Got any news on The Breeders? Email me sbtaves@icaen.uiowa.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:8940 alt.politics.clinton:10131 talk.abortion:42326
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 13 Oct 1992 11:28:30 -0700
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <1992Oct13.162712.11857@ncsu.edu> dsh@odin.uucp (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>>> dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes to Stan Knight:
>>>> On a side note, several pro-choice women on talk.abortion 
>>>> have been viciously attacked by radical pro-choicers for 
>>>> their support or non-opposition to third-trimester abortion 
>>>> restrictions. I wonder why these radical pro-choicers rarely 
>>>> attack men (such as yourself) who express the same opinion? 
>So far, only Ms. Adolf has called Stan Knight on his opinion.


Mr. Holtmuffin,

You may note that many of us in talk.abortion ignore 98% of the shit.

It is safer to assume that people thought a posting worthless by their non-
response than it is to assume people considered for 1/2 hour or more whether
or not to respond before deciding.

Of course, whether you choose to take the sensible path, or draw arbitrary
and likely incorrect conclusions is entirely up to you.

Adrienne Regard


Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections
From: mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac)
Subject: Re: Presidential debates #2
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center [Cleveland, Ohio]
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:26:33 GMT

In article <Oct.16.14.30.02.1992.6462@gandalf.rutgers.edu> shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) writes:
>He didn't concoct some homey story about some couple he met on his travels
>around the country.  He was discussing the people of Arkansas, and how
>many people he knows who have lost their jobs and homes due to factories
>closing down.  Since the population of Arkansas is so small, he has
>much more contact with the citizens, and he knows who they are and what
>happens to them.

How cornball can he get?  "If a person in Arkansas loses his job, chances
are I'll know him".  Give me a break!  That line was probably the most
moronic out of all candidates in the campaign so far.

-- 
Richard Mulac                                     mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov
NASA Lewis Research Center, 21000 Brookpark Road, MS 5-9, Cleveland, OH  44135
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        "There's a simple explanation for all           | These pontifications
              of this." - Bill Clinton                  |      are my own!    
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: mister rogers <rogers@ial3.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Bush's Veto
X-Xxdate: Tue, 13 Oct 92 18:52:22 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:10:32 GMT

if you think your cable company is charging too much for the service you
receive, there is a better alternative to regulation.

call them and cancel. tell them why you cancelled.
your payment for TV service will be lower this way.

-------------
mister rogers
-------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.libertarian
From: jhansen@convex.com (James Hansen)
Subject: Re: cable tv
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 14:59:48 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Oct6.200050.3057@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark T. Evert) writes:

>As alternatives exist 
>such as satellite reception, or no cable at all, I see no reason for the 
>bill.

These aren't viable alternatives in many situations.

--
James B. Hansen                                  {sun,uunet}!convex!jhansen
CONVEX Computer Corporation                              jhansen@convex.com
3000 Waterview Parkway, P. O. Box 833851
Richardson, TX 75083-3851                              Phone: (214)497-4802
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Subject: Re: Mr. Bush Just doesn't understand
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 06:28:40 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections

In article <1b5d5fINNi11@fido.asd.sgi.com>, aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com
(Allan Schaffer) wrote:

> 10/09/92:   Cincinnati, OH
> 
>    BUSH:  "I'm standing with American principle.  It is wrong to 
> 	   demonstrate against your country when your country's at war.
> 	   And I'm not going to back away from it one single bit"
> 
> ..until tomorrow, I bet.

Only if he pulls a Clinton...
 
> George Bush obviously doesn't understand the role of dissent.  He keeps
> saying, "they shouldn't be [protesting] while our boys are dying halfway
> around the world", but ignores the fact that people are protesting
> *because* our boys are dying halfway around the world.

You obviously don't understand how people from the WWII era feel about this
subject.  He described how much it bothers him that someone would protest
against his country while in a foreign land.  My grandfather felt the same
way, as did his friends.
 

> Allan Schaffer   x2160                    "Things have been tough, but 
> aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com              they haven't been that tough."
> aschaffe@netcom.com                                   - George Bush   10/4/92
> For a free copy of Bill Clinton's economic recovery plan, call (501) 372-1992

For the record: During the Bush years, my income went up 4X, I got married
and have been living quite well.  Things *are* pretty good.

--
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.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.libertarian