HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 00:39:57 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Serious question--honest

I am not trying to be funny or snippy here, but:

If the major problem of the world is that there are too many people on
it, and activists are dedicated to the lessening of the population,
why don't they just advocate suicide and then practice what they
preach?

Why do they want to *lessen* the population by merely *preventing*
its increase, if the problem is more urgent?  It would be much simpler
to take care of the problem we have now by mass voluntary suicide of
those convinced there are too many people in the world.

Problem is, those who advocate such philosophies always seem to think
that the world would be better off with *other* people not here; they,
apparently, are individually indispensable.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 13:12:00 EDT
From:         i'm voting for harry truman <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Responses to Brni
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

>Yeah, I will. Well, I'll enlighten SOME of you with an elucidation.
>Some of you I can't enlighten even if I try. And in any case,
>I am going to continue this thread, for my part, anyway, off line.
>Consider yourself on my mailing list. (You're in good company.)
>Jimbo also asked if I would explain what I think a right is.
>Sure, I will. I'll do that off line, too.

You know, I remember when we used to take silly threads off line, so they
wouldn't distract from the serious, intelligent threads.  Now we take the
serious, intelligent threads off line so they won't distract from the silly
threads.  How times do change.

Oh, yes - please include me on your mailing list.  Thanks!  :)

>Jamie

Gary W. Olson                "The federal government is basically one enormous,
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU  ongoing Meeting From Hell." - Dave Barry
38 days and counting down...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 13:00:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Virtual elections

Missy -- you got my vote (so far, but I'm one of those unpredictable voters).

                                        Chris Morrison
                                        CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
From: SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET (linda)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Jefferson's new party affiliation
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:45:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

>Tim, if Jefferson were alive in the 1860's, he'd be a miracle worker!

not only that, he'd be really ugly, bald (not a trace of red hair), senile,
and kinda smelly and living in arizona retirement community.

but he would never be a republican!

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 10:14:48 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: perot, perot, perot your boat; or,
              i'm voting for chauncey gar dner
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics
              <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
              29 Sep 1992 08:29:46 -0500 from <ANTHLAL%UMNACVX.B
              ITNET@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>

On Tue, 29 Sep 1992 08:29:46 -0500 <ANTHLAL%UMNACVX.BITNET@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STAT
>for those of you who care in the least, the perot toll-free number thing is
>a complete scam.  here's the rest..............ofthestory.
>you can call h.ross at 1-800-925-1300, but do not expect that you will get to

If it were really a scam, don't you think it'd be a 1-900 number, all
donations going to the Perot-stroika For Prez fund?

>                       anneliese "masonic youth rules!  what, you mean that's
>                       not their name?" l.

You've not heard of DeMolay?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 16:58:35 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Presidents

I don't ever remember seeing this on this list, but what are the
qualities that a president should have?

Evelyn Duncan
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: METZE@uimrlm.mrl.uiuc.edu (Virginia Metze)
Subject: Re:      Re: Perot--in, out, what?
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11
Organization: Ginny Metze, not speaking for anyone but myself
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 02:57:14 GMT

In <POLITICS%92093000440957@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU> CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET writes:

#         On the basis of her mind, Michael.  She is an intelligent person,
# she is nice and easy to talk to, and it is possible for her to have a long
# and intelligent conversation with people she doesn't agree with.  That's why
# I respect her and I would love to have a chance to take a class that she
# taught.
# 
#                                         Chris Morrison
#                                         CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet

	skipping intelligent because we haven't defined it...

		N I C E ? ? ? ?

		C O M P A S S I O N A T E ? ? ? ?

		E A S Y   T O   T A L K   T O ? ? ?

Are we talking about the same person?



===============================================================================
Ginny                                  Impeach Thomas!
metze@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu              Impeach the Rehnquist 5, 6 or 7!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Can any of you seriously say the Bill of Rights could get through Congress
today?  It wouldn't even get out of Committee."  F. Lee Bailey, 1967. 
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:39:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Virtual election comment ...

>I would offer this to the bEEr issue - all bears are of interest, and this
>candidate visited a micro-brewery in Lawrence, Kansas, just two weeks ago,

um, val,
i thought kansas was a dry state?
do they still make you put away your drink when you fly over kansas airspace?
i never could figure out what they would do to us if we kept drinking....
revenuers in helecopters come at us w/axes and shotguns?

-linda suE saboE  (wheat beer???)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 11:59:03 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      technical politics question

Hi all:

Does anyone know if James David Barber has had anything to say lately
about Presidential types?  I'm just wondering what he would consider
Bush, Clinton, and Perot to be.  As I recall, he disappointed many
by deciding that Ford was an anomaly, and that everyone since had
been an active/positive.  (Personally, I would consider Carter
to be an active/negative and Reagan a passive/positive.)  I would
peg Bush as an active/positive during campaign season and a passive/
positive the rest of the time.  Clinton is a question mark, but given
his upbringing he might well be an active/negative.  Perot, without
question, has to be a passive/negative.

Anybody know?

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:44:39 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Virtual election comment ...
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics
              <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
              2 Oct 1992 13:27:10 -0500 from <CDELL%VAX1.UMKC.ED
              U@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>

On Fri, 2 Oct 1992 13:27:10 -0500 VALENTINE M. SMITH said:
>I would offer this to the bEEr issue - all bears are of interest, and this
                                          (bear beer?)
>candidate visited a micro-brewery in Lawrence, Kansas, just two weeks ago,
>sampling the wonders of whEat bEEr. I do not indulge as much as in younger
>years, but suggest ALL bEEr is fun, in moderation, and everyone should as
>much as they'd like to have, of whatever kind. Better bEEr than cigarettes!

speaking of which (beer)...anyone going to the beer fest in CO?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: @POL
X-VMS-Cc: CDELL
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:14:26 -0500
From:         "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      Virtual election comment ...

How can a candidate for Virtual President abandon the race, and the sure
"debate" we'll have in mid-October, and expect to have a chance on Election
Day? I think Kerry ought to talk to Missy about the effect that might
have on the Kerry/Kerry ticket. I propose an e-mail "debate" - wherein we
allow either a non-candidate or the proposed logic czar to pose three
questions for all the tickets, and all seven, or nine, or ten tickets (I've
lost track due to the invisibility of most of the candidates) offer answers,
either jointly, or responses from all candidates. Lastly, I would offer a
thought. I noticed the other day a candidate for another ticket about they
being "first" at several things during this campaign. I would offer in
rebuttal that the DuNcaN/ValeNtiN ticket is here most every day, offering
solid reasonable commentary on a huge range of issues, and this ticket
demonstrates by far the best analysis of the events going on the world, \
and what could be done about and with those events, than all the other
tickets in the race combined. I urge you to recall that come debate time,
if our challenge is accepted, and on 3 November, Election Day. VMS
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 28 Sep 1992 09:57:39 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Re:Rush

Hi, Sue:
>Us?  Never.  Funny you mentioned 'moan and groan' though, because that is
>what I heard during the Democratic National Convention.  Didn't Mr. Clinton
>say that we must sacrifice and suffer?  What does he think we have been doing
>the past 2 years under that auspices of a 1990 Democratic dominated budget?

Would you care to elaborate on the "1990 Democratic dominated budget" idea?
I ask because, if Mike Kinsely is reporting chronology correctly, the 1990
budget deal got started when Bush submitted a budget whose deficit was so
big that the Gramm-Rudman (sp?) cuts would have kicked in.  From what I've
read, the Democratic congress has never passed a budget larger than those
Bush submitted (the spending may be apportioned differently, but the dollar
amounts have been pretty close).

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 25 Sep 1992 14:31:00 EDT
From:         "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.BITNET>
Subject: Re: responses to Brni

> >rest of society.  If the social climate dictates prejudice against
> >blacks and women, then the market will respond with lower wages and
> >fewer opportunities for them, because that is the sort of behavior
> >that society rewards.
>
> That's true only of the social climate among employers, but let's
> assume that they're as bigoted as the rest of us even though they have
> economic incentives not to be.  (Not all jobs involve significant
> contact with the public.)

That's one of the points I've been trying to make.  Employers are not
all that different from the rest of us.  And the employer's views are
not the only ones to consider--employees have contact with each other,
remember.  And the economic incentives are overrated, or they would have
worked much better.

> If the social climate dictates prejudice, how can the political
> climate be significantly different?  If it isn't....

You really need to be told this?  Well, in many areas the social climate
is local and the political climate is statewide or national in scope.
Then, politics is a public activity and people are reluctant to look
like bigots in public.  Business practice is much more private and so
people will be more comfortable following their old habits.  And, as
Jason Z. showed, it is easy to act as though you're prejudiced without
talking like you're prejudiced.  Just trot out some group traits and
apply them to individuals, even if they don't exhibit the traits.

Best,
Peter

> -andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: METZE@uimrlm.mrl.uiuc.edu (Virginia Metze)
Subject: Re:      Presidents
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11
Organization: Ginny Metze, not speaking for anyone but myself
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 01:49:42 GMT

In <POLITICS%92092617021504@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU> Evelyn writes:

# I don't ever remember seeing this on this list, but what are the
# qualities that a president should have?
# 
# Evelyn Duncan

	Right now, after a series of vetoes by George the First,
	I think that it is extremely important that a president
	realize he was elected PRESIDENT, not KING, and that he
	is to be a leader, who works with two co-equal branches
	of government, and that it is the basic responsibility
	of the CONGRESS not the executive branch to enact the
	will of the people.  The executive branch is supposed
	to enforce the laws, and the judicial branch is supposed
	to be an independent branch of government, not a bunch
	of political hacks.

	Now after 12 years of Reagan-Bush this seems to be
	totally forgotten.  The Judicial branch has been merged
	with the executive branch, and the Congress was never
	led, it was ignored, subverted, lied to, blackmailed,
	when it finally (far too late) chafed at being a rubber
	stamp.

	And the executive branch has not been enforcing the laws,
	they have been subverting the laws.  They have not been
	spending money given them by Congress for the proper
	purposes if they didn't agree with the law they were
	supposed to be enforcing.

	I would have thought that that was an impeachable
	offense, actually.  The president takes an oath to uphold
	the constitution.  And so does everyone else, supreme
	court justics for example.

	Well, I ramble.  But a basic understanding of our constitution
	on the part of the president would be nice.



===============================================================================
Ginny                                  Impeach Thomas!
metze@vmetze.mrl.uiuc.edu              Impeach the Rehnquist 5, 6 or 7!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Can any of you seriously say the Bill of Rights could get through Congress
today?  It wouldn't even get out of Committee."  F. Lee Bailey, 1967. 
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 4 Oct 1992 12:26:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Perot--in, out, what?

        Sorry, Ginny!  Read No Time For Sergeants.  Will Stockdale is a hick
that gets drafted into the Air Force in World War II, and comes through all
of the shit he gets into because of his underlying character.  But my favorite
is the bar scene where the people who hate him try to get him drunk and he
drinks them all under the table, then goes back to camp while they all get
arrested.

                                        Chris Morrison
                                        CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 26 Sep 1992 13:43:56 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Education and money

Kerry:

Rhodes College used to advertise its faculty salary in its annual
giving campaign.

There were different pledges that put you in a different "club".
One of the pledges "Is one book in the library".  Another "Is
the costs of extra-curricular activities for one student on a
scholarship".  You get the picture.

The pay per hour for a professor was stated at being $176.

I tried to understand how this was justified and I think the
sense came down to it being that for each class a professor
teaches there are 3 hours per week.  At Rhodes the course load
for a professor is 3 classes or 9 hours per week, with a 14 week
semester.  That makes an average salary of $44,352 per academic
year.

j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 00:45:19 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Perot--in, out, what?

Hi all:

So did anyone see Larry King Live tonight?  I thought I was going to
bust a gut (excuse the vulgarity) when Perot said Ed Rollins was never
really an important part of the campaign, anyway and no one should listen
to him.

Why are the two major parties outdoing themselves trying to look like
Perot folk?  I think one side (and I don't care which at this point)
should just say, "Look, we aren't going to court you Perot people,
because you've been duped before, and we wouldn't want you to think
we are going to lie to you, too.  You're just like all the other voters,
you know who we are and what we stand for.  You make your decision.  We're
not going to compromise our principles to win a few votes from a pathetic
megalomaniac like Perot.  You do what you want."  I think if one side
just said that, they'd get a bunch of voters from the other side who
are in the "Well, I'm voting for X but I don't really trust him" camp.

Now we get to waste almost a whole week waiting to see if the 50 True
Believers think Perot should run.  You think?  Maybe?  Yeesh.

On the other hand, I really wonder what the Texas Napolean would do if
his people ("The Owners of the Country") came out on Thursday and said,
"Y'know, Ross, we've decided we don't *want* you to be President after
all."  I mean, *after* the paramedics arrive.

Be a nice way to kick off the weekend.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: York University
            <92269.001510MMORSE@YORKVM1.BITNET>
            <Bv58pq.8E6@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 25 Sep 1992 22:20:19 EDT
From:         MMORSE@YORKVM1.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Education and money

Dear Jimbo,
  If, as you say, every education major is a complete bonehead, then
that confirms my point. Our value system inculcates us all with such
contempt for the educational system that only subrobertian mediocrities
would ever dare to enter it. Again, what kind of teaching core do you
*expect* to find in a society which says "those who can, do, those who
can't teach"? I'm treating that statement not as a rueful diagnosis of
a mysteriously appearing ailment in education, but a damning symptom
of the scurrilous anti-intellectualism which *causes* the problem
in the first place. Chowderbrained teachers? Fuckin-ay right, buddy,
that's what we WANT, cuz lurnin stinks, yaknow what I mean?
Michael
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 1992 01:18:00 EST
From:         YONI@BROWNCOG.BITNET
Subject:      Re: White House bitnet

I don't beleive there would be a White Hous bitnet address. Imagine how
many mailbombings (in data form) would occur everyday at the White House if the
Net was given the address of the White House. There mailbox would be overflowing
. But who knows, maybe the WHite House does have such a number.

Oh, another whacky idea--imagine how many hackers would try to infiltrate the
White House database if there was a telnet address. For security reasons alone,
the White House would probably not have its own address.


Lance
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 08:05:26 EDT
From:         Janet Perry <JPERRY@ERS.BITNET>
Subject:      White House bitnet?

Does anyone know if the White House has a bitnet address?  Not just
individuals who work there, but an address so that I can send a message
to the President (or at least some aide in the President's office)?
--JEP
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 29 Sep 1992 08:23:40 PDT
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@CS.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: the yellow ross of texas

>Question for andy: You often respond that you don't want money taken
>out of your pocket to pay for the "other guy" (electric rates, family
>leave). When reagan cut the tax rate on the upper income groups, wasn't
>your pocket one of the ones picked to make up the difference?

"Picked to make up the difference" implies that afterwards they were
paying less than they "should" AND that things moved in that
direction.  That's not true.  I believe in flat marginal tax rates,
I've no objection to paying my share even if that's more than I'm
paying now, so I'm not going to object to moving towards that goal.
Second, the rich are paying a greater share than they were before.

>Why do you support the S & L bailout?

I support it because I think that society should keep stupid promises
it makes even when doing so hurts society.  I think that society
shouldn't make stupid promises, and the whole S&L fiasco happened
because we did.

Does anyone want to admit that they think the US shouldn't live up to
explicit contracts it has signed?  Unless someone does, we don't have
anyone to argue the "US should violate contracts that it doesn't like"
position....  How about it Fred?  Should the US have violated the S&L
contract when it became obvious to everyone that it was a stupid deal?
Is that a general principle or is there something special about the
S&L mess?

>Also, countries
>with socialized medicine spend less per person on health care than we do.

Countries with socialized medicine also pay for different health care
than we do, so it isn't surprising that their costs are different.
We've had this discussion; the "overhead accounts for the difference"
folks have problems with counter-examples in the US that show that
overhead doesn't account for the difference.

>If we get rid of welfare and use that money for socialized medicine for
>everyone, I would think that the net result would be a savings in your
>tax bill.

And, if monkeys flew out my butt, I'd have monkeys in my office.
We're not going to get rid of welfare.

It isn't worth considering "trades" unless there's some chance that
BOTH sides can actually take place.

-andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU