HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM (Bob Deguc)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: HERE IT IS! (from ..YOU ARE CLUELESS.
Date: 24 Dec 1992 16:03:03 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: holein1.corp.sun.com

In article 37750@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu, pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
> In article <1ha1qtINNmn@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>, deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM (Bob De
> guc) writes:
> >In article 16291@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu, pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) wri
> tes:
> >> In article <merlyn.724871258@digibd>, merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
>  wr
> >> ites:
> >> >pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
> >> >Could it be that Clueless Boy is confusing Clinton's demonstrations against
> >> >US involvement in Viet Nam while in college in England with Clinton's touris
> t
> >> >trip to the USSR around the same time?  Naaa...
> >> >
> >>
> >>    Aw, come off it. He was demonstrating in the U.S.S.R. and it's DOCUMENTED.
> >>
> >
> >
> >I don't suppose that you would be willing to prove the above statement?  (I'd
> >like some proof, not the garbage that Rush spews out).
> 
>      As we speak, I look...
>      and what do you mean by garbage?


OK, I'll try to use words with less than three syllables.  By garbage I mean
exactly the type of slanted reporting that alot of conservatives (Rush included)
complain about.  He thinks that what Mr. Doran did was a good thing.  Geez, I
thought this kind of garbage went away when McCarthy was exposed ~40 years
ago.

	Rush engages in personal attacks on people that he doesn't agree with.
Referring to Clinton as "Komrade Clinton" and "Slick Willie" are prime examples
of the garbage of which I speak.  As a person who considers himself to be a
conservative on economic issues, I think that Rush does more harm than good
for the conservative cause.  Rush would better serve his cause by sticking
to the facts without getting into personal attacks.  It makes him look (even
more) childish.  Your milage may vary.


Still waiting for "proof",


Bob De Guc
I vote, therefore I am!!
From: patth@panix.com (Patt Bromberger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: George Bush pardons criminals
Date: 29 Dec 92 14:19:30 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <72466@cup.portal.com> L-Bueno@cup.portal.com (Louis Alberto Bueno) writes:
>kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
>>In article <cubsfan.725313723@camelot> cubsfan@camelot.bradley.edu (Michael Silverman) writes:
>> [deleted]
>>>[       ]
>  [       ]
>
>	Oh boy! Talk about an *AIRHEAD!* :-)  "Policy differences???"
>Read above again... and if you're still doubtful, some comparative reading
>won't ache you terribly.  The facts are the facts on this one, not just
>some prosecutor's opinion.  Sorry to bend your frame of reality on this
>one :-)

	Oh, I can assure you that Walsh is not

	"just some prosecutor"  :-)

	Martindale-Hubbell will tell you that he
	is a former U.S. Supreme Court Justice
	(no, no, no, don't argue - look it up!)
	who stepped down to conduct the Kefauver
	investigations.
	Presidents and government leaders around the
	world call this "Special Prosecutor" for
	advice and have done so for many, many
	years, which is the real reason he got
	appointed in the first place :-)

	We'll see who has the last laugh.

> [      ]
>
>	Walsh disputed a claim by the White House that his request for
>Bush's notes was not issued until just before Weinberger's trial, which was
>to begin early next month.
>	"Early in 1987, we sent a very comprehensive and a very specific
>request to every office involved in Iran-Contra, including the vice
>president's (Bush's) that included all handwritten notes, tape recordings
>and documents," said Mary Belcher, spokeswoman for the independent
>prosecutor. "It was one of those endless lawyer's sentences that covered
>everything."
>	"The real issue is why the notes weren't produced five years ago
>when the (Iran-Contra) congressional committees and we asked for them,"
>Belcher said.
>	The Iran-Contra affair centers around U.S. arms sales to Iran in
>exchange for the release of American hostages, with proceeds from the sales
>going to help finance rebel forces in Nicaragua.
>

	The trap was laid and the FOX finally jumped right
	into it!

>
>	BTW: I have a question fer ya, Tedz... do you *actually* believe
>Weinberger is as innocent as he claims?  If so, can you please provide
>some documented proof, such as I have for my position?  Thanks..

	Do you actually believe that no money changed hands in
	these deals, that no laws were broken?

	I wonder if Oliver North voted for George Bush ** sigh ** 

-- 
Patricia Ann Bromberger                            patth@panix.com
This quote borrowed from: Gary.Petraccaro@f12.n2610.z1.fidonet.org 
... "It matters not so much what you sing, but why..." J.S. Bach
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: "HIV-infected molest suspect outrages town"
Date: 22 Dec 92 23:36:51 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Dec20.191401.17657@udel.edu>, carroll@gloin.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes:
> In article <13669@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> ]In article <1go46oINN8n2@copland.crhc.uiuc.edu>, pgr@crhc.uiuc.edu (Paul Ryan) writes:
> ]] cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# ]] ]Rape victims had no choice, and neither do molestation victims.
# ]] ]Though I expect lots of homosexuals to argue about the latter.
# ]] 
# ]] There you go again: spreading your bullshit lies that gay men support
# ]] child molestation.
# ]
# ]Of course they don't.  They just define child molestation in peculiar
# ]ways, such that an adult manipulating a child into sex isn't 
# ]molestation.  Here's an example from recent email received from a
# ]homosexual in Britain: "I regard child molestation as being forcibly 
# ]performed by an adult!"  Therefore, if an adult manipulates an
# ]eight year old with promises of expensive gifts or candy into
# ]sexual activity, it's not "really" child molestation.
# 
# Yes, so you got a *single* example of a homosexual who defines
# molestation in an obfuscatory way. That doesn't allow you to
# conclude that the entire homosexual population feels the same.

Do you want to me to post a few dozen more examples, from other
homosexual men who share that view? 

The ENTIRE homosexual population?  I never made that claim.
Just that it's enough that NAMBLA marches in the S.F. Gay Pride
Parade, and it was a big deal when they were refused in Los
Angeles.

# || Mark Craig Carroll: <MC#     ||"We the people are getting tired of your lies
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Macroeconomics 601
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Dec19.072841.8275@netcom.com> <1h7t6uINNlel@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 20:31:50 GMT

<In article <1h7t6uINNlel@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:

<  In a previous article, ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) says:

<>
<>	The Commerce Dept. numbers show the GDP increasing
<>	by 3.4% in the 3rd quarter; July, August and September

<	The numbers are bogus.  This has been widely documented.

	Are they? The "flash" estimate in October was for
	an increase of 2.7% or so, which was widely poo-pooed
	as "cooked".

	Perhaps Horne can provide some actual documentation
	of his assertion; something other than, oh, 
	"Mother Jones" or "Spotlight" would be nice.
	The "Wall Street Journal", for example, seems
	to find these numbers credible.

<>	aren't generally regarded as the "Christmas shopping"
<>	season, y'know.
<>
<>	And unless those 43 million all had very good Ouija

<	This was apparent to *me* 30 days before the election.

<>	boards, they couldn't have known over 30 days before
<>	the elcetion *who* was going to win, right?
<>
<><  -=   What goes up, gets sucked down, as the black hole of the combined   =-
<>< -= Federal, State & Local Government AND Private Debt continues collapsing =-
<>
< >	Funny thing is, private debt is a smaller percentage

<       Home equity loans, which have DOUBLED in the past 2 years, aren't 
<       counted as debt.

	Aren't counted as debt by whom, please? Name
	one reputable economist who does not count them
	as debt?

	Heck, even the Commerce Department counts them as "debt".

<   >	of private income now than it was in 1982; what do
<   >	ordinary folks know about "living within the means"
<   >	that government doesn't?


	Anyone else care to answer the above question?

	Horne obviously cannot.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex
From: uphrrmk@Msu.oscs.montana.edu
Subject: Re: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Reply-To: uphrrmk@Msu.oscs.montana.edu
Organization: Montana State University
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:44:17 GMT

In article <168CDF2E0.PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU>, PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU writes:
>In article <13718@optilink.COM>
>manley@optilink.COM (Terry Manley) writes:
> 
>>
>>In article <168C7D5B8.PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU> PKJAMES@UKCC.UKY.EDU writes:



    T all those people who wrote me from soc.mots telling me about the
cross-posting I inadvertently did:  Thank you.  I honestly didn't realize that
it would be cross-posted, and thought the arguement was way out of it's range
myself.(I read it in alt.sex.)  I'm new to the system, and I sometimes have a
stubborn keyboard.  I deeply apologize for everyone who was upset by this, and 
there are now reminders on alt.sex to remove the cross-posting addresses from
their letters.(Many people seem to have made the same mistake I did.)  I'm
genuinley sorry.

                                 Thank you for your time and suggestions, 

                                  La Mort.

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65871 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11058 alt.rush-limbaugh:12643 alt.politics.bush:15224
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Democrat == Loony Left??? (was Re: Christiani
Date: 31 Dec 92 17:45:48 GMT
Distribution: usa, world
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

|> >You could take the entire human race and put it in the state of texas, have
|> >1/3 the state left over to grow enough food to feed the people, and still
|> >have 1/3 of the state left over for natural habitat.  The cost of moving
|> >people into outerspace is absurd, even for a handful.
|> 
I don't know who wrote this, but they must have excluded Texas from their
travels and reading.  Most of Texas is neither habitable nor capable of
supporting farming.  What is the point?  Is the objective to turn the
earth into a large sardine can for future generations?


-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65769 alt.sex:40549
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex
Subject: Re: What is Clay's real motivation?
Date: 30 Dec 92 20:37:48 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Dec29.190638.6751@hobbes.kzoo.edu>, k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) writes:
> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> >chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask) writes:
# ## ... I still
# ## fail to see why you spend so much time harrassing [homosexuals].
# #
# #Because they won't exclude child molestation advocacy groups from
# #their parades.
# 
# Clayton, was this a flip answer, or the real reason?
    
The real reason.

# Let me put a question to you, for the second time.
# 
# Assume, for the sake of argument (although it happens to be true), that
# I think sexual relations between adults and teenagers is of dubious
# morality at best.  Assume that I consider adult-child sexual
# relationships to be a very bad idea, that I consider this to be
# exploitive of the child in every case, and that it's only one notch
# below outright child molestation, in my book.  Assume that I think
# NAMBLA, or any organization that expressly promotes adult-child sexual
# relationships, to be despicable.
# 
# The question is:  does your opinion of me in any way depend upon whether
# or not I am homosexual?

No.  But unless I know that a homosexual really disapproves of child
molestation, I have to use the statistical evidence that suggests
that you don't disapprove.

# If not, I might ask why you expend so much verbiage on homosexuals,
# rather than child molesters.  There are many non-profit organizations to
# help abused children that, I'm sure, appreciate any volunteer effort
# they can get.  You've obviously spent many hours researching and
# Usenetting about homosexuals;  if you instead donated that time to such
# an organization, I'm sure the children would be helped much more.
# 
# If so, I might ask why you rationalize your prejudice against
# homosexuals by lumping them in with child molesters.

Because homosexuals on USENET insist on lumping themselves in with
child molesters, by arguing that adults screwing 8 year olds is OK.

#  Jamie McCarthy      Internet: k044477@kzoo.edu      AppleLink: j.mccarthy
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: mikeq@freddy.CNA.TEK.COM
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Welfare vs. Workfare
Date: 22 Dec 92 21:29:58 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Redmond,  OR.

>There are a lot of people making a decent living
>mooching off of the hard-working Americans, and they're likely going to want
>to eliminate anyone who tells them there is no more free pie.

