Conference back40::soapbox

    
      What depths can the politics of US finances sink to ?  There just
     has to be a better system than this.  It isn't new with Clinton
     and the 104th, either.  Other countries must chortle at our
     shenanigans.
    
      bb

    
    <chortle>
    

    
    <<<<  shaddup you

    Is there a cap on how long they get paid?  If there is no money
    available in a budget, how are they able to get paid?

    I hope the fact that those being "furloughed" are actually going to get
    paid gets around.  If they thing the taxpayers were angry in 94.
    
    Who actually sends these folks home?  Is it the executive branch ?
    
    al
    

    ZZZ   Who actually sends these folks home?  Is it the executive branch ?
    
    Yes, the Executive brasnch did it.  They are bad people.
    
    

    
    
    
    Hear them talking on the news about needing vacations.....

    	Wasn't this the exact tactic that the Dems used to get Bush to
    	agree to a tax hike?  It seems to me that in the negotiations
    	at that time, while the govt was shut down, Bush agreed to allow
    	a tax increase rider to remain on the budget extension...
    	

    I spent the morning cowering in terror, curled in a corner of the
    bedroom, locked into a fetal position.  The Sky Is Falling, I tell ya!
    Especially if you listen to any broadcast media, which is spreading
    the "crisis" like freshly-obtained fertilizer as far and as wide as
    they can.  Damn those eeeevil Republicans!  Boo-hoo, someone help us,
    help us all before it's too late!  There's no government, we're spinning
    out of control, we're gonna crash, yaaaaaahhh!
    
    Yawn,
    Chris
    
    P.S.  "Non-essential" personnel, eh?  Then why are they there in the
    first place?

Well, actually, the workers were instructed to take leave, if available,
which Congress will probably retroactively restore.

Those without leave are not being paid.  But again, Congress will probably
retroactively restore the lost pay.

But there is no commitment.

/john

New York State typically has some sort of budget crisis every year.  (that's
what they get for having a budget that expires on April Fool's Day I guess..)
When I worked for the state (actually a state university) there was one year
the crisis lasted much longer than normal.  Rather than shut down the state,
they had everyone work as normal, and we were issued "script" rather than
paychecks.  Banks could (but didn't have to) accept them as money on the
promise they would be redeemed once the state got its act together.  My
"script" check was a regular paycheck with the "Pay to the Order Of" portion
X'd out.

    actually, i heard on cnn last night that the president does not get
    paid while the shutdown is underway, but the congress does get paid
    during the shutdown. 
    
    maybe we can send clinton home, too! :-)

re: .-1

Rush's opening today was "Slick" "apologizing" to the country for the "shutdown
of the government", and then being interrupted to be told that he was being 
"sent home" as a non-essential government employee.

    
    re:  <<< Note 580.7 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I press on toward the goal" >>>
    
    ZZZ   Who actually sends these folks home?  Is it the executive branch?
    XXX   Yes, the Executive brasnch did it.  They are bad people.
    
    Reason I asked because it is the issue that defines control in this
    situation.  Last night, Gingrich stated stated that they would issue
    selective funding resolutions to keep open or reopen parts of the 
    government deemed most needed.  So it would seem congress does have
    some control here.
    
    I find the issue of paying/not paying "furloughed" govt employees
    interesting from a media coverage perspective.  I tried to catch what I
    could and found only on The News Hour with Jim Lehere actually
    discussed it.  Other than that, all I heard was the term "furloughed
    without pay" over and over.  Had I not listened to the News Hr, I 
    would certainly be left with the impression that these folks were
    not going to get paid.  I'm not a conspiracy theory advocate, it's just
    interesting how it happens to work out that the coverage seems to slant in
    the same direction on this issue.
    
    al
        

    The local ABC affiliate here interviewed govt. workers as they were
    leaving various federal buildings.  All of the ones shown viewed the
    whole thing as simply an unexepcted PAID vacation.
    
    Bob

    You mean the media...lied??  <look of shock and horror>

    Funny thing is - this type of BS makes an even better argument FOR
    the line item veto.                                  

    NORAD reported this morning that at last three individuals in space
    suits were seen floating gently back to Earth in parachutes during
    the night.

    Non-essential astronauts were sent home from the space shuttle.

    (That was a joke, of course.)  :)

    Hey, why is anyone working at NORAD?  Shouldn't they all be home
    on their unexpected paid vacation?
    
    If there's any orbiting space debris falling out of the sky, well
    then, that would only confirm that "the sky is falling"! :-)
    
    Chris

    re: .20
    
    And a good one at that!
    
    Bob

    The Wall Street Journal story this morning said they were "ALL" being
    paid.
    
    As for Federal workers leave and benefits, here is what they get:
    
    14 paid holidays per year.
    13 vacation days per year for first three years of service.
    20 vacation days per year after "3" years of service.
    26 vacation days per year after fifteen years of service.
    Vacation carry over is a maximum of 6 weeks.
    13 sick days per year which is accrued and "NEVER" lost, which means
    there is no cap and you can apply your accrued days to your years of
    service when you compute your retirement pay.
    Automatic cost of living increases each year, "PLUS" an automatic grade
    step increase wihin each grade that works like this.  If you are a
    pay grade GS12, you get an automatic increase (~3%) each of your first
    four years in that grade, the same every other year for the next six
    years, then the same every third year for the next nine years.  Each
    grade has 10 steps, so it take you 19 years to go from a GS12-Step1 to
    a GS12-Step10.  This is automatic.  You get the cost of living each
    year which is on top of the step increase.  Of course, you could get a
    promotion to the next grade and the step stuff starts all over again.
    
    It is hard for me to imagine too many government workers that don't
    have leave, except for many I knew when I worked for the Feds that used
    every bit of it.  As soon as they accumulated one day of sick leave,
    they used it.  Of course, they were worthless employees.
    
    When my father retired from the feds, he had over 2000 accumulated sick
    days which added about a year to his length of service.  He rarely ever
    took a sick day.
    
    On CNN this morning, the newscaster currently referred to these as
    laid-off government workers.  They are not laid-off.  They have not
    lost their jobs, their benefits or their pay.  It is absolutely
    irresponsible for the media to portray these workers in the same light
    as those in private industry who have truly lost their jobs.  This is
    liberal media at its best.  Pure hype.
    

RE: 580.23 by MIMS::SANDERS_J

> The Wall Street Journal story this morning said they were "ALL" being
> paid.

The past four shutdowns,  all done by a Republican President and a
Democratic Congress,  the settlement of the shutdown included continuation
of pay for all federal workers for any time in the shutdown.


This time may be different.  We shall see.


Phil

    .24
    
    Yesterday's news reports said explicitly, as in read my lips, that
    workers being kept on the job ARE NOT being paid and that SOME workers
    sent home are being paid.

    
      I'm starting to think this may go on for some weeks.  My reasoning
     is that I can't find any "political" reason for either the prex or
     the congress to back off for a while.  My guess is they'll wallow
     in their own slime for quite a while, without any continuing rez, or
     debt ceiling increase.  Certainly there's no reason for Newt or Sliq
     to do anything.  Dole would be the possible exception, since he's
     running for prex, but he's got problems on the right during the
     primaries and can't afford to look wishay-washy.
    
      Several more bills, mostly appropriations, are slithering down
     pennsy ave, but I doubt they'll even get read before the veto now.
    
      By the way, there isn't going to be any default, contrary to Rubin.
     They quietly did what everybody said they'd do all along, temporarily
     cook the books on the trust funds.  One guy said they could possibly
     keep it up for a whole year, till the elections.
    
      And all the markets are totally calm, as if nothing was happening.
     By contrast, all Greenspan has to do is make a sneeze that sounds
     like "interest rates", and they go into paroxysms...
    
      bb

    
    
    RE: .25  Dick, when they say "not getting paid" they mean on a weekly
    basis.  Once things are resolved, they will get their back pay. This 
    could definitely be trouble for employees living from paycheck to
    paycheck.
    
    
    Mike

    I will guarantee you that they will be paid in full.  They will not
    lose one red cent of pay, not one.  Absolutely, 100% guaranteed!
    

    And the toilets will still stink at Yosemite!

    There once was a budget calamity
    The pres said he'd veto off handedly.
    The repubs didn't think and dems wouldn't blink
    And the toilets will still stink at Yosemite!

    <---- Can somebody post this on the internet?

   We're doing a $2.5M project for the Navy.  No problem---the project
   is funded with 1995 dollars.  Problem---The procurement people at
   NSWC Crane are part of those sent home.  We can mail them the bills,
   but nobody is there to pay them.

    
    Well..Yosemite and the Grand Canyon are shutdown.
    
    Lots of people from other countries being turned away.
    
    All campers must leave Yosemite by Friday.
    
    Just thought. What a way to give nature a chance to recuperate
    from all the humans pouncing on those parks.
    
    

    re. 28
    
    saw on the news tonight a clip of furrloughed gov't employees signing
    up for unemployment. the law allows them to collect it until the
    crisis is resolved, and then they need to pay back all the money when
    their paychecks resume. 
    

    This is kind of a ripoff.  As I recall when I worked for the feds, they
    don't pay SUI (State Unemployment Insurance).  They should not be
    eligible.  But then, the government is always trying to make everything
    painless for everybody and you and I (and future generations) pay through
    the nose.

    friend of mine is an employee of Syre, a small hi-tech firm operating
    the Vertical Motion Simulator Facility at NASA Ames, where they do
    major simulations of helicopters, shuttle landings, and a few other
    interesting research projects- recently they did an airship.  NASA,
    deeming them non-essential, has shutdown the facility and Syre has told
    their employees they won't be paid in the interim.
    
    So this may not be hurting government employees but its sure hurting
    some folks.
    
    DougO

    
    
    Maybe he should find another job in an industry or for a company who
    isn't so reliant on the governemt if he/she can't handle the
    environment.
    
    
    
    Mike

    Timing is everything, y'see.  He's been with Syre for about 6 years on
    this sim, and knows it inside and out - its kinda like the reasons many
    of us stay on at DEC - the pay sucks, but at least the work is
    interesting.  The guy has presented papers at technical conferences on
    motion simulators, and we've had many an interesting discussion about
    the mechanics of his latest problems- just how much feedback loop delay
    induces nausea, how do you get the best predictable frame response
    times when changing the interrupt service hardware from VAXes to
    Alphas, that kinda stuff.  But after scrimping for a decade, ever since 
    college, he finally had enough saved to buy a house here in the Bay
    Area, in Silicon Valley.  Two months ago, he bought a house, in Mountain 
    View.  What he could afford.  Now, as of this past Tuesday, no
    paycheck.  Timing.
    
    Prattle about "the environment" some more, Mikey.  Big hearted fellow
    that you are.
    
    DougO

Well, DougO, the instability of positions with outfits that largely do 
government contract work (or contract work for government agencies) is
only legend, so what's he surprised about? I can have compassion for
his situation, but he sorta shoulda known that the risk existed. Fifteen
years ago we didn't worry about getting laid off at DIGITAL. We know better
now.

    
    
    You've got me all wrong, Doug.  I never said I didn't feel for those
    who are affected by this, it's just something that needs to be dealt
    with.  I've been laid off before, it ain't no fun.  Only problem is,
    when I was laid off, there wasn't an end in sight of when I would be
    needed back.  I went out and found another job.  Ain't any guarantees,
    Doug, it's a reality those of us in private industry have been dealing
    with for quite a while now.  
    
    Mike

    The bottom line is the civilian contractor at this facility gets sent
    home without pay and the government employee at this facility gets sent
    home with pay.  This is one reason the government is so screwed up. 
    You are paid not to work, just like welfare.  You know, like paid not
    to farm.  What else does the government pay people not to do.  The
    incentives are all wrong.

Attention Investors!

BOND OFFERING

Because of the changing economic conditions brought on by the government 
shutdown, Lehman Brothers have come out with three new bonds:

The Dole, which bears no interest,

The Clinton, which requires no principal,

and the Gingrich, which never reaches maturity.

    
    Good one, Glen.
    
    BTW...which is your REAL picture on the Silva Home Page...the
    cartoonish looking figure, or that picture of Stalin's brother ?

| <<< Note 580.43 by SCASS1::EDITEX::MOORE "PerhapsTheDreamIsDreamingUs" >>>


| BTW...which is your REAL picture on the Silva Home Page...the
| cartoonish looking figure, or that picture of Stalin's brother ?

	I'm not tellin....... :-)  it could be neither.....

    Seen in a trade rag:
    
    December '95 --> 	government shuts down.
    			nobody notices.

    
    
    Notcied here, you can't get into Rocky Mountain National Park,
    Yellowstone, Glacier, Mesa Verde, Dinosaur..........
    
    Really messing up the local economies in the Rocky Mountain west.  
    
    Wonder what the court ruling on union federal "essential" employees
    will be today.  Seems Lincoln freed the slaves back in the 1800's.  
    
    meg

    
    
    Yup, just goes to show you that the feds shouldn't be running the
    parks.
    
    It was real funny last week (or the week before) when the market
    dropped, all the major media people were saying it was due to the
    government shutdown.  I wonder what their reasons were for it going
    back up again......

	Mike, probably the same reason. But now they're happy that the gov is
shut down. Things will run better now. :-)

    .47
    
    > Yup, just goes to show you that the feds shouldn't be running the
    > parks.
    
    What it shows is that the feds shouldn't be running the government. 
    They have no time for anything meaningful, they're too busy strutting
    and crowing and otherwise making like Cock Robin.

    given the fact that Congress refuses to consider not receiving pay
    while the shutdown is on, I think the whole lot is a batch of
    hypocrits.  Who can better afford no pay?  the person making <35K or
    the person making at minimum 133K?  Who is making the decisions around
    the <35K workers and why are they selfishly receiving money while
    telling others to work for free for however long it takes for them to
    get over their egos?
    
    meg

    .50
    
    > the whole lot is a batch of
    > hypocrits.
    
    So what else is new?

    This second shutdown could have been averted if the President took his
    job seriously after the last CR was provided to prevent such a
    shutdown. He elected to politick instead of engaging in serious
    negotiations as he promised to do in order to get the CR funding. The
    responsibility for the shutdown rests firmly at his feet. It's highly
    unfortunate that the government had to shut down non-essential services
    whose budgets have not been signed into law by the President, but let's
    recognize the whys and wherefores. These next few days should prove to
    be crucial to negotiations, which have up to this point pussy-footed
    around the meaty issues of welfare, medic*; the out-of-control
    expanding expenses which were stated targets of candidate Clinton and
    even President Clinton until he got a congress that actually expected
    him to make good on his promises. Once it became clear that his words
    were being taken as a committment, he got cold feet. His hemming and
    hawing have been monuments to his lack of a clear vision. 

    .50:
    
    To be fair, most Congresscritters have to maintain two households: One
    in their own state, and one in the DC area.  Add a third household for
    the mistress, where appropriate.  They do have higher living expenses.
    
    On the other hand, I figure they should just cut all pretenses, and
    have their lobbyists put them up in a hotel for the duration.  Might as
    well put all that junket money to good use...

    
    
    I've got an answer to that.  Set up a dormatory for them.  One or two
    bedroom efficiencies where they can stay with a shuttle bus running
    back and forth to the capital.
    
    I could run two households rather nicely on $80K per year.
    
    
    

    
    So far, all the news reports I have heard have stated that all those
    who are on leave at the government due to the shutdown will get paid. 
    It will just take a little while.
    
    Now, every place I have worked at (granted I never worked for any
    governments or government agencies) always had a policy that you either
    used vacation pay or didn't get paid during a shutdown.  It must be
    nice working for someone who will give you 3-4 weeks paid vacation over
    the holidays.
    
    	Skip

    re: .55
    
    This is true, however, you do usually get the paycheck while
    you are on vacation.  I've yet to find a mortgage, credit card
    or utility company to whom the words "you'll get paid, it may
    just take a while" were as good as a check.
    
    Mary-Michael

    I'd happily take a 3-4 week involuntary but paid vacation which didn't
    affect the amount of my real vacation, to be paid in lump sum after the
    vacation. The short term cash flow problem could certainly be overcome,
    albeit not completely painlessly. Still, the cost of interest on
    borrowing to cover the cash flow issue related to non-payment of salary
    is a pretty small price to pay for such a benefit. It would be
    different if they weren't going to get the money, but they are so the
    pain actually being caused is minimal.

  >  given the fact that Congress refuses to consider not receiving pay
  >  while the shutdown is on, I think the whole lot is a batch of
  >  hypocrits.  Who can better afford no pay?  the person making <35K or
  >  the person making at minimum 133K?  Who is making the decisions around
  >  the <35K workers and why are they selfishly receiving money while
  >  telling others to work for free for however long it takes for them to
  >  get over their egos?
  >  
  >  meg

  That's right, pay attention to the diversion and ignore the real issue.
  The feds being on vacation is short term BS, the debt is the real problem.

  It's difficult to feel sorry for a bunch of folks who are basically on a paid
  vacation. At worse, you call up creditors and explain that they will receive
  a check when the government re-opens and they will likely be very cooperative.
  (unless of course you have a history of being a deadbeat in which case, the
   problem existed before the government shut down)

   Didn't Clinton veto the bill on funding congress? I seem to recall him saying
   something about dealing with the peoples issue before funding congress during
   that particular veto ...

   Meg, open you eyes. Newt is not the hipocrite you'ld like to think he is.
   Clinton is not the saviour you'ld like to think he is. This is politics,
   and the feds are out of work because Clinton vetoed several bills that would
   have funded them, and because Clinton refused to live up to his commitments
   of a balanced budget and more efficient government. Hold his feet to the 
   fire too please.

   If you want hipocrits, look at Clinton and Pennetta(sp?). Congress is doing 
   its job, and it's dragging the admin along with it.

>  I've yet to find a mortgage, credit card or utility company to whom the 
>  words "you'll get paid, it may just take a while" were as good as a check.

   Mary, most creditors will work with you, esspecially with such a public
   problem as this, usually without penalty. All you have to do is call and
   explain. They all know that the check is literally in the mail.

   Doug.

    
    
    I love the media-spin on this one with the photos in the
    news(snicker)papers....
    
     Everyone of them shows furloughed, federal workers with protest
    signs... and everyone of the signs blames Newt...
    

    .52
    
    > This second shutdown could have been averted if...
    
    ...the Republican leadership of Congress hadn't vowed after election
    day that there would be no compromise with the President.  But of
    course since you're a reichwynger, the word liberal is an obscenity in
    your mouth.

    The Senate has unamimously voted to suspend pay until the shutdown is
    finished.  The Newtonian congress refuses to even hear the bill.  
    
    In the mean time, I am glad I am not about to become 65, permanently or
    temporarily disabled, or in need of WIC, foodstamps, or many other
    programs.
    
    meg

    RE: .60

>    > This second shutdown could have been averted if...
>    
>    ...the Republican leadership of Congress hadn't vowed after election
>    day that there would be no compromise with the President.  But of

    You're right Dick.  They should have let it be pork-barrell politics as
    usual.  Let our great-great-great-grand kids pay for it.

    -- Dave

Pork-barrel politics only happens in the second or third person.  "New
leadership" is always in the first person.  It's all a matter of
perspective.

    I have a great republican congresscritter.  It is only pork if a
    project is outside of his district, inside the district it is a
    necessary thing.  
    
    Been this way under 16 years of republican congresscritters.  
    
    meg

    
    >Been this way under 16 years of republican congresscritters.
    
    A whore is a whore is a whore.... 
    
    Be it a Dem or a Pub or whatever...

RE: 580.62 by HIGHD::FLATMAN "Give2TheMegan&KennethCollegeFund"

B-2 pork or the Seawolf pork?


Phil

    .62
    
    Dave, I said *compromise.*  All politics is compromise, in case you
    haven't studied the subject.  I didn't say knuckle under or cave in. 
    But the Reichwyng's utter unwillingness to accept the remote
    possibility that the limolibs might be right IN SOME PARTS OF THE THING
    is beyond common sense.  It is posturing, pure and simple.  And it is
    hurting everyone - including the very plutocrats who are engaging in
    it.

    RE: .67

    Ok, how do you comprompise with someone who has a proven record of not
    holding up their end of the bargain?  

    -- Dave

    
    .67> All politics is compromise.
    
    Pol 1: "All Blacks should be Slaves"
    
    Pol 2: "No Blacks should be Slaves"
    
    Pol 1 & 2 in unison: "Let's compromise - only half should be slaves"
    
    ------
    
    So much for that theory.
    
    	Skip

    Compromise?  Where was the compromise for the last 40 years of
    absolute liberal policy?  Is the mess we have now actually the
    result of compromise with the conservative minority for those years?
    So without even that small conservative voice for those 40 years,
    we'd be in an even bigger mess than we're in now?
    
    Chris

    RE: .66

    Phil, I suppose you missed in 50.1319 where I said we probably could do
    without the B2's.

    -- Dave

    Oh, by the way, did the government shut down again?  I've been
    avoiding the news as a holiday gift to myself, so... :-)
    
    Did anyone notice?  Is it being reported as a CRISIS (again)?
    
    As for the parks, wgaf, but if we must, let the Disney folks run 'em...
    
    Chris

>              -< Are the "enforcement agencies" at home as well? >-

    Some thinks they're essential.

>    As for the parks, wgaf, but if we must, let the Disney folks run 'em...

    But they're already being run by a Mickey Mouse organization ;^)

    -- Dave

    .69
    
    > Pol 1: "All Blacks should be Slaves"
    >
    >  Pol 2: "No Blacks should be Slaves"
    
    Interesting point:  Pol 2 was from a state in which there were more
    slaves than there were in the largest state from Pol 1's part of the
    country.  But then Pol 2 couldn't afford to rock the boat cuz many of
    his campaign contributors were slave factors doing business out of
    state.  Result:  Slaves got freed in Pol 1's territory but not in Pol
    2's territory, at least not for another couple of years.

>    > This second shutdown could have been averted if...
>    
>    ...the Republican leadership of Congress hadn't vowed after election
>    day that there would be no compromise with the President.  But of
>    course since you're a reichwynger, the word liberal is an obscenity in
>    your mouth.

     ... the President met his commitment, produced a real balanced budget
     everyone could use as a starting point for negociations, and wasn't 
     targeting the tax cuts as the break even point, forcing the repubs to 
     recant one of the pledges that got them elected (and so the dems can 
     campain that the repubs didn't keep their word and on and on ...)

     How is the Congress' vow any different from the behaviour of the 
     past dem majority?

     The repubs are trying to forfill the campain promises that got them
     elected. Clinton threw his promises out the window the day he won the 
     race. I'll support the more honest of the two sides ...

     If Clinton wants to go down as the only president not to have a budget
     then so be it. 

     Doug.

    Slig should have taken his cue from the last shutdown; guess this
    banana obviously doesn't know what the word NO means.  I know this
    is rough on a lot of folks who don't deserve it (what about those
    "essential" workers who are expected to work w/o pay); but I still
    think it's time to hold Sliq's feet to the fire.
    
    If a few of you would watch C-SPAN if you have access to it, you
    might see who is doing the posturing and who the real hypocrites
    are.  Newt says he's willing to take the heat to bring the budget
    into balance; I hope he means it.
    

    Doug:
    
    Bottom line is Clinton vowed at Thanksgiving to agree on a 7 yr plan
    using CBO numbers...then he's since welched on that committment...the
    Reps have proposed budgets which contain higher rates of spending
    increase than the ADMIN. originally proposed...he's milking this for
    ALL he can, but it WILL come back to haunt him
    NR

    >But of course since you're a reichwynger, the word liberal is an obscenity in
    >your mouth.
    
     And you're a bed-wetting, thumb-sucking liberal whiner to whom
    responsibile government is an anathema. Ok, do we feel better now? Can 
    we talk about substantive issues, or shall we take the easy road of 
    rock throwing?

    If Dole caves in on this, I'll have to re-think that vote at 
    election time.  I hope Newt sticks to his guns on this one.
    
    The fact is Sliq has been grandstanding on this one; lots of 
    workers and citizens have been affected, but Sliq wants to milk
    all the favorable publicity he can get out of this (and as usual,
    the press is cooperating).
    
    Someone mentioned Newt can't "manage" the younger breed of freshmen
    Republicans; folks better get used to it.  I can remember watching
    C-SPAN when a number of events were held where incoming freshmen
    congresscritters were identifying themselves.  This is definitely
    a "younger" breed; they made it clear that they took Newt's Contract
    with America seriously and they are the driving force behind the
    effort for a balanced budget.  I don't think this younger group is
    going to roll over and dutifully accept the assignments that used
    to occur under the "good ole boy" pecking order.
    
    Dole's been hemming and hawing about the Senate having more reason
    and rationality on such issues; he'd better get with the program or
    he's likely to see a dramatic change in the number of "good ole
    boys" getting re-elected.
    
    

 ZZ    If Dole caves in on this, I'll have to re-think that vote at 
 ZZ    election time. 
    
    Karen dear, if Dole is in the finals then yes...otherwise, why would
    you want to vote this guy anyway?  He's voted for tax hikes in the past
    ya know!!!!!
    
    Smooch!

    
    I heard on the radio that Fleet Bank and Bank of Boston are offering
    interest-free loans to the federal workers affected by the shutdown, to
    be paid back when it's over.
    

    
    
    	yep. One congressman is giving $10,000 a month in interest free
    loans to federal employees. I forget who it was tho'...
    
    
    jim

    Dear Smooch,
    
    I'm not happy about it, but at present Dole seemed to be the lesser
    of the Republican evils.  If I had my druthers, Colin Powell would
    have agreed to run as a Repub, then Colin would have my vote in a
    NY minute.
    
    

    Dear Sweetums:
    
    Think about this for a moment.  Colin Powell is a great man, a non
    politician, and in my book, probably the one of the highest integrity.
    Unfortunately, ALL these great attributes are overshadowed by one itty
    bitty attribute which douses the flame...
    
    
    Colin
    
    
    	Powell
    
    
    		is
    
    
    			a
    
    
    				Fiscal
    
    
    					Moderate!!!!!!!
    
    
    You mentioned a few days ago that your family has voted Republican for
    years.  I submit to you that a fiscal moderate would be unable to
    represent YOUR interests...that is if you really follow the republican
    line on fiscal conservatism.  George Bush for example, was a fiscal
    moderate and although he is a good family man, meant little in his
    popularity.  Therefore, goodness, kindness, integrity all have to
    become secondary to the ultimate goal.  Colon Powell is deficient in
    this matter.
    
    Now back to Bob Dole.  Karen, Bob Dole is NOT a fiscal conservative,
    Bob Dole is one of the biggest proponents of white collar welfare and
    his voting record shows he's a George Bush part 2.  The real trick is
    to find what these people stand for fiscally.  Jim Dornan is NOT
    going to stop abortion.  Buchanan IS NOT going to isolate the United
    States.  That would take an act of Congress and our economic interests
    are too intertwined in International affairs.  You see my point!?  
    Stick to thinking fiscally, the social crapola will take care of itself
    within the states and the courts.
    
    -Smooch!

    Dear Smooch,
    
    I thought I wrote that Powell described himself as fiscally conser-
    vative, but moderate on other issues.
    
    For the record, I'm pro-choice (I said there were a few of us in
    the Republican party); so Dornan wouldn't be eliminated on that 
    score with me.
    
    I'd no more vote for Buchanan than I would for Tammy Faye or Jim
    Bakker ;-}
    
    Gramm reminds me of Elmer Fudd, nada.
    
    

 ZZ   Gramm reminds me of Elmer Fudd, nada.
    
    Now that's what I call substantive!!!  Any other possible reasons my
    sweet!?

    Works for me Martinski ;-}
    

    Hey...ww...what does it look like I'm wearing a bowling shirt here?  
    Whasislous!?  I'm no Pole!!!!!!! :-)

    
			  (__)
                          (oo)
                   /-------\/ 
                  / |     || \ 
                 *  ||W---|| Who's the Pole in the bowling shirt? 
                    ~~    ~~
    

    
    
    The groom at his wedding???
    

    RIOTS BY 1/15/96

My anger towards the press was growing at a rapid rate as I watched 15 minutes
of government protestors carrying signs to furlough congress, president
Clinton lying to the american public (again) and on and on.

Then, an amazing thing happened. The same press asked the question: Is there
really a crisis out there. They then reported that 88% of americans could GAS
about the current shutdown, that only 14% of government employees where affected,
and that banks all over the country were willing to help those affected
by the shutdown, interest free.

They then went into the political necessity of the dems having to portray
the shutdown as a crisis and blame the repubs, else they'll have to actually
negociate with them.

I was astounded! Real reporting! Looking deeper than the dem spin! Is there
hope for the press?

It was still lop-sided, but at least more than one side got covered.
It was almost refreshing ....

Doug.

    
    	Is there hope for the press?
    
    	I don't know ... maybe this story required a "republican spin"
    	in order to get their opinions heard.
    
    	Of course, if you're a non-fan of democrats, you wouldn't even
    	consider this a possibility.
    

>                           They then reported that 88% of americans could GAS
>about the current shutdown

One wonders what portion of Americans could GAS about anything beyond their
own creature comforts.

    As a minor aside - this shutdown IS affecting us (Digital).  Processing
    of export licenses is delayed making it difficult to ship gear to
    places like Korea, PRC etc.
    
    Also customers wanting to visit us have difficulty getting visas.
    
    Axel

| <<< Note 580.95 by POWDML::DOUGAN >>>

| Also customers wanting to visit us have difficulty getting visas.


	That's when American Express would come in handy..... hey, they could
do a whole string of commercials! The USA doesn't take Visas.....but they will
take American Express!  :-)

    
    	I hate to admit that I was going to say basically the same thing
    	that Glen said.  8^)
    
    	"American Express - don't leave Rome without it!!"
    

    
    Clinton vetos another continuing resolution.  It ain't the repubs,
    folks.
    
    
    

>    	I don't know ... maybe this story required a "republican spin"
>    	in order to get their opinions heard.

 The only republican spin was a 15 second sound bite of a woman blaming
 Clinton for vetoing funding on several occasions ...

 
 

gov shutdown for 100 snarf!

| <<< Note 580.98 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "A New Year, the SOS" >>>


| Clinton vetos another continuing resolution.  It ain't the repubs, folks.


	Mike, did that resolution have the standard repub welfare etc stuff
that he keeps saying he will veto? If so, then isn't it the repubs? I mean,
they know he will veto it, yet they keep giving it to him. If they REALLY
wanted something passed, why put it in?

Given the fact that the congress has given Clinton at least 2 complete
budgets to sign, and he vetos both

and

Given the fact that Clinton promised in Nov to use CBO numbers and come up
with a balanced budget in 7 seven years 

and

Given the fact that Clinton has yet to supply such a budget

then

How could anyone blame the congress for the shutdown? How can a congress
compromise w/ a president when he doesn't even supply a budget (i.e.,
how can they compromise when they are the only ones who've supplied a budget?)

Hmmm?

All the repubs have said they want is a real 7 year balanced budget from
Clinton... once they get that, then they can sit down and really compromise
and come up w/ a budget that both sides will agree with... I've heard
many repubs say this since the first CR was put into effect. They are waiting
for Clinton to hold to his promise.

/scott

	Scott, then why are they meeting now, discussing the budget, if there
isn't one that they're working with?


Glen

They're meeting, but not with a Clinton budget to start from.
Clinton as basically said that the repubs can have their budget as long
as it protects his (yeah right) priorities. Given that the
republican budget reflects many of the same themes spun off by the president
in previous years one would think that  a budget deal would be a simple matter.

But no, Clinton is playing politics and shaping a 2% difference in numbers
to be a catastrophe with starving and sickly elderly and children.

 After it became clear that the repubs could approach Clintons spending targets
and still have a tax cut, CLinton added more priority items to push the
difference back to the amount of the tax cut. He still won't use CBO numbers.
He's playing political hardball (I'm surprised he has the backbone for it).

Clinton is the first president I know of that hasn't produced a budget
(which was due back in Febuary). His next budget will be due shortly.
Think we'll see it?  Think the press will point at Clinton for the folly?

Doug.

    
    re: .104
    
    >But no, Clinton is playing politics and shaping a 2% difference in numbers
    >to be a catastrophe with starving and sickly elderly and children.
    
    Get it right!!
    
    It's an "assault" on the sickly elderly and children.
    
    NNTTM...
    

A mean spirited, synical assault at that.

Doug.

    Glen, you are so AMAZINGLY uninformed to even ask such a question.
    
    Let me get the baby spoon. Ok, open wide. Wider. There.
    
    When the congress and the President agreed to a Continuing Resolution to
    reopen the government after the first shutdown, the sole stipulation,
    which was agreed to by both sides, was that the President would present
    a budget plan that would balance the budget in 7 years using CBO
    numbers. This gave the President about a month to do so, and for the
    congress and president to work out their differences before that CR
    expired, plunging the country into another, lesser, shutdown. The
    President squandered his month and offered a proposal that neither
    balanced the budget AT ALL nor used CBO numbers at the last minute.
    Obviously this is not an acceptable situation; the President has failed
    to deliver what he promised, moreover, he has no intentions of
    delivering such. He expected the republicans to cave into his demands
    to continue to increase spending at an unsustainable rate as the polls
    showed his demonization of the republicans and their plans to limit
    growth were effective in improving his approval rating, as his earlier
    intransigence had been rewarded. Fortunately, the polls are no longer
    supporting the President's intransigence, and this fact has been
    reflected by Mike McCurry's admission that now that the polls are
    starting to go the other way the President is becoming more willing to
    get serious about negotiating. 
    
     The negotiations which are currently in progress are NOT comparing a
    Clinton budget proposal to the existing spedning bills. They are
    talking about issues such as willingness on the part of the President
    to support a cap gains tax cut, etc. They are STILL talking in
    generalities because the President has not produced a blueprint he can
    live with that satisfies the conditions he agreed to. This is for a
    very simple reason- the President is unable (or perhaps merely
    unwilling) to make the tough choices on what things will be funded at
    what levels given expected revenues in order to balance the budget in 7
    years.
    
     Fortunately this impasse cannot go on forever, since the house
    republicans will not eliminate their only fulcrum to get the President
    to do ANYTHING by passing a CR without some movement by the White
    House. White House spokesmen claim they have done all the compromising,
    but the fact of the matter is that they haven't DONE anything at all.
    They merely agreed to do something- and promptly failed to do it. We
    are approaching two months after the President agreed to provide a
    blueprint he'd be willing to sign, after rejecting the congress' duly
    passed legislation out of hand. The continued partial shutdown is the
    responsibility of one man, one man who prefers to play golf than do his
    job.

    Not only that, he STILL doesn't have a Sturgeon General!

    re: .108
    
    Yes, but does he have a Bass-O-Matic?

What he has is an inability to tell the truth ...

    8 states have run out of money for unemployment, at least the federal
    part.  Kansas is sending out its last unemployment checks until after
    the shutdown on friday, affecting 16,000 people without any new people
    coming on board.  Mass is dipping into contingency funds to fund UE for
    another few weeks, as are 6 others.  four other states are expected to
    run out in the next week.  What they will do remains to be seen.
    
    

    Call the White House and tell them to get busy.

 re .111


 Has anybody told Clinton that?  Maybe he oughta grab that pen and get 
 to signing.




 Jim

| <<< Note 580.107 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "to infinity and beyond" >>>

| Glen, you are so AMAZINGLY uninformed to even ask such a question.

	Actually, yes, I am. :-)  It has been a while since I have watched the
news, and I rarely read this topic....seriously that is. :-)  

| Let me get the baby spoon. Ok, open wide. Wider. There.

	Spoon!!!!!  (the Tick's secret code word)

| White House spokesmen claim they have done all the compromising, but the fact 
| of the matter is that they haven't DONE anything at all. They merely agreed to
| do something- and promptly failed to do it. 

	Mark, a couple of notes back said they were using the repubs budget,
and working it to fit Clinton's. If this is true, then it would seem that he
did not submit a budget, but he has done more than agree, he had to compromise.
So which is it? Working with repubs budget, or just speculating at what a
budget might have in it?



Glen

>it would seem that he did not submit a budget, but he has done more 
    >than agree, he had to compromise.
    
     The compromise was to agree to submit a budget blueprint that would
    balance the budget in 7 years using CBO assumptions. When the
    republicans finally were able to drag something out of him, it did not
    meet the agreed to terms- it neither balanced (EVER!) nor used CBO
    numbers. It was a political ploy. Clinton banked on continual poll
    support for his finger pointing. Eventually he's going to have to get
    off his duff, unless the republicans relent and allow the government to
    operate without a budget. 
    
     If you ask me, each new CR ought to fund the government at lower
    levels. Right now they are typically funding at 75% of last year's
    budget. The problem with the current method is that all the employees
    being furloughed are going to eventually get paid for not working.
    That's a waste of money. Unfortunately, Clinton isn't giving the
    republicans many choices by refusing to participate in honest
    negotiations. They feel they have to hold his feet to the fire or else
    he'll just keep reneging on his promises.

    Mark,
    
    Too bad we couldn't take your .107 and get it published on the
    front page of every newspaper and get it on the news.  That sums
    up this entire mess in a nutshell.
    
    FWIW, people ARE being hurt by this, including federal employees.
    I know we've all had a lot of fun at federal employee's expense,
    but those folks deemed essential have been ordered into work and
    they are not getting paid.  They've been told if they fail to report
    they will be fired.
    
    Local TV channel interviewed a woman who works at the SS office here
    in Atlanta.  She appeared to be middle-aged; stated she was newly
    divorced with 3 children.  She's had to draw on savings to keep
    afloat already because her last pay check (supposed to be for 2 
    weeks) only included 1 weeks pay, but they took out 2 weeks worth
    of deductions.  She's made the decision to disconnect her home phone saying
    she's trying to determine what she can live without until this mess
    gets straightened out.  She has been given one of the letters to
    show creditors, but she says it's not getting her anywhere with her
    creditors. 
    
    She was one employee who seemed to realize that Sliq is the real
    culprit here (some folks furloughed are still picketing Newt's 
    local office).  She said she'd like to give the prez a piece of her
    mind :-)  Not a bad idea actually, she seems to have more functioning
    brain cells than Sliq does.
    
    K
    
    PS:  Notice we got our Federal income tax forms already?  Wonder
    	 how long this might hold up refunds?
    
    

    
    
    
    Meanwhile, slick is going to Bosnia to get material for his state of
    the union address.  
    
    
    

| <<< Note 580.117 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "A New Year, the SOS" >>>


| Meanwhile, slick is going to Bosnia to get material for his state of
| the union address.


	Isn't it cheaper to buy American material? 

    Who cares? The taxpayers will foot the bill. And besides, surely we can
    come up with a few tens of thousands of inexplicable expenses we can
    bilk the taxpayers for- what are they gonna do, audit us?

    
    Karen, isn't the IRS considered "essential"?

    Time, Inc.
    
    Because of the shutdown, insurance companies and other health providers
    are now financing Medicare out of their own
    funds, to an estimated tune of $28 million per week. Doctors are
    getting worried. Dr. Douglas Henley, president of the
    American Academy of Family Physicians, told the Associated Press
    Thursday that he believes the payors will keep
    covering for the government, which hasn't reimbursed them since
    December 15, for at least a few more weeks. But
    some medical providers are growing worried that insurers are running
    out of patience fronting money for the
    government, and may stop paying the bills. 
    

I *really* wish there was some way to not pay the president or
congress until this is solved, and there'll be no retroactive crap
when it's over -- the pay is gone, period.

Do your damn job or go to hell.

Sick 'n tired Pete

    
    
    Here in the DC are, certain pols have decided not to take their pay. 
    Of them, 5 are republicans and 1 is a democrat.  Of the 5 accepting
    full pay, all are democrats.
    
    
    

    
    my solution is this. Lock them all up in congress *until* a deal is
    worked out, period. Potty breaks and food allowed, but that's it.
    
    Also, to speed the process along quickly, feed them Nutria loafs, or
    Taco Bell.

    
    	RE: Mike [.123]
    
    	Sounds like the Republicans make too much money and won't miss
    	a few weeks as much as the Democrats will.
    

    >my solution is this. Lock them all up in congress *until* a deal is
    >worked out, period. Potty breaks and food allowed, but that's it.
    
     Good idea.
    
    >Also, to speed the process along quickly, feed them Nutria loafs, or
    >Taco Bell.
    
     What process are you trying to speed along, the potty breaks?

    feed them nutria loaf, or taco bell, and then lock the potty doors...
    
    

    re .110
    
    Sliq is just differently-abled, as he is verisimilitudinally
    challenged...

    .120
    
    Mark,
    
    I not surprised that folks who were responsible for getting the
    forms out to us are considered essential; I just hope the folks
    who process the refunds are considered essential also ;-}
    
    

    
    	Knowing the government, the payment office will be open while the
    	refund office is closed.
    

    The IRS will have a major layoff on April 16th.  File early if refund
    is dur.

If a refund is due, you screwed up.

You should arrange to owe them as much as you can without incurring a
penalty.  This means you want to owe as close as possible (without going
over) to 10% of your total tax.

I'll be writing a check on April 16th (we'll get an extra day again in
New England because Monday is Patriot's Day) for 9.09% of my total tax
liability.

/john

	gov reopends... next shutdown, jan 26

    > I'll be writing a check on April 16th (we'll get an extra day again in
    > New England because Monday is Patriot's Day) for 9.09% of my total tax
    > liability.
    
    Hmmm...you're a real patriot to hold back that money one extra day.
    
    ;^P
    

Is ;^P a smiley of some sort?

Pete

    
    	it's a smiley with it's tongue sticking out the side....
    
    

    
    	You mean
    
    
    	its tongue
    
    
    	I guess ... right?
    

    No, he meant "it is tongue".

    
    	I believe the apostrophe is appropriate since I'm showing ownership
    of the tongue. I could be wrong....my mother would be ashamed. She was
    an english teacher.
    
    
    

    So English really is your mother's tongue?

    .139
    
    Would you say that it was hi's tongue?  Or that the tongue is your's? 
    No.  Commit the following rule to memory:
    
    Pronouns NEVER NEVER NEVER have apostrophes in the possessive.  If a
    pronoun contains an apostrophe, it is a contraction, not a possessive. 
    
    And don't get clever and say something like if you and I both have
    fancy cars yours'll go faster.  That's a contraction of yours and will.

    
    	I was just going to say, "Steve, you're wrong", but Binder did it
    	ALOT betterer than I wa's going to.
    

    I sawer that.
    
    A LOT

    
    
    It's a good thing Dick speaks gooder English than all of use put
    together...
    

>    In the mean time, I am glad I am not [...] in need of WIC, 
>    foodstamps, or many other programs.

By all means. Perish the thought that a few folks on the dole should
use this as an opportunity to learn that they can get by on their own
for a change.

    You mean people can make their own foodstamps?

    Jack, are you promoting fraud?

    Our church opened its food pantry and we had 27 people come and get
    some.  No committments on their part, no preaching, just a Your Welcome
    and Come back to see us someday...charity at its finest.

    agreed.

    
    "you're welcome"
    
    
    

    
     So since the Government is/was shutdown for X days last year(and this
    year) why should I/We pay Fed taxes for this time period. Besides
    the fact that the IRS will shoot me and my family on my own property
    while I'm unarmed and sleeping.
    
     Really I mean if I don't go to work I don't get paid. If the 
    Electric Co. does not supply me with electricity I don't pay.
    So why should I pay for something I'm not getting?
    
     Hey will you write me in jail :-)
    
     Hack

    Re: .151
    
    The answer is simple. The government has the guns and the forced backed
    bureaucracy to force you to pay. Why, because the service received for
    your dollar is so pathetic that you wouldn't pay voluntarily.
    Therefore, force is needed. 
    
    I may not have to write to you while you're in jail. We will probably
    be able to speak to each other on a daily basis, along with eating,
    working and taking showers.  :) 

    
    
     So am I the only poor fool that has thought about this......
    
    
     Fair is fair.
    
     Forget the shower I'll stay dirty.
    
     Hack

re .151:

So what government services that you normally receive did you not get during
the shutdowns?  If the electric company doesn't provide power to big commercial
customers, do you think that you, a residential customer whose power wasn't
cut off, are entitled to a refund?

    
    	Gerald, if we haven't noticed any change in federal accomplish-
    	ments since the day of the shutdown, then you're saying that all
    	the employees who were sent home are basically excess baggage?
    
    	So why aren't they all let go?
    

    re: .155
    
    Shawn,  I made a similar comment during the first shutdown and was made
    to realize that almost any part of the government can be shut down for
    a brief period of time and cause very little long term problems.  It's
    like having your heart stop.  As long as it starts again before your
    brain suffers from a lack of oxygen, you are unlikely to have any
    negative long-term problems.
    
    My passport doesn't expire for another 7 years.  Should the government
    be shut down while it's being renewed so that I can go on a business
    trip for Digital, it would cause a problem for me.  If I'm renewing it
    simply to ensure I have a valid passport for possible travel at some
    unknow future date, the shutdown is unlikely to cause me any problems.
    
    Bob

About the only Federal government service that I directly receive is the
Postal Service, and that wasn't shut down.  I was asking Hack what services
he missed.  I didn't miss any.  A friend who needed a passport obviously
did miss a government service.

    
    Well this is a subject for another note...... Honestly I did not
    miss any services. I feel that a very large amount of the Government
    could be shutdown for good.
    
    It doesn't matter if I missed the service or not. I pay taxes for 
    services. If they don't provide them then I feel I don't have to pay.
    
    BTW... I would VERY gladly donate the money received to good cause.
    Its not about money, its about taxpayers paying for government that
    was not available for an amount of time.
    
    
    Thanks for listening
    
    Keith(real name) Cell 17652 Second tier :-) 

    Sure,
    
    Ask the people who couldn't get their SS aplications processed, the
    tourist industries near national parks or monuments, howefver, you
    could fly cheaper during the shutdown as the excise tax for airfare was
    one of the things not being renewed or processed.  
    
    Ask the people who live downstream from any of the 16 Superfund sites
    in Colorado.  We won't see all the results of this until the mountains
    start thawing, but if you are an angler, drink water that hasn't been
    filtered to remove the cadmium and other heavy metals, or photographer,
    or eat vegetables grown in some valleys you may well be impacted by
    this this spring.  (Several feet of snow fell in some of the SF areas
    which drain into several major rivers in the state during the shutdown
    and there was no one to keep the pumps and other mitigation thingies
    working.)
    
    meg

    
    
    
    Hopefully, the dems and repubs in the house and senate can get together
    and pass something that will withstand a veto.  This will show slick
    (I'm gonna punch you in the nose) willie that he is indeed irrelevant.
    
    

RE: 580.160 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "A New Year, the SOS"

> the dems and repubs in the house and senate can get together and pass 
> something that will withstand a veto.

This would require that the House freshmen learn some new words.  "Listen", 
"think" and "compromise" for starters.  Do you really think they are up to
it?

As for President Clinton,  it looks likely that he will be re-elected.  The
whining for the next five years is going to be amusing.


Phil

    
    
    
    Gee Phil, you one of them TV fortune tellers?  Election is a long way
    off.  I'd bet you a cup of coffee that he will be going back to
    Arkansas next January.
    
    
    Mike

RE: 580.162 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "A New Year, the SOS"

A cup of coffee?  Sure.  


Phil

    
    
    Well, I am a risktaker, Phil. :')
    
    
    
    

>As for President Clinton,  it looks likely that he will be re-elected.  The
>whining for the next five years is going to be amusing.

 While he has a great deal of money to run an effective campain, I doubt folks
 will fall for the same tricks twice.

 He hasn't a prayer of being elected with all the ammo he has given the 
 opposition in his first two years.

 Doug.

RE: 580.165 by BRITE::FYFE "Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do with

> {Mr Clinton} hasn't a prayer of being elected ...

Anyone running against Clinton is going to look like a lot like Rush 
{The National Bucket of Lard} and/or Newt (who is going to shut down the 
government _again_ until he gets better reservations on Air Force One).

You may love these people,  but the voters mostly don't.


Phil

    > He hasn't a prayer of being elected
    
     I wish that were true. It's not.
    
     Item: the republicans lack a strong candidate
    
     Item: the republicans have utterly failed to win the publicity war
    with the administration & democrats as to why a balanced budget is
    important. The republicans haven't effectively countered the politics
    of fear.
    
     Item: the american public looks for the easy way out. Clinton's going
    to promise no pain.
    
     Item: the democrats aren't going to stay home this election.
    
     It can go either way. Short of something really, really damaging
    coming out of one of various investigations into past shenanigans on
    the part of the first couple, Clinton stands an excellent chance of
    being reelected.

  >   Item: the republicans lack a strong candidate

   This is unfortunately true.

  >     Item: the republicans have utterly failed to win the publicity war
  >  with the administration & democrats as to why a balanced budget is
  >  important. The republicans haven't effectively countered the politics
  >  of fear.
   
  Yup. But they haven't been trying very hard either. I beleive this will change
  once they start actually running the race.

  >     Item: the american public looks for the easy way out. Clinton's going
  >  to promise no pain.
 
  I'm hopeful that this is changing, as evidenced by the 1994 elections.

  >   Item: the democrats aren't going to stay home this election.

  I know of many people that voted for Clinton that have vowed not to make
  that same mistake twice. Also, even the libs in the media are starting
  to put the light on Clintons lackluster performance.

  Item: Clinton was a relative unknown during the last election. This election,
  he has two years of poor leadership with control of congress. His actions
  will speak louder than his words this time around. 

  Item: Promises unkept, inability to lead. His inability to deal
  with a Repub majority who is actively trying to solve the problems which
  haven't been dealth with for 15 years under dem control will further hurt him.
  Once his retoric has been fully exposed (it's starting to happen now) he
  will loose more support.
  
  Item: The repubs haven't started the campain yet, but they have lots of
  ammunition. For every volly Clinton can throw, the repubs can counter strongly.
  They will lose if they fail to do this.

  Item: The south, and many other states have moved considerably to the 
  right. The same issues that propelled the 1994 elections are still valid. 

  Item: The current rif between this admin and the dems in congress. They
  don't care for each other, and this will come to haunt Clinton.

  The future looks brite :-)

   Doug.

RE: 580.167 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "memory canyon"

Item:  The Republicans in Congress have failed to set a reasonable set of 
       priorities.


Phil

    
    
    <-------
    
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!
    
    
    Boy!!! Two good laughs in one day!!! Thanks Phil!!
    
    

>Item:  The Republicans in Congress have failed to set a reasonable set of 
>       priorities.
    
    Yet it's the most reasonable set of priorities coming out of congress
    in years.

    .171
    
    > Yet it's the most reasonable set of priorities coming out of congress
    > in years.
    
    Wrong choice of words.  Try "least unreasonable."  NNTTM.

    If it makes you feel better, I'll go along with that. Either way, it
    amounts to the same thing.

    
    re: .172
    
    
    Which is not a "compromise"?? (and what Phil is looking for?)
    

    .173
    
    > Either way, it
    > amounts to the same thing.
    
    Not at all.  Analogy:  Poisoning oneself with cigarettes is not
    reasonable at any time, but doing it with Merit is putatively less
    unreasonable than doing it with Lucky Strike due to the former's lower
    concentration of poison.

RE: 580.168 by BRITE::FYFE "Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without." >>>

>  Item: Clinton was a relative unknown during the last election. This election,
>  he has two years of poor leadership with control of congress. His actions
>  will speak louder than his words this time around. 

Congress's pathetic activities make him look good.


> Item: Promises unkept, inability to lead. 

Sounds just like Newt's Congress.


> The future looks brite :-)

If so,  I gotta wear shades.


Phil

    
    	Binder, "reasonable" is a relative term.
    
    	So to say "most reasonable" is correct in that it's very reason-
    	able when compared to other acts.
    
    	160 pounds isn't heavy if the object is a car, but it is if the
    	object is a newborn baby.
    

	Not that I've even read most of this string...... but it looked
	like it belonged here.   Sorry if it's a repeat.


From a friend on the 'net:



Subject: The Ten Most Dimwitted Members of Congress

----- Begin forwarded message -----

BY  KEN SILVERSTEIN  (As published in The Progressive)

H.L. Mencken once wrote that since elections produced such dreadful results,
citizens should stop wasting their time voting and simply pick their
representatives at random from the phone book.  Mencken's barb has even more
sting these days since the quality of political leadership seems to have
dropped precipitously, as a few random hours watching C-Span quickly
reveals.

     Identifying the ten most dimwitted members of Congress was a difficult
task.  To do so, I canvassed several dozen sources-- liberal and
conservative, Democrat and Republican-- on Capitol Hill. Seven freshmen and
one sophomore won a place on the list. Thanks to the sheer brute stupidity
of these newcomers, world-class contenders like New York Senator Alfonse
D'Amato and California Representative Bob Dornan didn't even come close to
making the final cut.

     Before turning to the roll call, a few caveats.

     First, I intended to create a bipartisan list, but was unable to come
up with any suitable Democratic candidates. This in no way reflects the high
intellectual caliber of the party, which has its fair share of nitwits.
However, I found that while Democrats were eager to point to Republicans,
the opposite was not the case: Republicans fingered their own.  "That's the
luxury you have when you're in the majority," one Democratic staffer
complained bitterly.

     Second, while most of the members here come from the GOP's right wing,
it would be a mistake to conclude, as many liberals do, that conservatives
are generally dumb: Newt Gingrich and Jesse Helms are anything but stupid.

     Finally, while the distinguished members of the list may enrich the
nation's political folklore, their foolishness is dangerous.

     That said, the winners are:


No. 10 - Representative Martin Hoke - Ohio (first elected in 1992)

     Hoke, a millionaire businessman, was a political unknown when he
defeated Representative Mary Rose Oakar in 1992.  He's accomplished
little in Washington and would likely still be unknown if it weren't for
his frequent blunders.

     After President Clinton's 1994 State of the Union address, Hoke and a
Democratic colleague, Eric Fingerhut, were asked for comment by a local
network affiliate.  The pair was wired up by producer Lisa Dwyer.  As she
walked away, Hoke-- unaware that his observations were being recorded by an
open microphone-- exclaimed in a mock accent, "She has the beeeeeg breasts."
The day after this slip, Hoke expressed a certain relief when an escaped
Ohio convict went on a murder spree, suggesting to a reporter that the
killings might knock his remark about Dwyer off the front pages of local
newspapers.

     This was not Hoke's only slip in the area of gender politics.
Interviewed by The New York Times's Maureen Dowd about the life of the
single man on Capitol Hill, Hoke, a divorcee, replied, "I could date Maria
Cantwell or Blanche Lambert- they're hot."  Cantwell and Lambert, fellow
members of Congress, were not amused.

     Hoke fervently attacks "big government," but sometimes seems unfamiliar
with his target.  In 1992, he was demanding urgent reform at the Federal
Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, an agency abolished three years
earlier.

     When Hoke defeated Oakar he had the band at his victory party play,
"Ding Dong, the Witch Is Dead."  Commenting on Hoke's D.C. exploits, Oakar
has suggested that the Congressman should change the tune to another song
from The Wizard of Oz: "If I Only Had a Brain."


No. 9 - Representative Don Young - Alaska (1973)

     The new head of the House Resources Committee, Young is best known for
his rabid attacks on ecologists.  Animal-rights advocate Mary Tyler Moore
once read a poem about the cruelty of steel-jaw leg-hold traps before the
Merchant Marine subcommittee, where Young previously served.  Accompanying
Moore was Cleveland Amory, who periodically inserted a pencil in a trap,
causing it to snap shut.

     The moment was highly charged and Young, as a hunter and trapper,
realized dramatic action was required to turn the tide.  His solution
was to place his hand into a trap he had brought along to the hearing, and
then begin to calmly question a witness as though nothing unusual had
happened.  "I never told a anyone, but it hurt like hell," Young later
confided to a Congressional staffer.

     Young also made use of a visual aid at a 1994 hearing.  Young waved an
18-inch oosik-- the penis bone of the walrus-- at Mollie Beattie, director
of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  Beattie had suggested that Alaskan
Natives should be able to sell oosiks only as handicrafts, not uncarved, a
proposal Young derided.  The incident was especially embarrassing because
Beattie is the first woman to head the Service, and the hearing marked her
debut on the Hill.

     Earlier this year, a group of students in Fairbanks invited the Alaskan
wild man to speak about the GOP's "Contract with America."  Young expounded
on a number of his favorite topics, including the need to slash federal
funding of the arts.  The government, Young said, has funded "photographs
of people doing offensive things" and "things that are absolutely
ridiculous."  One student asked Young what sort of things he had in mind.
"Buttfucking," the Congressman replied (a reference to a 1990 exhibit of
Robert Mapplethorpe photographs in Cincinnati supported by the National
Endowment for the Arts).  Young defended his remarks, saying he was merely
"trying to educate" the inquisitive youngsters.


No. 8 - Representative Sonny Bono - California (1994)

     Sonny Bono, the new Representative of California's forty-fourth
district, is best known in his post-Cher incarnation for his four guest
appearances on Love Boat.  He didn't enter politics because of any keen
desire to better the world.  He was simply mad about how long it took to
get a permit to open a restaurant in Palm Springs.

     Bono's mental shortcomings have long made him a subject of scorn among
California politicians.  During his run for Congress last year, Palm Desert
councilman Walt Snyder called Bono a "laughingstock," and Representative Al
McCandless charged that he took "pride in not having studied [the] issues
until just a few months ago."  Snyder and McCandless, incidentally, are both
Republicans, and they both supported Bono in his race against Democrat Steve
Clute.

     Bono served as mayor of Palm Springs between 1988 and 1992.  His
public-relations director, Marilyn Baker, later revealed to the Los Angeles
Times that she had to rewrite the mayor's agendas into script form so Bono
could conduct official business. "For call to order, I wrote,  'Sit.'  For
salute the flag, I wrote, 'Stand up, face flag, mouth words.'  For roll
call, I wrote, 'When you hear your name, say yes,"' recalled Baker, who quit
after three depressing months of service.

     Bono's current legislative director, Curt Hollman, is charged with the
Herculean task of summarizing complex issues in short, simple memos that
Bono can comprehend.  Unfortunately, Hollman can't watch during all of his
assignments.  At one Judiciary Committee hearing, Bono complained, "Boy,
it's been flying in this room like I can't believe today.  We have a very
simple and concise bill here, and I think it would be to everyone's pleasure
if we would just pass this thing."  This prompted New York's Charles E.
Schumer to dryly reply, "We're making laws here, not sausages."

     On another occasion, Bono complained that his colleagues were becoming
needlessly bogged down in "technical" matters and legalese.  This about the
Judiciary Committee, which writes laws and deals with trifling matters such
as constitutional protections.


No. 7 - Representative Jack Metcalf - Washington (1994)

     Metcalf describes himself as "a guy willing to take some kamikaze
runs," a statement reflected in some of his policy stances.  He has
advocated, for example, a return to the gold standard and the abolition of
paper money.  Even The Wall Street Journal once mocked Metcalf for keeping
company with "gold bugs, tax protesters, and conspiracy theorists," and
noted with concern that he had secretly buried in the woods thousands of
dollars in silver coins in expectation that "a cataclysm of some sort [will]
engulf the nation."

     Metcalf frequently adopts positions that don't square with his actions.
He is an ardent champion of term limits, yet he has served for twenty-four
years in the Washington state legislature.  During the 1994 campaign, he
pounded his Democratic opponent, Harriet Spanel, with charges that she
opposed the death penalty and was generally indulgent of the criminal
element.  Then, during the final days of the race, the Metcalf camp covertly
contracted prisoners at the Washington State Reformatory to conduct its
telemarketing operation.

     The sixty-seven-year-old Metcalf is an old-fashioned sort, as seen in
his views on curbing teen pregnancies.  As he told interviewers from
Republican Beat-- a fictitious youth magazine dreamed up by Spy-- people
under sixteen "need to be closely chaperoned by their parents.  They won't
like that, but what causes teenage pregnancies all over that we're worried
about is unchaperoned kids. Period."

     Despite his lack of brain power, the courtly Metcalf is popular in
Congress, where he is seen as a well-meaning simpleton.  "Jack wants to do
the right thing," says one House staffer.  "He just doesn't have a clue as
to what the right thing is."


No. 6 - Representative J.D. Hayworth - Arizona (1994)

     A former TV sportscaster and football player, Hayworth, like Gerald
Ford, appears to have forgotten his helmet one too many times.  At a
recent convention of People for the West!, a group linked to the Wise Use
movement, Hayworth said that logging was a particularly beneficial activity
because forests are a fire hazard.

     Hayworth's entire political philosophy can be boiled down to "Big
government, bad; less government, good."  The Arizona Republic has said that
"substance has never been a strong suit of Hayworth's (even by sportscasting
standards)," and that he even has "to read his cliches from a script."

     Hayworth's major activity since coming to Washington-- and one that
invariably sets off waves of anguished head-slapping on the floor-- is his
daily one-minute statement.  His attempts at humor elicit groans, as when
he suggested to the opposition party that it "lure Freddy Krueger as the
new liberal Democrat spokesman" and "set up a new political-action
committee, the 'Whine Producers.' "

     Though decidedly dumb, Hayworth is also smooth and relentless.  "You
can't have a real debate with Hayworth," says one Democratic staffer.  "He
talks as passionately about his need to take a No. 1 as he does about the
need to cut government spending."


No. 5 - Representative John Hostettler - Indiana (1994)

     Hostettler's dumb roots run deep.  He's an enthusiast of Dan "Potatoe"
Quayle, who campaigned on Hostettler's behalf.  And he has Quayle's penchant
for putting his foot in his mouth.

     In opposing gun control to a group of high-school students, he
suggested that the Second Amendment allowed for the private ownership of
nuclear weapons as well as handguns.  He alienated Jewish voters when, at
a candidates' forum he made reference to the people "who killed Jesus
Christ."

     Hostettler sometimes cites historical precedent in pushing the Contract
with America, though his grasp of the subject is shaky at best.  He blithely
supported slashing government spending, including deep cuts in social
programs, saying in a speech on the House floor on March 16 that "American
society can and will take better care of its needy without the interference
of the federal government."  To back this assertion, he referred to the
progressive era, when "local charitable agencies" looked after the poor.

     (Never mind progressive-era books, like Lincoln Steffens's The Shame
of the Cities and Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, that detailed the urban
misery that private charities failed to dent.)  "The signature notion of
the progressive era was the demand for government regulation to ameliorate
society's injustices," says Josh Brown, a historian and media director of
Hunter College's American Society History Project, "Hostettler's got his
history all wrong."


No. 4 - Representative Frank Cremeans - Ohio (1994)

     "The Greeks and the Romans were homosexuals.  Their civilizations did
not stand.  Did they come in contact with a social disease like AIDS? I
don't know the answer.  But I wonder."  This was Frank Cremeans pondering
the enigmas of history during the 1994 campaign against Democrat Ted
Strickland.  Comments like this prompted the Dayton Daily News to call
Cremeans "a bad joke" whose election would constitute "a mockery of
democracy."

     Cremeans has continued to make bizarre statements since taking up
residence in the Capitol.  He once declared his opposition to sex before
marriage, saying that "marriage is a very sanctimonious commitment."  In an
interview with a radio station in Marietta, Ohio, during which he discussed
Congress's first 100 days under Newt Gingrich, Cremeans excitedly declared
to the show's host, "Just think about it, Mike, we're advancing backwards!"

     Cremeans might have ranked lower here but, unlike some of his
competitors, he is smart enough to know he's dumb.  He wisely refuses
to answer any substantive questions from the press or public, referring all
such inquiries to his chief of staff, Barry Bennett, a prominent Ohio
Republican who is viewed in Washington as Cremeans's babysitter-- "His
handlers can tell him anything and he'll simply repeat it over and over,"
says one committee staffer familiar with Cremeans.  "He takes direction well
but when he tries to think on his feet he quickly gets into trouble."


No. 3 - Senator Larry Pressler - South Dakota (1978)

	Most recently noted for his attacks on public broadcasting,
Pressler, the only Senator to make the list, is considered to be a
hopeless nitwit by virtually all of his colleagues.  Ted Kennedy once asked
a former Senatorial colleague of Pressler, "Has he had a lobotomy?"  South
Dakota's other senator, Thomas Daschle, said of Pressler, "A Senate seat is
a terrible thing to waste."

     Pressler has had repeated difficulties with closets.  On one occasion
he fell asleep in one and arrived late to an important hearing.  In
another incident he rose from a meeting with colleagues in the Commerce
Committee and mistook a closet door for the exit.  He realized his mistake
but apparently thought the best strategy would be to wait to emerge until
everyone else left the room, a tactic that failed when his companions
decided to wait him out.

     Pressler has sponsored virtually no important legislation during his
two decades in Washington, a fact he seeks to obscure by issuing
frequent press releases touting his meager achievements.  One example: "New
York Times Carries Pressler Drought Letter."

     Parliamentary procedure has never been one of Pressler's strong points.
During the recent mark-up of the Omnibus Telecommunications Bill, lobbyists
assisting the proceedings on TV from a Commerce Committee anteroom roared
with laughter as Chairman Pressler mangled the hearings.  To keep him from
participating in committee affairs, Republican staffers distract Pressler
with a constant stream of unimportant memos.


No. 2 - Representative Helen Chenoweth - Idaho (1994)

     Chenoweth-- an ultraconservative who prefers to be called Congressman--
is a close political and philosophical ally of the loonier sectors of the
militia movement.  Earlier this year she claimed that federal agents
enforcing the Endangered Species Act were landing black helicopters on
ranchers' properties in western states.

     On the campaign trail last year, Chenoweth held fundraisers where she
sold baked Sockeye Salmon, an endangered species.  Asked if she believed
the Sockeye were truly threatened, she said, "How can I, when you can go in
and you can buy a can of salmon off the shelf in Albertson's?"  According
to Chenoweth, "It's the white Anglo-Saxon male that's endangered today."

     To one group of scientists who testified before the resources
committee, Chenoweth said, "I want to thank you for all being here and
I condemn the panel."  At a field hearing on the Endangered Species Act in
New Bern, North Carolina, she apologized to a witness, saying, "I didn't
understand everything you said.  You all talk so funny down here."  On the
House floor, she once protested, "Excuse me, but can someone please explain
what an ecosystem is?"

     Chenoweth blindly attacks any proposal emanating from the White House.
She once arrived badly late to an energy subcommittee hearing, and quickly
began attacking Administration officials who were testifying about a
proposed bill that she opposed.  The acting chair, John Doolittle of
California, finally cut Chenoweth off to inform her that the officials
shared her position.


No. 1 - Representative Jon Christensen - Nebraska (1994)

     Unquestionably the dumbest man to serve in the 104th Congress,
Christensen rails against the "liberal elite," who he claims is out of
touch with the daily struggles of common folk.  Christensen himself has no
achievements to speak of, and, prior to his election, lived off the interest
income of his wife, Meredith, who springs from a rich Texas clan.

     After graduating from law school, Christensen twice failed the Nebraska
bar exam, finally squeaking through on his third attempt.  No law firm would
hire him (except for clerking duties), so Christensen was forced to sell
insurance.  He supplemented his income by peddling lawn fertilizer out of
his garage.  In a brazen display of resume inflation, Christensen now
describes his past positions as "Insurance Marketing Director" and
"Fertilizer Holding Company Executive."

     During the 1994 campaign, Christensen held a question-and-answer
session at Omaha's Westside High School.  Apparently fearful that their man
would wither under pressure, Christensen's aides prepared questions in
advance and handed them out to students who were volunteers for his
campaign, telling them to clutch their pens in their  hand so the candidate
would know who to call on.  Other students learned of the fix, and foiled
Christensen's plot by holding pens in their hands when asking questions.
"If he can't stand up to a roomful of seventeen-year-olds, how is he going
to stand up to the U.S. Congress?" Westside senior Joey Hornstein asked the
local press.

     During a radio interview in Nebraska, Christensen vigorously attacked
welfare recipients, saying he favored cutting all government "hand-outs and
subsidies" to "eliminate people's reliance on government."  When the host
pointed out that Christensen had outstanding student loans of between
$30,000 and $100,000, the Congressman feebly replied, "Well, I wouldn't have
been able to go to school if I didn't have a student loan."

     In another staggering display of imbecility, Christensen once called
a press conference to announce his personal deficit-reduction plan, which
called for cuts in government spending of $1.5 trillion.  When informed by
a reporter that $1.5 trillion was the entire budget, a bewildered
Christensen hastily changed topics.

----- End forwarded message -----

    .177
    
    > "reasonable" is a relative term.
    
    Yes, that's true.  But it means something about doing things that make
    sense.  Not *this* Congress.  They're just doing/proposing fewer things
    that don't make sense.

    
    	What they're doing is quite a bit more reasonable than, say,
    	nuking NYC [arguably, but anyways] or throwing unwanted babies
    	into Boston Harbor, wouldn't you say?
    

RE: 580.171 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "memory canyon"

> Yet it's the most reasonable set of priorities coming out of congress
> in years.

Yea,  so?

RE: 580.180 by BUSY::SLABOUNTY "Don't like my p_n? 1-800-328-7448" 

> What they're doing is quite a bit more reasonable than, say, nuking 
> NYC [arguably, but anyways] or throwing unwanted babies into Boston 
> Harbor, wouldn't you say?

Yea,  so?

>     First, I intended to create a bipartisan list, but was unable to come
>up with any suitable Democratic candidates.

 Ya Right. I guess he never heard that democrat talking about the slave trade
 and traders throwing 6 million slaves off the boats which changed the
 feeding habits of sharks in the Atlantic that has lasted to this day ...

 

    
    	Well, Phil, either you missed about 10-15 replies or you haven't
    	yet imbibed your reading comprehension pills today.
    

 > Congress's pathetic activities make him look good.

 Lets see. Mandatory spending is currently about 1/2 the budget. Discretionary
 Spending is about 1/3, and the rest is interest. Mandatory spending is based
 on law, spending levels based on formula which goes uncheck by congress, and
 has resulted in the fastest growing and least economically contributory portion
 of the budget. Projects show it eating up the remaining budget in just 
 over 5 years.

 Congress wants to remove the absoluteness of this spending and bring it under
 control while Clinton wnats to leave the JATO strapped on but put lower octane
 fuel in it.

 And Phil wants to see a compromise ....

 Well Phil, Nothing the congress has done is nearly as pathetic as most of
 this presidents actions over the last three years (and that doesn't include
 his wife either!).

 At least THIS congress understands the problem and is willing to do 
 something about it. I just hope they have the nads to follow through ...


 Doug.

    .180
    
    You wanna have another go at subtle semiotics, Shawn?  :-)

    
    	Let me look up "semiotics" and get back to you, Binder. If it's
    	something illegal or immoral I'm afraid I'll have to pass.
    

	How would Vanilla Ice handle the shut-down? 

RE: 580.185 by BRITE::FYFE "Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do with

> Congress wants to remove the absoluteness of this spending and bring it
> under control while Clinton wnats to leave the JATO strapped on but put 
> lower octane fuel in it.

Newt's plan is also best described as "lower octane fuel".  I'd rather
see a plan that fixes it long term.


Phil 

RE: 580.184 by BUSY::SLABOUNTY "Don't like my p_n? 1-800-328-7448"

Or I'm just being disagreeable.

THIS IS NOT AN ARGUMENT,  I'M JUST BEING DISAGREEABLE!


PHIL

    
    	I didn't see you disagree with anything, actually.
    
    	I saw you fail to make the intended connection.
    

>Newt's plan is also best described as "lower octane fuel".  I'd rather
>see a plan that fixes it long term.
    
     I'd rather see a Maserati for $50/month. Welcome to the real world,
    Phil. By opposing steps in the right direction, you give assistance to
    those who want to continue in the wrong direction. And you refuse to
    own up to this.

>Newt's plan is also best described as "lower octane fuel".  I'd rather
>see a plan that fixes it long term.

No Phil, the plan to move the monies back to the states and remove the
formula driven controls is effectively removing the JATO. It's the
first step in slowing if not stopping the runaway train and finding
better, safer, and more productive ways of transporting the service.

However, fixing this problem long term depends on what you believe a
real fix is (sustained low growth to ellimination of the program).

Doug.

    neva stopped Phil before, why should u think it would now :0)

.166>  You may love these people,  but the voters mostly don't.

Sorry, Phil, but you're wrong. 

Now, neither you nor I can produce figures to substantiate either side of 
the matter now, but, come November, I think you'll see the error in your
thinking.

Feel free to keep this in the repository, if you will.

RE: 580.195 by MOLAR::DELBALSO "I (spade) my (dogface)"

> Now, neither you nor I can produce figures to substantiate either side of
> the matter now, but, come November, I think you'll see the error in your
> thinking.

Newt's approval rating is around 27 %.  Bob Dole is smart enough not to
stand beside him.


Phil

	Then why does Dole let Newt hang with him in the budget talks? I think
people will tie the two together....both good and bad. (depends on which side
gets their way, Clinton, Nele [Newt/Dole])

    Look back a few years and you'll see the demo leadership of both houses
    of Congress, two individuals, meeting with Bush. 
    
    What's the difference?
    
    

>    What's the difference?

    Could it be Newt's higher profile or the fact that Dole is running for
    president?

    -- Dave

    
    
    	gov't snarf
    

    I'd like to kick Newt G. upside his fat head!
    
    
    There, I feel much better now...
    8^)

> Newt's approval rating is around 27 %.

Whose poll, Phil?

RE: 580.202 by MOLAR::DELBALSO "I (spade) my (dogface)"

Reported on page 39 of that flaming leftist rag,  U.S. News and World
Report,  15-Jan-1995.


Phil

That was a freakin' year ago, Phil!

    Jack:
    
    That was such an insignificant fact Phil tried to slip by...kinda like
    it always was for Phil, anyways...
    
    
      how

RE: 580.204 by MOLAR::DELBALSO "I (spade) my (dogface)"

> That was a freakin' year ago, Phil!

Was not,  it just came in the mail...


Sorry,  try 1996.


Phil

| <<< Note 580.202 by MOLAR::DELBALSO "I (spade) my (dogface)" >>>

| Whose poll, Phil?

	Getting kind of personal, aren't you, Jack?

	NOVEMBER... Congress and President Clinton were unable to agree on a
budget, resulting in a shutdown of the federal government that caused massive,
traumatic nationwide disruption for maybe eight ordinary citizens.  The
President announced that he was sending home 800,000 "non-essential" federal
employees.  Al Gore was halfway to Tennessee before he found out that this
did not include him.