HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gpn0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (GARY PHILIP NEWHART)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: a real question about international affairs...
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:52:17 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <POLITICS%92091408562892@OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU>, ST402711@BROWN
VM.BITNET (Tim Johnson) writes:
>
>  There was recently an event in one of the
>South African black homelands in which
>South African troops fired upon peaceful
>demonstrators, at the order of the local
>thug in charge of operations.
>
>  I have a few questions about the incident
>that I haven't been able to find answers for
>in the local news coverage of the event.
>(This is almost two weeks old now, I think,
>so the MTV generation may have put it out of
>their mind already.)
>
>  The news described "South African Troops"
>and the regional president (or whatever he
>is called) as the villians in the incident
>(and rightfully so - I don't dispute that.)
>
>  Given, however, that this was a black
>homeland, it seems likely that the head
>honcho was black - I guess I take that
>for granted, though someone who knows may
>wish to confirm this for me.
>
>  The "South African Troops" in question, though,
>were they Black or White?  The papers had no mention
>of this, and all news photographs of the events (that
>I have seen) show wounded Black demonstrators and
>no sign of the armed forces responsible.
>
>  In a situation which is as racially charged as
>that in South Africa, I would think that this would
>be very relevant information.  Does anyone with
>better news coverage know the race of the troops?
>
>                         thanks
>
>                               -Tim
>
The troops shown on CNN, the ones with the rifles firing on the demonstrators
were black.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jbm@panix.com (John Mignault)
Subject: Re: It's always the money
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 23:35:20 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <POLITICS%92090817370862@OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU> SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET writes:


> *** Resending note of 09/08/92 16:09


> How about if each taxpayer contributes 1/4 of 1 cent toward the purchase of
> Bibles for use in the public schools?

Great, as long as they also include the Tao Te Ching, the Torah, the Koran,
the Upanishads, the Bhagavad-gita, and any other scripture one can think of.

Or is it just *your* religion that gets to play? In which case, why should the
numerous Jews, Moslems, Buddhists et al. in this country subsidize the
dissemination of your scripture with their hard-earned quarter-cent?

> ---Robert

John Mignault
jbm@panix.com

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 13:12:25 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: read my lips: I have family values
              10 Sep 1992 11:02:48 EST from <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>

From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>

>> I still don't understand how the education voucher will upgrade our
>> ability to compete on a global scale. Can someone enlighten me?

> Perhaps the education voucher provides the ability for poorer families
> to attend private schools?

It was wise of you to have said "poorer" rather than "poor."

Say I am head of this poor family which can barely pay the
rent and provide food and medicine.  Say the closest decent
private school charges $3500/year.  Say, the  government
will give me $2000 voucher per year for each of my two
children.  I need an additional $3000 a year.  I don't have
that kinda money.  The vouchers are worthless to me.

In addition, if the vouchers are given to families without
regard to their financial situation, the majority of the
people who will benefit will be those who are *already*
sending their kids to private schools.  And that mostly
means upper and upper middle class families.

> MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu

--KAT
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:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 20:51:36 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: private education

Hi, MacPhil:
>>My daughter's public school has about 500 students in grades K-5.  The last
>>PTO meeting I attended had parents lined up in all the hallways because
>>they couldn't fit into the cafeteria (capacity 300+).  Parent-teacher
>
>Just out of curiosity:  what was the agenda of the meeting?  I'm sure
>an emotional issue might be capable of bring SRO crowds...

Well, they never give the agenda out in advance; *all* the PTO meetings
I've been to (and that's most of them) are packed.  Anyway, I think the
last one was a report on the income earned at the Fall Festival, the status
of the "library" book collection, and I don't remember much else.  I've
never seen/heard of an "emotional" issue at this school :)

>>conferences, generally scheduled for about 30 minutes each, routinely run
>>to an hour at at time -- and the teachers sure aren't getting paid for the
>>overtime.  The campus beautification committee will have its first work day
>
>No, they aren't, but they also have no choice about the meetings either.
>Many teachers in the public systems are subjected to parents who allow
>their children to play both teachers & parents against each other...
>"My Timmy would NEVER do that!"...

Um, what's your point?  That the teachers at my kid's school *don't* go out
of their way?  Or something else?

Kerry
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:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 14:24:06 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Andy, Leader and maybe Dave on the Environment

-andy:
>>Oh!  I get it (finally :)).  Hm.  It seems, from experience, that this
>>ownership strategy would only work if individuals own the resources -- not
>>the state (or, rather, the state or federal governments).  Also, it will
>>only work for those resources that have an immediate market value.
>
>Even if the short-term expenses exceeds the revenues.  Remember
>orchards.

What about resources whose value is currently unknown, or for which markets
haven't been developed?

>>And for some resources, at least, it will only work if people can perceive a
>>benefit that might accrue after their deaths
>
>That isn't required at all.

Huh?  Why would the average person (or business or govt) want to invest
money in something that will provide no return over their own lifetime?

>>I'm not at all convinced that most folks (or most businesses, or most
>>governments, or whatever) are really capable of planning over ecological
>>time.  I'm also concerned about resources that won't work within this model
>>.
>Hunters are; they've done it repeatedly.  How are elephants different
>from mountain sheep or other species that hunters have brought back?
>(Note that elephants are easier, because there are thriving
>populations, but there won't be if the ivory ban continues because
>those populations are held by folks who did hunter-style management
>and they can't afford to keep that up without the hunter-revenues.)

Hunters have made the market strategy work for those species that are
attractive and/or profitable to hunt.  No problem there.  What I don't see
is how this model can be extended to resources like fresh water, wetlands,
species with no current market or trophy value (liverworts, anyone?), etc.

Let me give you a couple examples, and you can tell me how we can "convert"
, OK?  I'd like to see what you think.  The three resources that come to
mind readily are (1) commercial fish (including shellfish), (2) grazing
land, and (3) timber.  Now, I'm not exactly sure who "owns" offshore
fisheries, but the BLM manages lots of grazing land and the forest service
manages forests (and the commerce dept. has something to do with fisheries,
as do lots of other agencies).  Whether the "people" own the resources or
the govt "owns" them, the government manages them (at least in part).

Now, all these resources have obvious current economic value.  All are
potentially renewable, and I don't see how we can avoid seeing that our
best long-term interest is to harvest them sustainably and maintain
whatever other conditions are necessary for their long-term survival.  And
in all three cases, we're failing.  All three are being exploited faster
than they can be replaced, such that the resource base is declining.  We're
eating the seed corn, killing the golden goose, etc.

How do we fix it?

Kerry
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, 14 Sep 1992 12:19:34 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: read my lips: I have family values

Missy J:
>The real reason people without teaching certificates aren't allowed to
>teach is that they haven't completed the requisite educational
>indoctrination courses.  And they haven't made enough bulletin boards.

Or learned how to use overhead projectors and write lesson plans :)

>There are many fine people in business, private industry, and government
>who would make excellent teachers but are not allowed to teach at the
>lower levels.  I think this is particularly stupid, since they *are*
>allowed to teach in colleges and universities, whether they have any
>degrees or not.

Hence a few programs around the country for "alternative certification".  I
don't think the verdict is all the way in, yet, but it's a neat idea.

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 22:01:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Where Carolyn left off

I think bestiality involves cruelty to animals (unless the animals like it,
but although I admit to lack of experience I doubt that they do).

Should homosexuality be considered when considering adoption cases?  I'm
not sure.  Moral considerations are a valid consideration, but does
homosexuality disqualify someone automatically, by itself?

Homosexual marriages?  I think the basic idea is to create stable,
monogamous relationships and then to recognize them.  Would the people
involved be living with members of the opposite sex if their same-sex
relationships weren't recognized, or would they have the same relationships
only in a looser form?

By the way, I recently dated a woman whose orientation was primarily
toward other women.  Our relationship was primarily that of friendship,
but I didn't see anything in her life that was so immoral.

                                       Chris Morrison
                                       CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:29:03 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

>>  The great treasures of our culture were not created with the funding
>>   of the mainstream; what makes you think the treasures of tomorrow
>>   can be?
>
>Hint: most NEA money goes to art from OTHER cultures, dead cultures.
>Look at what orchestras and operas play.

BTW - the great treasures of our culture WERE created with private
funds.

