HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Michael F. Kamprath <kamprath@space-grant.sprl.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: And to the Republic for which it stands....
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 13:50:07 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan, Aerospace Engineering
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A701D6BBB801C4FC@sprl-mac2016.sprl.umich.edu>
X-Xxdate: Wed, 14 Oct 92 13:52:59 GMT

In article <ISBELL.92Oct14100010@panther.ai.mit.edu> Charles L Isbell, isbell@ai.mit.edu
writes:
>kamprath@space-grant.sprl.umich.edu (Michael F. Kamprath) writes:
>|>>><| This country is a _democracy_.  It is NOT a "Two Party Sytem."  DO   |
>|>>>I must disagree.  The United States of America is a republic, it is not
>|>>>a democracy.
>|>>
>|>>After several people pointing out my error in semantics, I concede defeat
>|>>and thus have fixed the problem.
>|>>
>|>>| This country is a _democracy_.  It is NOT a "Two Party Sytem."  DO   |
>|>		     ^^^^^^^^^^^
>|>This is fixed?
>
>|The change came later in the .sig . . . .
>
>|You all can continue to argue over the proper Politically Correct word to use 
>|to describe our form of government.  The meaning of my .sig is clear (IMHO),
>|and so I refuse to continue to humor you all over "proper words."
>
>Why is the use of republic over democracy "Politically Correct" as
>opposed to just accurate?  

Well, considering the fact that I did change the word "government" near the
end of my .sig to "republic" in order to show the nature of our governent,
I liken the further efforts by some to change my .sig to an oppressive 
government :-) that can not deal with unnacceptable thoughts (and word use).

I think the meaning of my .sig is clear.  Being anal retentive about the
so called "corret use of democracy" indicates to me that some people just 
can't deal with other points of view.
 
>The use of capital letters seems to
>indicate a desire to associate your detractors with the currently
>unfashionable PC movement.  Was this intentional or am I simply
>misreading you?
>
>Just curious.
>

I always capitalize Politically Correct.  If that is not correct, tough.

========================================================================
| Michael F. Kamprath                   | The University of Michigan   |
|   kamprath@space-grant.sprl.umich.edu |      Aerospace Engineering   |
|   kamprath@engin.umich.edu            |      Graduate Student        |
+---------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| This country is a _democracy_.  It is NOT a "Two Party Sytem."  DO   |
| NOT believe The Lie that not voting Republican or Democratic will    |
| waste your vote.  Vote for who ever you please, and let the          |
| politicians find out what a democratic republic is all about.        | 
========================================================================
From: so690561@mbcr.bcm.tmc.edu (Susan Elizabeth Olson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Probably the biggest FAQ
Date: 16 Oct 92 04:16:37 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: mbcr.bcm.tmc.edu

...but where can one obtain the current libertarian platform/plan
(example perot's book was posted to alt.politics.perot on 10/13/92
-articles 3353-3356 according to the newsreader here should you
wish to compare).  Since I don't want to have a huge file like
the perot plan (170K) mailed to me before I get a chance to clean
out my account, could someone please email me an anonymous FTP
site address for this info instead if one exists - I don't read
this board regularly.

Thanks
-S
From: thant@void.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Open letter to the libertarian right
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:30:36 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA


In article <7256@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM>, ssoar@tekig5.pen.tek.com writes:

[...]
> 
> Rate the following economies in order of gov intervention into 
> business (import
> restrictions, subsidization, direction a la industrial policy)
> 
> 1  US
> 2  Germany
> 3  Japan
> 
> Answer:
> 1  Japan (most intervention)
> 2  Germany
> 3  US  (least intervention)

Given that two of Japan's healthiest markets, economy cars and
consumer electronics, got going despite *opposition* from Japan's
Ministry of International Trade and Industry, it is foolish to
attribute Japan's economic success to government intervention.

Given that the U.S. Tariff Code has 8,753 different tariff rates,
it is foolish to claim off-handedly that the U.S. government 
intervenes the least in international trade.


> Next question--Rate the same economies on performance over the past 10 years
> (GDP growth, manufacturing employment, technological leadership, etc)
> 
> 1  Japan  (Most growth)
> 2  Germany
> 3  US   (Least growth)


Next question--Rate the same economies on tax burden in relation to GNP:

1 West Germany (as of 1988 38%)
2 U.S. (29%)
3 Japan (27%)

(Source: William J. Baumol and Alan S. Blinder, Economics:_Principles_
and_Policy, 4th, ed.  New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988, p. 717)


Next question--Rate the same economies in terms of capital gains tax burden:

1 United States (as of 1988, 33%)
2 West Germany (max long term rate zero; max short term rate 56%)
3 Japan (zero as of 1988 [5% as of 1990])

(Source: Wall Street Journal, March 8, 1988)


Also, the Federal Reserve's propensity to print up dollar bills is
something the U.S. economy suffers from that Japan, and especially
Germany are traditionally not as burdened with.

You might want to stop believing so much of what you see on television.

thant
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Open letter to the libertarian right
From: parvin1@husc11.harvard.edu (Douglas Parvin)
Date: 9 Oct 92 01:48:58 EDT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Atit,
I thoroughly enjoyed your post and see many of the points you've made.
Hey, maybe I'm just a bit more optimistic about civic life than you are.

I have many libertarian sympathies myself, and actually find myself somewhat
surprised that I'm being cast as the evil regulator.  I guess I was just
reacting to some of the more simplistic, idealistc claims of some posters
who trumpet the a priori superiority of the free market in all possible
respects.

Thanks for your little example.  It's clearer than mine was, and I hope it
convinces Thant that at least theoretically his beloved market can be
inefficient in certain regards.

Again, your points were amusing and well-taken.  Now, if you'll just post
in support of my position, maybe I can get you some good ol' American pork.
I am, after all, the president. ;-)

-- 
===========================================================================
Douglas Parvin
parvin1@husc.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: jbn@photon.com (Joe Naiman)
Subject: Re: Please let Marrou debate! -- and CNN's Crossfire
Organization: Photon Research Associates, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:09:58 GMT

At the risk of once again bringing up the abortion debate, the argument
against allowing Libertarians equal access is the same as allowing legal
abortion:  if it isn't viable, it has no rights.  Conversely, the
argument for allowing Libertarians equal access is the same as for a ban
on abortion:  just because it isn't as capable as others doesn't mean that
it has no rights.

Isn't it ironic that the Republicans vary from their right-to-life
philosophy in not allowing Marrou to debate?  Conversely, isn't it ironic
that the Libertarians, who want equal access, won't allow the unviable
fetus the right to life?

Joe Naiman

Xref: sparky alt.politics.libertarian:804 alt.politics.marrou:1572
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Keywords: abortion,platform
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:50:12 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1992Oct12.173807.26595@mcs.anl.gov> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:

>Cool out. Just because you don't agree with someone does not make them a
>kook.

What an Un-PC thing to say. :-)

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: adams@liszt.berkeley.edu (Adam L. Schwartz)
Subject: presidential debate commission
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:13:24 GMT


I called the Commission on Presidential Debates ( (202)-872-1020, ask for Denise).
I forgot to ask for Denise but I asked for them to invite Marrou to the Debate and,
short of that, to allow him a five minute presentation since is on the ballot in all
fifty states.

Let these people know that there are people who support Marrou.

-Adam
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: Why should I vote for Marrou?
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:45:08 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.154333.7277@board8.uucp>, skinny@board8.uucp (skinny) writes:
|> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:
|> 
|> >>My thinking is starting to turn in this direction also, after several
|> >>years of voting for the "least bad" of the demopublican (or are they
|> >>republicrats?) party's candidates.  I am even thinking that it might
|> 
|> >I prefer republicrats as it flows better.
|> 
|> >>be appropriate to vote for libertarians in those races in which they
|> >>are running, and NO ONE in the others.  I would think that this would
|> >>help indicate that the demopublican party is totally unwanted.
|> >>					- Dave
|> 
|> >Dave I would disagree with the NO ONE part. If there is no lib available
|> >I would like to be able to have a part in damage control. I look at the
|> >candidates stand on the issues. I have three major issues that concern
|> >me (along with several minor issues). If no Libertarian is available
|>                                        ------------------------------
|> >then I would look at the other choices. If they differ on an important
|> >issue then I vote for the candidate that best matches my ideals.
|> 
|> >				mike
|> 
|>  Amazing. Don't judge the candidate. First choice is ANY libertarian. 
|> Good job.  It sure beats thinking!
|> 
|> thank you.
|> 

Sorry. I didn't mean it that way at all. I weigh the candidates possitions
regardless. What I meant was that if no libertarian were available I
would still look...

Sorry for the lack of clarity!

				mike
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: jkresse@ptimtc.tadw.panasonic.com (Jim Kresse ATVL )
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: Panasonic ATVL, Burlington, NJ
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:35:53 GMT

In article <5401@sumax.seattleu.edu> laemmle@sumax.seattleu.edu (Dave Laemmle) writes:
>I thought the LP left this up to its members and did not make Abortion
>a party platform. Different Libs I know are both Pro Abortion and Anti 
>Abortion. In fact  I thought Ron Paul (pres. Candidate in 88) was anti-
>Abortion. I don't Think abortion should be part of a party platform.
> Some people site the life beginning of conception as when civil liberties
>are applicable. Thus Abortion would seriously take away a fetus's chance
>to enjoy thier civil liberties and self government. Not
> all Anti-Abortion people are religious "kooks" some people have medical
>facts and other reasons for being on the antiAbortion stance.
>Civil liberties should be given to all human life, not just viable life.
>Most pro-choice advocates have dropped the arguement of the fetus being
>alive and called it a "viable life" or a "womans choice" If it is life 
>then I would assume that it deserves teh chance to make its choices and
>enjoy its civil lberties. I would hope libertarians would not want someone
>to control their civil liberties.\
>
>dave laemmle
>   please notice that I did not cite God or any other religious being for 
>   as a possible reason for not supporting Abortion. 
>   
Thank you for this well-stated posting!

Jim Kresse
jim@atvl.panasonic.com
Standard disclaimers apply
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: erik@westworld.esd.sgi.com (Erik Fortune)
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 22:11:49 GMT


In article <1992Oct14.191808.5614@sei.cmu.edu>, ask@sei.cmu.edu writes:
> Pregnancy is totally voluntary (except in the case of rape), and carrying 
> to (near) term is ALWAYS necessary to insure the child's viability.

False.   Accidental pregnancies happen.

Your assertion that a person can be obligated to a fetus is based on your
belief and nothing else.  So is your belief that becoming pregnant implies
some such obligation to the fetus.   Your belief that something is true does
not make it so.

I am not required to act on your beliefs (something of a moot point in this
particular debate:-).   Neither is anyone else.

By the same token, you are not required to act on my (or anyone else's)
beliefs (trust me, you're glad that you don't have to act on my beliefs:-).

The difference between us is that I don't try to force you to behave the
way that I think you should.

-- Erik
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: Michael F. Kamprath <kamprath@space-grant.sprl.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Libertarians & Abortion (was: Please let Marrou debate!)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 14:04:41 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan, Aerospace Engineering
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A701DA275E02C4FC@sprl-mac2016.sprl.umich.edu>
X-Xxdate: Wed, 14 Oct 92 14:07:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.112134.26220@hemlock.cray.com> Ken Jopp, khj@cray.com writes:
>The libertarian position on abortion has to be pro-choice.
>A fetus is physically imposing itself on its "host."
>She should be under no obligation to indulge the imposition.
>
>Consider:  If my son needs a kidney transplant to live, and I 
>am the only available donor, should I be forced by law to give 
>the kidney?  
>
>So why should a woman be forced by law to give of her body 
>to sustain a fetus?
>

With out actually entering the "abortion debate," can this argument then 
be extrapolated to children who existance demands resources of the parent
to support?  

I mean, if the parent doesn't want to give the kid up for adoption, but also
does not want to feed the kid, then why should the governement care?

IMHO, this is a bad argument for abortion.  It implies that no one has 
responsibility for any of there actions.

Again, IMHO, a better argument would be that the point at which "life"
actually begins is definately a moral judgement.  A soceity's laws
that they live by should be some manifestation of the collection of morals
of the individuals in that soceity.  Therefore, a government that 
supposedly reflects the will of its people would at least define laws
that require a moral judgement according to what the majority of the people
people feel.  The last time I checked, the majority of Americans support
the "morality" of abortion.  So the government has no right imposing the
morals of the minority onto the majority.  

Of course, my whole argument rests on the assertion that "when life begins
is a moral judgement."  Also that when life does begin, "terminating" it 
is likened to murder, and before that point, "terminating" a pregnancy is
like removing an unwanted growth.

========================================================================
| Michael F. Kamprath                   | The University of Michigan   |
|   kamprath@space-grant.sprl.umich.edu |      Aerospace Engineering   |
|   kamprath@engin.umich.edu            |      Graduate Student        |
+---------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| This country is a _democracy_.  It is NOT a "Two Party Sytem."  DO   |
| NOT believe The Lie that not voting Republican or Democratic will    |
| waste your vote.  Vote for who ever you please, and let the          |
| politicians find out what a democratic republic is all about.        | 
========================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: zane@ddsw1.mcs.com (Sameer Parekh)
Subject: Re: Why should I vote for Marrou?
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 01:40:24 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL

In article <1992Oct12.183712.1806@genie.slhs.udel.edu> tom@genie.slhs.udel.edu (tom) writes:
>
>no it isn't. it is a democratically elected _republic_, at least in
>theory. when was the last time you voted for or against a federal
>law, instead of a person to do it for you?

	It's SUPPOSED to be a representative govt., but with the fact that
many people think there are no alternatives to the two parties, it isn't
representative. Personally, I think you're picking a nit, but maybe not. My
high school HONORS Government teacher says that the United States is a
democracy..
-- 
Sameer_Parekh zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM zane@infopls.chi.il.us
PFA related mail to pfa@ddsw1.MCS.COM   | Specialization is for insects
Anonymous mail to ap.2363@cupid.sai.com |   - Robert A. Heinlein
Fri Oct 16 20:15:51 1992 US Debt: $4,098,027,431,523 Per capita: $16,034
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Prominent Libertarians (was Re: An answer to one of David Sill's)
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 07:49:56 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.211032.3763@b11.b11.ingr.com> craig@jido.b11.ingr.com writes:
}In article <YAMAUCHI.92Oct13133528@sartre.ces.cwru.edu> yamauchi@ces.cwru.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes:
}   In article <1992Oct13.172855.29723@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
}   >Dave Sill asks:
}   >>Name some prominent Libertarians--CEO's, actors, writers, etc.
}
}   >Comedian Tommy Chong ... 
}   >Frank Zappa ... 
}   >Mojo Nixon, Dave Barry, ...
}Russell Means.
}Clint Eastwood has been mentioned as a small-l lib.
}
}-- cP
}

And there's also Marilyn Chambers, the porno star, Raquel Welch, Jimmy Walker,
Al Goldstein (publisher of Screw magazine), Alex Bennett (Bay Area morning
radio talk show host), and probably many others I don't know of.


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: gag65@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Sponsor of first debat - Annheuser Busch
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:06:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.010015.1316@wuecl.wustl.edu> gl1@cec2.wustl.edu (Greg Lyon) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.225642.29518@cas.org> gag65@cas.org () writes:
>>One of our Libertarian Party activists here in Ohio just confirmed that the
>>corporate sponsor for the first presidential debate in Missouri is Annheuser-
>>Busch.
>>
>>For those who suggested a possible boycott of the corporate sponsor of the
>>debates, here's a place to start.
>>
>>I'm not sure of any of their corporate phone numbers, etc, just wanted to pass
>>this along ASAP.
>>
>>--Gary
>
>  Yes and no.  August Busch, the chairman of Anheuseur-Busch is the sponsor
>of the debate, not Anheuseur-Busch, Inc.
>
>  And, before you go off flaming him or the company, please remember one thing.
>He is sponsoring the debate only to help St. Louis.  Without him, the debate
>would have been held (sans Andre Marrou) in some other city.  He was not
>involved with the decisions on who to invite, etc.
>
>  If you want to go overboard and boycott A-B products, why not boycott
>Washington Univ. as well, since we have as much to do (ie. NOTHING !) as
>A-B did in preventing, or allowing Marrou to speak on Sunday.
>
>Greg
>
>--
>*******************************************************************************
>Greg Lyon                                       Student Union Attorney General
>gl1@cec2.wustl.edu                                            Clinton/Gore '92
>Washington University in St. Louis - Site of the First 1992 Presidential Debate

While I believe that boycott is a legitimate consumer tool in a free society,
I have a tendency to agree with you that a boycott here may be a bit rash.  But I
do think it is legitimate to inform both A-B and Washington University about
Libertarian concerns. They are both in a position to _influence_ the powers that
be (albeit in a limited way), and we should make them aware of the situation.

By the way, I also heard that Miller will also be sponsoring the debates.
Beer wars, anyone?

--Gary
Xref: sparky alt.politics.libertarian:665 alt.politics.marrou:1471
From: sulkom@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Mark Sulkowski)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
Subject: Re: Why should I vote for Marrou?
Summary: A calculation
Date: 7 Oct 92 21:33:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Oct7.192337.6478@news2.cis.umn.edu>, stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (Jack Stecher) writes...
	1/(1+r)^t [u(1,X;t)(P+p)Q + u(0,X;t)(1-P-p)Q + u(1,W;t)(P+p)(1-Q) +
>		u(0,W;t)(1-P-p)(1-Q)],
>where the first argument of u is 1 if Bush wins and 0 if Bush loses, and where
>the second argument is X if Marrou reaches threshold X and W otherwise.  The
>above is my expected utility of voting for Bush.  If instead I vote for Marrou,
>my expected utility is the sum from t=0 through infinity of
>	1/(1+r)^t [u(1,X;t)(Q+p)P + u(0,X;t)(Q+p)(1-P) + u(1,W;t)(1-Q-p)P +
>		u(0,W;t)(1-Q-p)(1-P)].
> 
>Clearly, I should vote for Marrou.

	I couldn't have said it better myself.  (Really!)

	Somehow I don't think the Marrou/Lord campaign should make a TV
commercial showing this equation....

> 
>Jack Stecher
>stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
B

Mark Sulkowski
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Availability of private schools.  Was: Re: Public schooling
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 12:09:24 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <7OCT199219412057@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov> <Bvx78I.CK9@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
  <Oct13.143600.29945@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>

>...The term "public school"
>is, if anything, even worse, because it conflates "government" and "public".
>It's a "government-run school".
>
>Alan Wendt

I prefer the term "Trabbie factory of the mind."


    Alan T. Furman         | VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!  Marrou/Lord in 92!!
---------------------------+----------------------------------------
  atfurman@cup.portal.com  |   (800)682-1776 for more information
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Is there a FAQ on Marrou/Libertarians?
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 07:46:27 GMT

Closest things I can think of are the LP Program and Platform in the
/pub/libernet/LP section of think.com available via anonymous ftp, and
a book: "Libertarianism in One Lesson," by David Bergland, available from
Freedom's Forum books: 415-864-0952


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou