HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cermak@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Rob Cermak)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Subject: Honeymoon: Clinton
Date: 7 Nov 92 13:10:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Maybe his health is bad but during the campain he managed to speak
to the public.  Last report, Clinton was in hiding and was spoken
for by his aid.  Hmmm... Look's like a little bit of a honeymoon
if you ask me.  Failed voice?  I guess Clinton & Congress won't be doing
a lot of talking...
-- 
Rob Cermak			        EMAIL : cermak@gandalf.rutgers.edu
Programmer NJ Climate Center &		USMAIL: Rutgers University
Prog/Tech Rutgers Meteorology-COOK              Department of Meteorology
FAX             :908 932-7922			Cook College  PO BOX 231
Meteorology Dept:908 932-9387                   New Brunswick NJ 08903-0231
[Change = Write your( Congress Representative + White House + Senator )]
        = Attend your local town meetings & school boards
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.config
From: byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd)
Subject: Re: alt.politics.united.we.stand
Reply-To: byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd)
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:30:24 GMT

In article <2AF85774.4444@ics.uci.edu>, artreyes@ics.uci.edu (Arthur A. Reyes) writes:
|> 
|> I support the creation of the "alt.politics.united(.we.stand.america)" newsgroup.
|> 
|> I believe that it should also serve the function of disseminating UWS project/action
|> information.  This would allow local workers to begin implementing projects without
|> the need for over-coordination.
|> 
|> Perhaps Perot '92/UWS Headquarters in Dallas could moderate the newsgroup to ensure that
|> we have accurate, up-to-date information.  Do they have a USENET/INTERNET/ARPANET/*NET
|> connection?  If not, I'm sure that Ross could negotiate a good deal for them.
|> 

I'm not sure if it should be moderated.  Regardless of reality, it would play into
the already-used strategy of the opposition.  My guess is that it would sorta 
moderate itself.


|> I recommend that we keep the string ".united.we.stand" in the newsgroup's name.  I
|> believe that this string will catch people's attention when their newsreader software asks
|> them if they wish to subscribe.  Agreed?
|>

Agreed!
 
|> By the way, what is the procedure to create a new newsgroup?  Please give us instructions.
|>

For alt... groups, (I've been told) all that is required is a willing system
administrator.  If Perot '92/UWS (I'd rather say United than UWS, personally)
has or can get a machine on INTERNET, they could be the host for it.
 
|> After we create the new newsgroup, would it be a good idea to dissolve the
|> alt.politics.perot newsgroup?
|>

Eventually, but one step at a time.
 
|> 
|> I also support the idea of teaming UWS together with organizations of similar charter. 
|> But let's try to keep the name "United We Stand, America."

Agreed.  There is the Concord Coalition, and another group formed by two
20-something guys.  Anyone know who I'm talking about?  Saw them on Sunday
morning Today show.


I think we should also work hard to incorporate discussion by youngsters, maybe
by looking for and encouraging high school & junior high internet feeds.  They
have the most to lose if this mess gets any worse.
 
-- 
Marc J. Byrd - byrd@rice.edu       |  United We Stand. 
Rice University                    |  Whether or not you accept it, you are 
Dept of Elec & Comp Engr           |  responsible for the actions and 
XUV Holographic Microscope Project |  inactions of your government. 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:5236 talk.politics.misc:58492 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8047 alt.rush-limbaugh:9150 alt.politics.elections:22879 alt.politics.bush:13349
From: joltman@doctor-pepper.ai.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Ross Perot is the only true choice for change
Date: 6 Nov 1992 15:34:50 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: doctor-pepper.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Nov3.062805.503@anasazi.com>, john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:
|> Keywords: 
|> 
|> In article <1992Nov2.210125.24552@anasazi.com> best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
|> ]
|> ]You've overlooked a critical point in your analysis, John.  That is that in
|> ]the private sector there is a driving force called _competition_.  Now,
|> ]our government has zero competition therefore it is innately inefficient.
|> ]Furthermore, the Founders, that you have acknowledged as wise, recognized
|> ]that big government was a big problem.  That is why they sought to create
|> ]a limited government (and look what happened - we have the opposite).
|> 
|> Another thing that should be pointed out is that government has the power
|> of coercion by force, which business does not.
|> 
|> Treating the government like a business is a dangerous way to look at things,
|> because it is not a business; it operates in a different climate; it
|> has different powers and responds to different pressures. Finally, debt
|> incurred by a national government is different than business debt.

Why, specifically, is treating the government like a business
dangerous?  Obviously, you can't turn it into a real business in
every sense, but you can take a business approach to it.  Using
that philosophy should make it more efficient.

Regardless of what you think the differences between business and
government are, the fact remains:  the US is pissing away ungodly
amounts of money on interest.  If we hadn't racked up this $4Trillion
debt, we could have cut all taxes approximately in half and have
the same revenue.  Interest is the US spends most of its money on --
not defense, social programs, etc.

The difference between national debt and business debt is that  the
people don't care how much they borrow because it isn't their money.
They don't have to pay it back (at least not any significant portion
of it).  They just throw all this money at their supporters to keep
getting re-elected and make it look like they care about them.

|> -- 
|> John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
|> john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
|>        - - My gun is safer than Ted Kennedy's car - -
|>  - - - "It is better to be judged by twelve, than carried by six." - - -

-- 
T. Andy Frakes (joltman@ai.mit.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: jeffh@pisces.sps.mot.com  (Jeff Heilner)
Subject: BUSH's LOSS - Who's responsible?
Organization: SPS
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:11:49 GMT


Perhaps inadvertently raising a question about the media that many people  
have asked, I saw the following exchange on CBS news last night:


After a post-election rally, Ross was getting into an elevator, when a  
voice from a pack of media folks quipped:

"Mr. Perot, did you cause President Bush to lose the election?"


Incredulously, and in his typically succinct style, Ross replied....

"No......did you?"



- Jeff

 

--
Jeff Heilner                      | In the time it took you to  
Motorola SPS - Tempe, Arizona     | read this, the US national
jeffh@pisces.sps.mot.com (NeXT)   | debt increased by $65,000! 
A'S * SHARKS * WARRIORS * RAIDERS | Don't blame me...I voted PEROT!
Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:5146 alt.politics.clinton:15760
From: cermak@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Rob Cermak)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Economics Experts
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:51:21 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.perot
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

--->From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
--->In article <Bx609G.G2J@rice.edu> byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:
--->>What's the difference between Ross Perot and all the Nobel Laureate 
--->>economists that endorsed Clinton?
--->>
--->>Perot is a successful economic experimentalist (ie billionaire), 
--->>while the others are just theoreticians.
--->>
--->
--->Perot is a successful super-lobbyist who made his fortune by securing
--->government contracts.

Yes, that is how government is suppose to work, Perot took money
from the government and formed a succesful business, not run it into the
ground, declare chapter 11 and make us pay twice.  

With Perot's type of income, the money he barrowed to start that business
was PAID in full by the amount of taxes he pays.  If anything the GOV'T made
out on the contract AS WELL.   IE: Everybody won.  

Most of the contracts, IMHO, are the largest money laundering operations
in the Nation.  We pick on Perot, because he made it successful.
-- 
Rob Cermak			        EMAIL : cermak@gandalf.rutgers.edu
Programmer NJ Climate Center &		USMAIL: Rutgers University
Prog/Tech Rutgers Meteorology-COOK              Department of Meteorology
FAX             :908 932-7922			Cook College  PO BOX 231
Meteorology Dept:908 932-9387                   New Brunswick NJ 08903-0231
[Change = Write your( Congress Representative + White House + Senator )]
        = Attend your local town meetings & school boards
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: datkins@carina.unm.edu (Drexel Atkinson CIRT)
Subject: test...test
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 21:16:03 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: usa


This is a test





-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Drexel Atkinson 			BITNET:  	datkins@unmb
    Systems Programmer			INTERNET:     	datkins@ariel.unm.edu
    CIRT-ACS  University of New Mexico  
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: Why We Should Get Rid Of Clinton
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:48:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.031515.2462@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> twlane@nyx.cs.du.edu () writes:
>jwk@sequent.com (John "Just Say Noe" Kramer) writes:
>
>>In article <92309.123223MJB151@psuvm.psu.edu> MJB151@psuvm.psu.edu write
>:
>>>Here are the top 5 reasons why I think we should get rid of Clinton.
>>>
>>> him into lifting the embargoes on them.  Which, spells another Affair 

        ....