Yup. Millionaire cattle ranchers, wheat ranchers, logging company owners, 
land developers, corporate CEOs...  Just to name a few.

FIRST, wean the rich off the welfare rolls, THEN work on the poor.
MUCH more efficient way to go.

Mike
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Hey, Bill, WAKE UP!!!!
Date: 21 Dec 92 18:14:25 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Wally L. Blume) writes:
|> 
|>  Here is a cute little story I heard the other day...
|> 
|> Once there was this President Elect who was faced with an economy that 
|> was taking a turn for the better. In a mad dash to try and take credit
|> for this he set up an economic summit and called economic and business
|> people from across the country to come and discuss ways to improve our
|> economy. He proclaimed that this marked a new era in politics, an era
|> of political involvement where he as the new President would listen to
|> the experts and make a carefull decision based on what was learned in 
|> these brainstorming sessions. Actually what was said in these meetings
|> really didn't matter since he had made up his mind long ago what he wanted
|> to do about the economy, as a matter of fact he, his wife and his Vice
|> President all slept through most of it. Then when this session was
|> concluded our sleepy-eyed Pres. Elect stood up and said "That's exactly
|> what I've said all along, I see no need to change my original plan"

Obviously this person has a great future as a fiction writer.  Anyone
who watched the conference knows that Clinton and Gore not only
stayed awake, but demonstrated a solid grasp of the issues discussed.
He may already have his own agenda, after all we demanded he have
one before we would vote for him, but the implied hypocracy is
unsupportable.

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Democrat == Loony Left??? (was Re: Christiani
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Distribution: usa, world
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 06:20:44 GMT

Jamie R. McCarthy (k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu) wrote:
: [It's hard to be sure, but I believe it's "mike myke schwartz"
:  (mykes@shell.portal.com) who writes:]
: 
: >You could take the entire human race and put it in the state of texas, have
: >1/3 the state left over to grow enough food to feed the people, and still
: >have 1/3 of the state left over for natural habitat.
: 
: 4.5 billion people in one-third of Texas comes out to 50,500 people per
: square mile.  By comparison, the suburbs I grew up in probably have
: under one thousand.  Detroit/Windsor has 6,700.  NYC has 11,460.  And
: Tokyo/Yokohama, one of the biggest, crowdedest, most polluted places
: you'll ever want to be in, has 23,400.
: 
: I don't think so, Mr. Schwartz.
: 
: (By the way, Hong Kong's the winner, with over five million people in
: twenty square miles.  Several Third World cities top 100,000/sq.mi. as
: well.  But 50,000/sq.mi. is the next best thing to living hell.)

Crowded it would be, but the Earth is NOT because we don't have everyone
living in Texas.  I just say that we have a long long time to go and many
many more years to go before overpopulation is a compelling reason to
colonize space.

: -- 
:  Jamie McCarthy      Internet: k044477@kzoo.edu      AppleLink: j.mccarthy
:  "A degree in Computer Science from Berkeley didn't much qualify me to uphold
:   the banner of Chaos against the forces of Order."              - R. Zelazny
From: bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: HERE IT IS! (from ..YOU ARE CLUELESS.
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:13:58 GMT
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program

>In article 16291@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu, pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
>> In article <merlyn.724871258@digibd>, merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) wr
>> ites:
>> >pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
>> >Could it be that Clueless Boy is confusing Clinton's demonstrations against
>> >US involvement in Viet Nam while in college in England with Clinton's tourist
>> >trip to the USSR around the same time?  Naaa...
>> >
>> 
>>    Aw, come off it. He was demonstrating in the U.S.S.R. and it's DOCUMENTED.
>> 

Bullshit.  You're a liar.


-- 
{{{{ bill eldridge           310-206-3960                x                }}}}
{{{{ bill@cognet.ucla.edu    310-206-3987 fax           xxx              }}}}
{{{{ ~more, ~better, ~faster [80's motto]                x              }}}}
{{{{ ~hot, ~toxic, and ~shallow [90's motto]                              }}}}
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65994 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11197 alt.rush-limbaugh:12781 alt.politics.bush:15350
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:07:30 GMT
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA

In article <1992Dec23.012346.27396@grace.boeing.com> rwojcik@atc.boeing.com writes:
}In article 1h5vnrINN9f2@CATHY.NA.CS.YALE.EDU, yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
}>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
}>...
}>>My argument is that this mission will fail and fail miserably if the
}>>US or UN does not take this course of action, a reconcilliation
}>>between the rival clan leaders seeming to be the more remote
}>>possibility.
}>
}>The goals of the mission were defined to be the protection of the relief
}>workers.  Thus the mission will succeed, in the sense that it will achieve,
}>with few casualties, the goal set out for it.
}
}Boutros Boutros-Ghali claims that he had a verbal agreement to disarm the 
}warlords, but the US insisted that the agreement not be put in writing.  He
}then claimed that the US reneged on their verbal agreement, and he is now
}insisting that they live up to it.

And I claim that you verbally agreed with me that you would kill yourself, and
insist that you live up to your agreement.

Do you see how valid a "you said" argument is?

}It is just plain stupid to pretend that we are there just to
}deliver food.

This may be part of your difficulty.  That is not, to the best of my knowledge,
the mission there.  As last I heard, we were there to protect those who are
doing so.  A different thing.

}We look like
}fools right now.  We charge in there with all our helicopters, ships, Navy
}Seals, and marines.  Very impressive.  Then we pretend that it is just a food 
}delivery.

Just for novelty sake, please refer to any military mission statement that claims this.

You may not like it, you may not even believe it, but reality is that way.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65888 misc.legal:21903
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
Subject: Re: George Bush pardons criminals
Date: 31 Dec 92 20:13:17 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:
|> Tom Mayer) writes:
|> 
|> >>Gulity or not guilty.  Once you get a jury or court to say not 
|> >>guilty you are not guilty, end of story.
|> 
|> >      Well in a technical legal sense that may be true, but if you use
|> >      the more common everyday definition (did he actually commit the 
|> >      crime or not) North is obviously guilty.
|> 
|> 	In every sense the common every day definition is irrelevent,
|> 	except for armchair discussions, editorials, and rants on usenet.
|> 
I repeat.  This thread started with my statment that he was a criminal.
Whether he has been found innocent or guilty, I stand by my analysis of
the available data.

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
From: jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr)
Subject: Re: George Bush pardons criminals
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 01:31:39 GMT

[MG> = mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)]
[ART> = art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)]

MG>   Where was North exonerated? His convictions weren't overturned because of
MG>   any flaw in the trial court's factual determinations about North's
MG>   conduct.

ART> A few months back there was an interview in the Globe with one of the
ART> North jurors.  She said she felt he was innocent on all counts but voted
ART> to convict on three of the lesser charges because, "...how could I go
ART> home and face my neighbors if I didn't convict him of something?"  Nice
ART> impartial jury there.

MG> This comment doesn't seem to have anything to do with the point I made,
MG> which was about the basis on which the appellate court overturned North's
MG> convictions.  [...]

MG> Even if your recollection of the Globe interview is correct, it is
MG> inapposite to the point being discussed here.

It is relevant if you remember the origin of the discussion.  The claim was
made that North is guilty despite the reversal of his conviction.  Supporting
argument for that position was that the reversal was due to procedural error
which is irrelevant to the matter of factual guilt.  Al Thompson brought up a
reason why the original trial should be suspect which is not based on
admissibility of otherwise valid evidence.

North writes about a similar incident in his autobiography.  I don't know if
it was the same juror.

--
    John Carr (jfc@athena.mit.edu)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65517 alt.rush-limbaugh:12385