HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Some people think I got scared off..
Keywords: NOT!
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  4 Oct 92 00:43:58 GMT

In <19pv04INNdqe@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:

>In article <1992Sep23.010610.28094@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (SIR to you, Adrienne) writes:
>>In article <19nfetINNdgu@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com> regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) writes:
>>
>>Aw, gee, like pro-aborts haven't been calling for a boycott on me.
>>[Deletions]
>>Starting with Siren. 
>>When will you ever play by your own rules? 

>Mr Chaney, you stupid git:  show one instance of any boycott I have parti-
>cipated in.

>Sheesh.  First we have Mr-SAT-Score Nyikos deciding I'm drieux, then we have
>Mr Stupid-git Chaney deciding I'm Siren.

And this woman complains about me hanging titles on her.  Has she never
heard of Gilbert & Sullivan's _The Mikado_?

>(a whole bunch of completely useless ad hominem deleted.  Yeah, Peter, *I'd*
>sure take advice from this guy, sure.) 

>Adrienne Regard


Yes, Adrienne, I remember you saying in your last long post to me that
"You get what you pay for."  But in the Army they also have the saying,
"We go with what we got."  

At the time I was contemplating sending you the message which mentioned
the word "respect," only two talk.abortion people had e-mailed me: 
Holtsinger and Chaney.  I felt it would have been rude of me to ask
advice of anyone who had never communicated with me before.

In the post where you had such a good laugh (and hey, I'm glad you did; we
all need a good laugh now and then) over Chaney's response, you asked
whether it was a joke.  Well, since it got a laugh out of you, you could
say it was, but I really was telling it to you the way it happened.

However, I left one thing out of the account:  the thing that really
killed the idea of sending that message, or anything even remotely
like it in the foreseeable future. 

Chaney, Holtsinger, the Overpeck and/or Buckland posts, any of these
by itself could have shelved that message, but actually none of them
did.  Note, I related these things in chronological order, but did
not put any connectives between them and the statement, "And I did
not post it."

What really killed the idea was rediscovering that it was YOU, and
not one of your toadies clumsily expounding your "lethal force"
philosophy, that said the words I have enshrined in
"Adrienne's appalling attitude toward the unborn."

I have NO respect for the callous indifference towards the unborn 
displayed in that passage.

'Nuff said.

Peter Nyikos
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: In Suzanne's Defense
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:21:58 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Sep30.184027.3858@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>
>Disrupts the normal biological process of that organism?  Do you really
>mean to say that women were never biologically designed to carry on
>the human race?  I mean, the wider hips.  Were they just accidental?  Or
>were they widened to allow births?  I don't want to get into detail, but
>it seems to me that our babies are designed to be biologically compatible
>with their mothers.

Women weren't 'designed' to carry on the human race. We just sort of
evolved in that direction, the same way that men did. BTW, if babies
really were designed to be biologically compatible with their mothers,
why do we have Rh related anemia in babies, and choriocarcinoma in  
women...
 
>mutation can you claim that is human life itself?

For that matter, a tumor is living human tissue; that doesn't mean I
must play host to it if I can avoid it.



-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Subject: Re: Overpeck's problems  (Was: Re: Have you herd about the ram?)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:33:47 GMT

Kibble, you are an extraordinary ass, and you are too
pompous and boring for me to read your assinine excuse
fest through to the end.  But one of your idiotic "points"
gave me a chuckle, so I thought I'd address it.  The
rest of your nonsense speaks for its own stupidity.  After
this I am done with you.  I know you love nothing more
than to spend weeks making a fool of yourself, but I
don't have the time to play with your pointy little
head anymore.

In article <1992Oct2.014742.14799@cfctech.cfc.com> kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy) writes:
> >> GENERAL CORRECTION: None of those flames were ever intended by me to reach
> >> talk.abortion. If you want to whine about their presence here, please
> >> direct your whines to the responsible parties. I only responded in the same
> >> forums where I saw baseless charges, accusations and untruths, as is my
> >> right. I never imported any of it into talk.abortion.
> >
> >I never complained about their being in talk.abortion.  Whatever
> >are you talking about?  This is clearly an attempt to misdirect
> >the discussion.  As such, it is a failure.  It is not based on
> >reality.
> 
> Dean, Dean, Dean, didn't you write this a couple of articles ago:
> 
> "...Kevin, ever
> needful of attention, even if it is usually negative attention
> in the form of flames, brings it up again weeks later."
> 
> Does this not refer to my recent passing references in talk.abortion?
> If this is not a complaint, then why the conspicuous mention in the context
> of insulting me? "Not based on reality", indeed! You are betrayed by your own 
> words.

What an idiot you manage to make of yourself, Kibble.  There is
not a single thing there about your posting your idiocy to
talk.abortion, just a note that you haven't the sense to
leave your embarrassments alone, but drag them out again,
like an old cigar box full of childhood memorabilia, in
order to get attention.  I was expressing, clearly, my
astonishment at your bringing it up again, and there is nothing
there that is evenly remotely a complaint about it.

Now I can understand when some high school football hero feels
the need to pull out his All-City trophy to show his dinner
guests that he was, once upon a time, a halfback of some
renown, but I am left dazed with wonder when you feel
compelled by some sinister need to drag out your award as
All-Net Moron so as to prove to all and sundry that, yes my
darlings, you are a solid gold ignoramus who will stop
at nothing to get attention.

Dean Kaflowitz
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:38595 talk.politics.misc:47970 alt.sex:30866 alt.rush-limbaugh:5889 alt.politics.elections:14304 alt.politics.clinton:7265 alt.politics.bush:6728
From: ken@moncol.monmouth.edu (KEN GUILFOYLE)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 25 Sep 92 21:10:40 GMT
Followup-To: poster

In article <1992Sep24.232921.10162@pony.Ingres.COM>, garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR) writes:
> In article <1992Sep24.204032.11507@wetware.com>, drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just  writes...

   What the fuck are you talking about.?

> 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: CWA Membership (was: "Snapple" Anti-Choice?)
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1992 21:00:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Oct5.181714.12006@csus.edu>  chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>
> I'll come back with poll stats showing that the majority of Americans
> do support rape & incest,

I don't think you should speak for anyone but yourself on that issue.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: steve@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com (Steven Martin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Outlaw Fire NOW!!!!
Date: 30 Sep 92 20:34:37 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U S WEST, MRG

In article <1992Sep28.203617.18727@wetware.com> drieux, drieux@wetware.com
writes:
>Robert Thank you for clarifying that we CLEARLY
>have a NEED to outlaw FIRE as it is DANGEROUS!!!!
>
>Just Say NO! to Rapid Oxydation!!!!!

Oh come now. Obviously the correct solution is to impose a waiting
period on anyone who wants to buy matches or lighters!

      _/_/_/   _/
     _/       _/
    _/     _/_/_/  _/_/_/  _/  _/  _/_/_/
   _/_/_/   _/    _/  _/  _/  _/  _/  _/
      _/   _/    _/_/_/  _/  _/  _/_/_/
     _/   _/    _/       _/_/   _/        Steve Martin
_/_/_/   _/    _/_/_/    _/    _/_/_/     steve@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and
 bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against 
 tyranny in government."  Thomas Jefferson
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: Is it Christian values or chavinism?
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Distribution: net 
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 13:49:17 GMT

In <10817@spark.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:

>In article <1992Sep20.030811.17500@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> 
>sdemitri@nyx.cs.du.edu (Suzanne Lucia Demitrio) writes:
>>"Dead so far" describes what we know about the present and past;
>>"die for good" projects brazenly into an eternity that ain't over yet.
>>You can't prove that the dead *won't* be bodily resurrected.

>Of course you can.  Even if you don't appeal to natural science, there
>are those whose bodies are not available any more, having rotten away,
>being burn, dismembered, and so on.  They'll have to get a new body in
>order to be resurrected.  This is _not_ what happened to Jesus of
>Nazareth -- he was seen walking around in the very same body.  Remember
>the nail marks in the hands and the spear wound in the ribs?

Yes, but this was after 3 days. If the rest of the 'good christians'
are to be bodily resurected some day in the future, I sincerely
hope that it is without a sense of smell or sight. Even one year
in a hermetically sealed coffin is not a pretty sight (why some
folks go to that expense is beyond me - you rot from the inside
out). Personally, I'm for cremation - environmentally I guess I
might help grow a few daisies if buried whole, but think of the
wasted space.

BTW Happy Rosh Hashannah (sp?) to all.

REB

Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz)
Subject: Re: Overpeck's problems  (Was: Re: Have you herd about the ram?)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 22:22:55 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.170923.25652@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
> In article <1992Sep29.041532.26362@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> smgarvin@nyx.cs.du.edu (susan garvin) writes:
> >
> >You know, I've always felt that someone who spends weeks and
> >thousands of lines of typing flaming someone else for 
> >one sentence looks like a twittering fool, particularly
> >when that is their only contribution to the newsgroup.
> 
> How many "weeks and thousands of lines of typing flaming [sic] someone else"
> was expended on my smattering of words posted in alt.flame re: child
> molestation, Susie?
> 
> Look in the mirror.
> 
> 								- Kevin
Poor Kevin.  Some guy posted something to the effect of
"If you want to talk about child abuse, I can tell you
about child abuse," and Kevin, a bonehead if ever there was
a bonehead, flamed the guy and called him a child molester
when the man was speaking about his own experience of having
been abused.  Most people would just say they were sorry and
they were wrong, then try to let it pass, but Kevin, ever
needful of attention, even if it is usually negative attention
in the form of flames, brings it up again weeks later.

A sad case, our Kevin.

Dean Kaflowitz
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Shouldn't we feed the poor?
Date: 27 Sep 92 19:50:34 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.013826.8813@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>From article <459n3yr.ray@netcom.com>, by ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer):
>> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes ...
>>>From article <hy4n7rm.ray@netcom.com>, by ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer):
>>>> Wealth is finite; there is not enough wealth in the world to save everybody
>>>> who can be saved.
>>>In fact, there is.   
>>>Simple food and water is not expensive unless people like you hoard it.
>> Pardon me, but you clearly know nothing about the exigencies of living
>> in the real world.  
>I know the real world far better than you do!  You live in nothing but 
>a sick fantasy.
>
>> First off, wealth is finite (wealth is not money).
>
>Garbage.  The creativity of human beings to supply their own needs and
>the needs of others is limitless.
>
>> Second, nobody lives on just food and water 
>
>That certainly seems adequate to me!  That's what _I_ live on.   What
>do _you_ eat, rocks and nails?
>
NB for those of you who hail from northern climes:

Suzanne lives in the sunbelt, where shelter and fuel are
largely irrelevant, and clothing is optional.
I think they have fig leaves, anyway.

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle)
Subject: Re: Personhood and interference
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:41:55 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.173207.3115@nntp.uoregon.edu> egorr@hebb.uoregon.edu (Eric Gorr) writes:
>
>Oh, btw, and I could come up with $20,000 in a few minutes, if it was
>required.
> 

I'm SOOOO glad you volunteered.  IT IS REQUIRED.  Send me your address and
I'll have my friends send you the forms necessary for you to donate toward
their in-vitro attempt.  They can't afford it on their own and they are looking
for funding.  Your $20K investment in their happiness is greatly appreciated.


I'll be waiting.....

Oh, Cashier's check, please.
Not that they don't trust you....

Jennifer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: In defense of the supposedly indefensible (was Re: "Snapple" Anti-Choice?)
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 21:18:17 GMT

In article <25877@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
>In talk.abortion, psl@nrl.navy.mil writes:
>
>>I realize that these late term abortions are rare.  But that seems such a red
>>herring to me.  I've read in some recent postings that if certain crimes 
>>rarely occur then its a waist of time to pass laws against them. The 
>>intrinsic badness" or "goodness" of an act doesn't seem tied in with its 
>>frequency.
>
>How about making a law against someone "throwing" a heavy tool or the
>like down to earth from orbit? It could kill someone, but there is no
>law against it. 

Litter laws.

								- Kevin
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Animal Rights and Anti-Abortion
Date: 27 Sep 1992 05:44:55 GMT
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
NNTP-Posting-Host: eno.wpd.sgi.com

---
ml3e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Loomis) writes:
|    I did have slight quibble with your post.  Though I would be glad if
|Dworkin and McKinnon were stoned in the streets by their fundamentalist
|christain allies, I thought calling them "left wing bitch lesbo dyke" a
|little extreme.  It seems homophobic to use two words to get across Ms.
|Dworkin's sexual orientation, when you could use just one. 

Isn't Dworkin het?

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"That is the case with us all, Papa.  One half of the world cannot
understand the pleasures of the other."  --Jane Austen
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Overpeck's problems
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:19:51 GMT
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Organization: SGI TechPubs
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.26.79.24

---
decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (dean.kaflowitz) writes:
|And CJ is welcome to call me a twittering fool if she so
|desires.  While I must say the "twittering" part is a
|first, I have been called a fool and worse before.  Some day
|I will care about that, perhaps.  Then again, maybe not.
|At least none of the Herd have called me a fool yet.

Oh, Dean.  I will whisper tenderly into your ear of your 
twittering foolishness until the stars die and the moon 
explodes into a fiery shower of shooting stars.  And I
will write purple prose in honor of your folly until my
pen runs dry of ink and my tty of electrons.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"All sorts of people who don't know me and my many fine personal qualities 
say absolutely dreadful things about me.  What can you do?  Have them 
killed, of course, but that's *so* expensive." --Jon Carroll
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: rogers@ial1.jsc.nasa.gov (mister rogers)
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Organization: i represent myself
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:10:05 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.215121.14334@galileo.physics.arizona.edu>, krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
> 
> In article <1aduobINNlht@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> aphrael@cats.ucsc.edu (Robert Daniel West) writes:
> >But if a doctor, like Mr. Kervorkian, wishes to help a terminally
> >ill person in carrying out his wishes, what then is the problem? 
> 
> Because only one of the several people Dr. Kevorkian helped kill 
> was terminal.  The others just wanted to die, they were not terminal.
> 
> Ted

we're all terminal with something, even if only aging.