>Is this typical of the people that voted for Mr. Perot?
>
>If so I didnt realize that there was so many absolute and total morons in
>the world.  
>
>Maybe they are all related and the product of inbreeding.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Do you think we can convince them to go off and form there own cult down
>in Guyana......and drink some kool aid?


Is this typical of the people that voted for Clinton?


John Korman




Xref: sparky alt.politics.perot:5207 alt.politics.clinton:15953 alt.politics.bush:13254
From: fagin@coos.dartmouth.edu (Barry S. Fagin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Libernet: a libertarian/classical-liberal digest and forum
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:09:08 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Originator: fagin@coos.dartmouth.edu

This is an announcement for Libernet, posted every couple of months
or so to the Usenet politics newsgroups.

***
Members of the network community should know about Libernet,
a mailing-list/discussion group.  Libernet is intended to be a
real-world, high-quality forum for libertarians, classical liberals, and others
interested in applying the philosophy of liberty to tough
policy questions. 

Libernet is for anyone interested in good discussion and provocative ideas, 
including (especially) non-libertarians who are curious about the libertarian 
perspective.  Criticism is not only tolerated but encouraged, provided it is 
kept civil and does not choke the list.  

Libernet is available in two subscription modes: "reflected" and "batch".
"reflected" mode subscribers will receive Libernet messages one at a time,
as they are sent out.  "batch" mode subscribers receive groups of Libernet 
messages in RFC 1154 Digest format, the defacto standard for e-mail digests.
(If you don't know what this means don't worry about it; nothing special
is required to receive batch mode messages).  These batches are published 
daily.  Subscribers should indicate which mode they prefer.

If interested, send mail to libernet-request@dartmouth.edu.  Thank you.

--Barry Fagin (libernet-request@dartmouth.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone)
Subject: Re: Electoral College
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 20:45:39 GMT

st1r8@elroy.uh.edu (Guillot, Burt J.) writes:
>
>I've read somewhere someone suggested that the West Coast should stay
>in Daylight Savings time until after the election is over.  Currently,
>(assuming the polls close at 7pm), we have this:
>
> 7:00 Eastern
> 8:00 Central
> 9:00 Mountain
>10:00 Pacific   (All times based on Eastern Standard Time).
> 
> ...
>
> 7:00 Eastern
> 8:00 Central
> 9:00 Mountain
> 9:00 Pacific

Um... hate to break this to you:  the timezones go the other way.  When
it is 10 on the east coast, it's 7 on the west...  just FYi. ;)

jb


--
-- Jeff Bone ------------------------------------------------------------
                  Message for Clinton:  fix it or out!
------------------------------------------------------- jbone@dell.com --
--                         std. disclaimer                             --
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: asoper@wyvern.twuug.com (Aubrey Soper)
Subject: Re: How to Contact United We Stand
Organization: Tidewater UNIX Users Group
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 04:01:25 GMT

turney@kenyon.edu writes:

>If you are interested in contacting United We Stand to get your name on the
>mailing list and/or communicate your ideas for the future direction of the
>organization,

>	Phone:	1-800-685-7777

>	Mail:  	United We Stand
>		6066 LBJ Freeway
>		Suite 150
>		Dallas, Texas  75240

No computers, no e-mail? 
-- 

aubrey
---                              ;
><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>'  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>
From: stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu (Jeff Stieglitz)
Subject: EDS Personel Policies
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 9 Nov 92 05:30:55 GMT
Distribution: usa

I've heard that EDS has quite a personel policy handbook which governs 
employee behavior and dress.

Would anyone care to discuss this or give me a copy?

Same question goes for Perot Data Systems.

--

Jeff Stieglitz                                   stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.usa.constitution
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Democracy or Republic ?
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:58:29 GMT

In article <BxFK6x.7Cn@rice.edu> byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:
>Do we in the United States have a democracy or a republic?

We are a democratic federal republic.

>Who gets to decide who is educated, informed and intelligent?
>In the current process, the parties choose electors, right?
>Anyone think they might be a little biased?

Considering that out of 16,000 electors in our history that less than
10 have voted the "wrong" way I would say that your fears, though real,
are not backed up historically.  I would not be against replacing the
office of the elector with some automatic vote assignment process.

Mike Best

Newsgroups: alt.politics.perot
From: canaan@u.washington.edu (Always a rainbow)
Subject: News from home
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:00:30 GMT

[ Southern Partisan, 2nd Quarter 1992 ]
        You may think that you know what trash is, but until you've seen
Brooklyn trash, you don't know the meaning of the word.
                The folks in Stuttgart saw and smelled five carloads
of it for what seemed a lifetime, while lawyers in Little Rock argued
over whether it should be shipped back to New York City where it came
from. It seems that the Southeast Arkansas Landfill, Inc. had agreed
to bring the trash down South by rail car and dump it in Dewit, about
30 niles from Stuttgart.
        Not to be outdone, the people of Arkansas shipped their
Governor to New York City and dumped him in Madison Square Garden. The
two incidents are now being referred to as The Great Trash Exchange.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:2115 talk.politics.misc:58333
From: tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox - (415)926-3105)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Marrou < 0.3%. The *REAL* reason..
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:30:52 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

In article <1992Nov5.214732.19086@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com>, evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:
> In article <1992Nov5.131147.1@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu> tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox - (415)926-3105) writes:
>>
>>   In today's SF Chronicle, the following strange statistics were
>>   reported:-
>>
>>   Calif Senate `long seat'		- Genis		220,000
>>   Calif Senate `short seat'		- Brodie	210,000
>>   Calif totals for president		- Marrou	 44,000
>>
>>
>>   Am I expected to believe that libertarians were so distressed with
>>   Marrou that 4 out of 5 of them couldn't bring themselves to vote
>>   for him, and as a consequence, voted for the official candidates?
> 
> No.  You it means that there were many, many people who were so
> disgusted by the choices offered in the senate races that they were
> willing to cast a protest vote for anybody else, regardless of whether
> or not they were familiar with the candidate.

   I dont agree. I think there is more to it.
   June Genis was in a race against Hershenson(R) and Boxer(D). The
   final result was very close, as predicted in the polls.
   Brodie was in the Feinstein(D)/Seymore(R) race, which was from the
   start a sure thing for the witch from SF (70%/30%).

   If I accept the premise that 4 out of 5 libertarians vote
   according to strategy rather than conviction, then I would have
   expected June to have suffered the same fate as Andr.

Tony Cox, Stanford, CA
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: rigg@valeron.che.wisc.edu (Tim Rigg)
Subject: Re: semi-automatic weapons
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Chemical Engineering
Date: 12 Nov 92 11:29:36
	<1992Nov11.143429.14710@crd.ge.com> <BxKCEH.IHF@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
In-reply-to: gletty@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu's message of Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:54:02 GMT

In article <BxKCEH.IHF@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> gletty@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Bruce Gletty) writes:
   ebstokes@maxwell.crd.ge.com (Ed Stokes) writes:
   >We have to get our principles accepted at the local level before
   >anyone will accept them on a grand scale. In other words, semi-automatic 
   >weapons are not an issue in the town council race...

   They were an issue in Urbana quite recently. The gun-banners tried to
   get an 'anti-assault weapon' ordinance passed that would have banned
   almost every gun I can think of. The police were against it, and it
   failed; but it was indeed a local city council issue.

There is a measure coming before the Madison (WI) city council to ban
all weapons that are not legal for hunting.  The public hearings will
probably be held next week or the week after which means that they
might be held during the middle of Wisconsin's 9 day deer hunting
season.

In short, the gun grabbers are equally active on local and federal
levels.

tim
--
    ...  Then they came for me,
	   and by that time there was no one
	     left to speak up for me. (Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: belld@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (David Bell)
Subject: Re: Marrou < 0.3%. The *REAL* reason...
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 18:00:33 GMT

steve-b@access.digex.com (Steve Brinich) writes:

>  Are you sure of those numbers?  I can see that it's possible that some
>of Marrou's votes haven't been tallied yet, but if so how is it that Genis's
>and Boddie's votes -were- tallied?
>  That seems hard to explain, but then again so is the notion that the LP
>Senate candidates got five times as many votes as the LP Presidential
>candidate.

I understand that many Perot voters voted independant and 3rd party right
down the line.  If all Marrou voters, and only 10 percent of the Perot
voters, voted for the Libertarian senate candidates, it would explain the
numbers just fine.

Dave
belld@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: semi-automatic weapons
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:37:22 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Nov11.143429.14710@crd.ge.com>, ebstokes@maxwell.crd.ge.com (Ed Stokes) writes:

> Exactly ! My response to all three was that this idea, to protect
> ourselves from a tyrannical government, came from Jefferson. This
> just resulted in blank stares...
>  
> It seems that in my ordinary conversations with otherwise intelligent
> people, the idea that the government will ever get so bad as to require
> self protection is _universally_ viewed as paranoid.

It's not only the federal government, of course.  Ask your friends
how they would have liked being black in a Southern town in 1880,
where the town fathers, judge, and police chief all had particular
white laundry that didn't get hung on the clothesline with the rest.

> We have to get our principles accepted at the local level before
> anyone will accept them on a grand scale. In other words, semi-automatic 
> weapons are not an issue in the town council race...

It depends on where you live.  Chicago and Washington DC come to mind...
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Early Ohio state results
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 20:49:27 GMT

scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn) writes:

|     Question 2: How has Marrou been doing across the country? Post, post!

Champaign County, IL final (but unofficial - no count on write-ins yet)
tally, plus those for my precinct run:


Registered voters:				91710		1181
Ballots cast:					77254 (84.24)	 863 (73.07)
Blank Ballots:					  516 (00.56)	   2 (00.17)

Party-line voting

Republican					10914 		  87
Democratic					 8043		  95
New Alliance					   10		   0
Socialist Workers				    0		   0
Populist					    0		   0
Natural Law					    3		   0
Libertarian					   15		   0
Conservative Party of Illinois			    2		   0

President and Vice President

Ballots cast					77254		863
Republican - Bush/Quayle			27096 (35.07)	288 (33.07)
Democratic - Clinton/Gore			35003 (45.31)	440 (50.98)
New Alliance - Fulani/Munoz			   91 (00.12)	  0 (00.00)
Socialist Workers - Warren/Reid			   36 (00.05)	  1 (00.12)
Populist - Gritz/Minett				   41 (00.05)	  0 (00.00)
Natural Law - Hagelin/Tompkins			   39 (00.05)	  0 (00.00)
Libertarian - Marrou/Lord			  213 (00.28)	  6 (00.70)
Independent - Perot/Stockdale			13751 (17.80)	122 (14.14)

United States Senator
Ballots cast					77222		863
Republican - Williamson				32236 (41.74)	345 (39.98)
Democratic - Braun				38103 (49.34)	472 (54.69)
New Alliance - Port				  162 (00.21)	  3 (00.35)
Socialist Workers - Kaku			  126 (00.16)	  0 (00.00)
Populist - Justice				  110 (00.14)	  1 (00.12)
Natural Law - Winter				  162 (00.21)	  2 (00.23)
Libertarian - Spiegel				  565 (00.73)	  5 (00.58)
Conservative of IL - Koppie			 2390 (03.09)	  9 (01.04)

--
Michael Adams (StarOwl@uiuc.edu  madams@nyx.cs.du.edu  wi.4962@n7kbt.rain.com)

Nancy Lord in '96
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:2247 alt.politics.libertarian:1842