>        orchestras and operas play what they do because most of their
>        funding comes from rich white folks who want to have someone
>        keep playing mozart and tschikovski.  stravinsky is rarely
>        seen, nor is john cage.  why?  because people have a certain
>        conception of classical music that they do not like challenged,
>        and if the orchestra doesn't play hit tunes, they don't get
>        funding.

So much for the theory that the NEA helps and pushes american
cultures.  Most of the money goes to support dead european art,
because that's what rich Americans like.  Why shouldn't they pay for
it?

>The great treasures of American culture are commercial films and
>American music, not to mention rodeo, and car racing.  (The great
>american art form is monster truck racing accompanied by R&B.)
>
>        great.  _Satan's Cheerleaders_ and Boston's "more than a feeling"
>        are great treasures of american culture.  hoorah.  don't
>        forget the Care Bears cartoon and Designing Women...

brni's preferences for Boston may explain why he wants someone else to
pick his art for him.  I was thinking of Stagecoach, Manhattan, Larry
Mahan, Dale Ernhardt, John Moses Browning, etc., and I'm ignoring the
audio arts.

>NEA money goes to art that American's didn't produce and don't
>value.
>
>        i suppose that robert mapplethorpe wasn't american.  nor is
>        karen finley, or judith schechter, laurie anderson.  funny,
>        they all talks like americans...

Mapplethorpe is a bad example for NEA supporters.  His grant didn't
provide him anything but status; he'd made it by the time they got
around to noticing.

Brni insists that the NEA is important, but doesn't have any examples
where that's actually true....

>        so, your art is monster truck racing, eh?  no wonder its
>        so expensive.  i think that you would be hard pressed to
>        defend it as an art, tho.

No, my art isn't monster truck racing.  However, I can defend monster
truck racing as art on exactly the same basis that is used for any
other art form.  Feel free to provide an honest definition of art that
includes "performance art" yet excludes monster truck racing.

-andy

ps - "no wonder it's so expensive." doesn't make any sense.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 11:49:00 EDT
From:         TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Is homosexuality immoral?

Martin:  So the government should not be in the business of
stopping murder then--after all, committing murder is immoral,
and, according to you, the state shouldn't legislate morality.
The way I see it, when you live amongst a society, you are bound
by the moral rules of that society.  The only "right" I can really
say you have is the right to be a participating member of the
society that you live in.  If you don't like the moral rules of
the society that you live in, move somewhere else.
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:05:40 EDT
From:         Brandon Magee <cuz@CHAOS.CS.BRANDEIS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Nattering Nabobs
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              Stephenson" at Sep 3, 92 12:50 am

A person going by the name of Kerry Stephenson forged:

| On the Florida question:
|
| Bush sent help *as soon as* the governor of Florida *requested* it.
| He could not legally do so before then.

	As I stated in an earlier post, I don't really want to get
into this. However, Bush has the legal right to send help immediatly
in any form if he deems it necessary. The tradition is not to do so
until a request has been given. When the actually request was sent is
still in question, thus I will not say that Bush is at fault in this
situation.

--
 Cousin It                                    cuz@cs.brandeis.edu
    I have opinions of my own - strong opinions - but I don't
         always agree with them    -President George Bush
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:50:33 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Bad v. Harmful

Dave:

I don't get your point about heaven.  If you are saying that the
"box" answer is truthful, and therefore preferable, I agree.
I you are saying that the "heaven" answer is more pleasant, and
therefore preferable, I disagree.

However, a case can most certainly made for speaking in the far
future tense, in the sense that, the next place we know she's
going is heaven.  (The kid is most likely bright enough to
discern that she's in the box.  Unless you are trying to say that
kids of Christians are morons.)

So what's the point?

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:12:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      RE: not to change the subject or anything . . .

1.  Companies hire temps all the time when it's in their interests.  Doesn't
it make sense, if a company has someone who is trained and performing
satisfactorily, for them to let that person take some time off and then
come back happy than to just fire them, try to retrain a replacement, and
have morale of the other people go down?

2.  I don't just blame Bush for vetos.  If these bills are as so gd important
as the Democrats say they are, then how come they can't get their heads
together and come up with something that will get enough votes to override
a veto?  I think they are more interested in having Bush veto this thing,
and then using it to beat him over the head with.  In other words, they
don't really give a rip about the people they say they're trying to
help, either.

Chris Morrison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:21:30 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Interest Rates
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

MacPhil
>But while interest rates might help the economy, wouldn't they
>weaken the dollar on the international market even more than
>current rates?

Yes. I mean, aren't you guys at all concerned about the state of the
dollar.
>
>Mac "Sitting on a 10.5%/30-year mortgage, drooling @ the
>     Fannie Mae rates of 6.85%/15 and 7.35%/30" Phil
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill
>
>MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu

Dunstan - Just about to take on a "9.99% or base rate+1%, whichever is
the lower" mortgage.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 08:06:04 EDT
From:         jcs <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The War Between the Jasons

>                2) Men's bathrooms are not "just as good as"
>                   women's bathrooms.  Most women's bathrooms are
>                   larger and have furniture in them, sometimes even
>                   an entire outer area filled with couches and chairs
>                   in which one can rest (many here at the University).
>                   How many men's bathrooms could be used as small
>                   apartments?  (This remark void where the housing
>                   authority is on the payroll of the real estate crooks.)
>
>                                              --Missy P 2 B

First off, i wanna know what the other kerry was doing
hanging around Men's bathrooms on her campus, hmmmm?

also, according to an article i read in some liberal leaning magazine
or newspaper found at my mother's house this weekend, men have
nicer dressingrooms in Department stores. Considering that women
spend something like 10x more $$ than men do on clothing, women have
fewer sales people to help, and smaller cubicles with very harsh
lighting (and i think some of those circus mirrors that make
you look fat).  Men often have one on one sales help, and plushly
appointed rooms that are made to look like old fashioned men's club
stuff.

so, go figure.

jcs
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:12:27 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The War Between the Jasons

>From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
>
>Jamie:
>
>I will say it again.  A union between two people of the same gender
>is not now and has never been "marriage."  If you want to recognize
>such unions, go ahead.  But call them something else, and create the
>new laws regarding that union from scratch.  (Why not?  Everybody on this
>list seems to hate marriage laws anyway--why not develop something
>entirely different?)

Such a union has never been called a "marriage" I suppose. But what
you call it doesn't change the facts.

Obviously, one doesn't have to create new laws from scratch. One can
simply change the legal definition so that it includes homosexual
unions.

To refuse to do so is discriminatory, and violates equal protection.

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:05:17 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: private education
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>
              11 Sep 1992 16:44:56 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WV NET.EDU>

On Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:44:56 -0400 <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU> said:
>Robert:
>> My daughter's private *Christian* school held a little get together last
>> night for the parents and teachers/admin to get to meet each other.  This
>> year the enrollment is 715, and covers grades K-3 thru 12.  There were
>> 500 parents present!  I wonder if a public school would have gotten more
>> than a handful.
>
>My daughter's public school has about 500 students in grades K-5.  The last
>PTO meeting I attended had parents lined up in all the hallways because
>they couldn't fit into the cafeteria (capacity 300+).  Parent-teacher

Just out of curiosity:  what was the agenda of the meeting?  I'm sure
an emotional issue might be capable of bring SRO crowds...

>conferences, generally scheduled for about 30 minutes each, routinely run
>to an hour at at time -- and the teachers sure aren't getting paid for the
>overtime.  The campus beautification committee will have its first work day

No, they aren't, but they also have no choice about the meetings either.
Many teachers in the public systems are subjected to parents who allow
their children to play both teachers & parents against each other...
"My Timmy would NEVER do that!"...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:02:03 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      RE: Clinton Mailing List
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:27:00 EDT <CMORRISO@SNYESCVA> said:
>Repeat:  I want mailing nodes and list names for both campaigns so that
>I can subscribe via Bitnet.  I would like to be an informed voter.

Repeat:  Send the following command to LISTSERV:

LIST GLOBAL

you'll get back a list of all LISTSERV lists.

I'd hazard a guess that simply sending the commands
SUB BUSH-L                                       or
SUB CLINTON-L

to a LISTSERV machine will do the trick if you don't have much time.

N.B. : It's not necessary to know the site name hosting a list.  LISTSERV
will do that for you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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
Subject: (no subject given)