Interesting People mailing list archives
definitely, let's put it in some context [ this is the last I
From: David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 07:41:18 -0500
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 23:37:09 -0500 To: farber () central cis upenn edu (David Farber) From: rjs () farnsworth mit edu (Richard Jay Solomon) Putting it in some context:
From: rick () cra org (Rick Weingarten) Subject: Re: the implications of Republican control of the Congress
The Republican Contract has to be put in some context.
Senator Gramm has said clearly, for instance, that his main target for cuts is welfare.
That's 1 percent of the annual Federal budget. A tithe is a tenth. 0.01 is smaller than 0.10. Did all the kids who had trouble with decimal points in the 3d grade go on to become lawyers?
of NIST for example. Their reactions to HPCC will, in some sense depend on
That's 0.3 percent of the annual federal budget. And, besides it's the Dems who said that Newt wants to eliminate HPCC; Newt didn't specifically target this program. When do we get some useful signal-to-noise ratios? Richard Solomon and From: clarkw () sam neosoft com (Clark R. Wilkins)
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 09:10:48 EST From: Michael Felker <mfelker () central cis upenn edu> vis a vis the Mafia, I believe it should be restated as the Republican "Contract on America". M.
It seems to me that this is at best a political cheap shot. How about some reasoning rather than an off the cuff remark? The "contract" is an agreement to bring 10 items to the house floor for a vote. It is NOT an agreement to make all ten happen. It seems reasonable to me that we see these issues get legitimate, open debate, rather than be hidden away in secret committees. Clark R. Wilkins <clarkw () sam neosoft com>
Current thread:
- definitely, let's put it in some context [ this is the last I David Farber (Nov 17)