-------------
mister rogers
-------------
From: dfpedro@nv2.uswnvg.com (Donn F. Pedro)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Love or Sex
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:34:51 GMT
Followup-To: alt.sex
Organization: I don't speak for them anyway.

In article <1992Sep29.201600.5463@ncsu.edu> bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS) writes:

Removed talk.abortion and other groups from the Newsgroup line.

:Which would you rather have ? 

Both.

:Would you rather be in love with a person and 
:spend time together, or would you rather have sex with people (safe people ie
:no diease)? 

Yes.  

:Are there any lovers out there ? 

Pleased to meet you.

:I mean people who take their time
:plot and plan a seduction, not a get drunk wham bam. 

It's not a seduction.  It's not a plot or a plan.  It's two (or more)
people expressing how they feel for one another.  

Don't drink and don't have to get partner(s) drunk.

(paraphrased)
"The more you love, the more you can love and the intense 
intense your love..."

	Heinlien

"Of course I don't have to have sex sith my friends.  In most
cases it isn't even considered.  The real question is -- why
can't we?  Who says that love is finite?"

		Me




     Donn Pedro ....................................dfpedro@uswnvg.com

		     There are no ordinary moments.



Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49097 alt.politics.elections:14926 talk.abortion:40017 alt.sex:31662
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:11:19 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <lcnsptINNrcv@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes:
#In article <lefty-290992185354@lefty.apple.com> lefty@apple.com (Lefty) writes:
#|In article <Bv9K8H.J03@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu
#|(Bruce Varney) wrote:
#|> 
#|> Have you ever seen a film of a child being killed in his/her mother's womb?? 
#|
#|No, and neither have you.
#|
#|Look up the word "credulous" and see what it means.
#
#Try looking it up yourself; it's not *in* the dictionary.

I'll add mine, too.  This is from Webster's New World, the freebie
edition that Sears gives away:

credulous - adj.  tending to believe too readily

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton
From: tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Organization: Mentor Graphics -- IC Group
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 13:39:08 GMT

In article <4eld68a00YV704lVt2@andrew.cmu.edu> Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Recently posted by Rini Clarkberg:
>> I stand up for life too.   That's why when I look at the picture 
>> on page 310 of The New Our Bodies, Ourselves and see the picture with 
>> the caption:  "Woman dead on motel room floor.  Her death was due to
>> an air embolism suffered during an illegal abortion," I want to cry.
>
>This is sort of like a murder - suicide.  The woman had no right to take
>away her baby's life and died while trying.

Remember folks, it's always important to BLAME THE VICTIM!

It wouldn't be Usenet without splashes of BTV all over.

Tom
P.S.  I'm being sarcastic.  I had the same reaction to page 310.
-- 
Tom Limoncelli -- tal@warren.mentorg.com (work) -- tal@plts.uucp (play)
       Both candidates are offering economic packages, but only
          one candidate can leave us with a President Quayle.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Subsidies for Roads and Cars in the USA
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:03:10 GMT

In article <JMC.92Sep29150251@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>I think the interstate system is paid for out of user fees, but the
>local streets come out of local general taxes.  Is that right?

	That is only _partially_ correct.

	General funds go into roads, also.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell ("Droopy"))
Subject: Bush's China policy--what the hell is going on?
Organization: Clarkson University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 23:10:23 GMT

Bush vetoed a bill passed by congress that would have made China's
most favored nation trade status dependent on their human rights
record.

Is this the same Bush who condemned SAfrica's human rights record?
Is this the same Bush who has condemned Serbian atrocities in Bosnia and
	croatia?
Is this the same Bush who sent troops to the middle east to prevent
	the continuation of Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait?

I wonder how much oil China has.

"Just say noe" to four more years of hypocrisy.
============================================================================
BRI FARENELL				"Violence is the last refuge of the
FARENEBT@CRAFT.CAMP.CLARKSON.EDU     	 incompetent."  --Salvor Hardin	
CLARKSON '95
A politically incorrect, pro-life, liberal, card-carrying member of the ACLU.
===========================================================================
"If you choose not to decide, you have still made a choice."   --Rush Limbaugh

	(I know it's HIM, but it's still a great quote)
From: ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: If you want to know if Ross is Running -- Ask US.
Date: 29 Sep 1992 15:49:48 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


   If voting for Ross makes us "idiots" then I guess that makes Clinton and
Bush supporters something along the lines of mindless pond scum. At least our
guy may be telling the truth, and is more than willing to admit a mistake
when he makes one. Bush and Clinton don't even know the meaning of that word.
-- 
George Bush? He doesn't have a clue anymore. Bill Clinton? A slick smile and
a pandering style. Neither one is being realistic about what it is going to
take. The answer..........? ROSS FOR BOSS! VOTE FOR ROSS PEROT FOR PRESIDENT!
The Cryptozoology Information Network. Want on our Email mailing list? Amiga!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections