HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Free at last!!
Keywords: Liberals, Republican Prez, Why?
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:45:05 GMT

fdeck@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (francis deck) writes:
>We are free at last from an executive branch which believes
>that it is above the law, and that its purpose is to enrich
>private individuals.

    I might go along with the "above the law" part of your statement but 
I'd say that the "enrich private individuals" expectation remains to be 
seen.

>  At least I hope that will turn out to
>be the case.

    Good luck.

>  We're free from a guy who calls himself a
>conservative, but who has taken initiatives on any number
>of occasions to increase the size and power of his own
>branch of government.

    Yeah, at this point we have a guy who calls himself a moderate to do 
that.

>  We are free from someone who caters
>to the right wing, e.g. Rush Limbaugh and the TV preachers.

    Well, that's true. I can agree with that one without reservation.

>We are free to tell our children that the way to the top is
>not the way of crime.

    You were free to tell them that for the last 12 years too. I'm not 
certain that the truth of the statement is any greater or less than it 
used to be, but I kind of hope that it's what you tell your kids regardless 
of who's in the White House.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: "Trivial" Felonies (Was: Zoe Baird, Support Her !!!!!!!!!!)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:50:40 GMT

What I find interesting is that this appointment was supposed to be ground
breaking in that Baird would have been the first woman in the AG role. She
was a good example of a woman balancing her career and family life. So
what do they "get" her on? Her means of procuring child care so that she
could further her career. I don't consider this a coincidence. The so-called
family values types have always looked askance at daycare as an enabler of
"the breakup of the American family," i.e., it allows mothers to compete
in the workplace. I attribute the flap about her daycare to the same cause
as the railing about Clinton's "draft dodging," pot smoking, whatever: it's
the death rattle of the old order as it's fading from power. The
hippie/yuppie/whatever-diminutive-you-like generation is here: get used
to it. :-)

---
Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm)
Subject: What does sacrifice mean to Bill?
Summary: Does sacrifice mean higher taxes to Bill?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 01:34:00 GMT
Keywords: Taxes, decreased spending, sacrafice

  
  So, what does sacrifice mean to our new president?  From
what Leon Panetta has said, it may mean higher taxes (even on
the middleclass).  And, you though you were getting a tax cut!

  I agree that sacrifices must be made ( preferibly, several
congressmen on an alter infront of the Capital ), but higher
taxes are the WRONG kind of sacrifice.  We must reduce what 
government does, and how much it spends.  The problem isn't
that the government doesn't raise enough money:  the problem
IS that it spends too much.

  However, I see TAX INCREASE written all over the President's
speech, and this will only put us into further economic troubles.
From: birmingh@fnalo.fnal.gov (Phillip J. Birmingham)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: National debt is not bad
Date: 23 Jan 93 22:36:29 -0600
Organization: Deep Thirteen
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalo.fnal.gov

In article <yB3sXB2w165w@major.panix.com>, dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea) writes:
> birmingh@fnalo.fnal.gov (Phillip J. Birmingham) writes:
> 
>> > 1)  Maybe, just maybe, our large defense outlays are part of the reason tha
>> > we haven't been attacked on US soil since 1815?  If you have the means to k
>> > my ass into oblivion, I'm sure as hell not going to mess with you.
>> 
>>          Hasn't hurt, but probably the combination of two large oceans and
>>     friendly neighbors have had more to do with it. 
> 
> Even strangers are friendly when you have a gun hanging off your hip. :)

         You know what they say: an armed society is a polite society...

         Seriously, though, I think our country's main protection has been
    the formidable natural barriers against invasion. Having a first-class
    military hasn't hurt in that respect, but I do feel the buildup we saw
    under Reagan could not have gone on much longer.

-- 
 Phillip J. Birmingham   birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov  
 I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13251 talk.politics.misc:68868 alt.politics.elections:25024 alt.folklore.urban:34340 alt.politics.clinton:20719 alt.politics.perot:5905
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.folklore.urban,uchi.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Perot Quiz
Summary: from the February 1993 Spy Magazine
Date: 21 Jan 93 02:57:19 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Organization: University of Chicago

One out of every five voting Americans liked Ross Perot's ideas enough to
think he and Margot should be redecorating the White House right now. Could
it be that the rest of us missed something he said? How many of the following
do you recognize as no-nonsense Perotisms?

A. "The U.S. government is like a 450-pound woman in a size-7 dress or
 Bigfoot in a size-5 shoe.

B. "Truth is, they all lie on TV and sell you a phony picture of what's
 going on. . . Anyone who's truthful is called and looked at as crazy."

C. "There is no way you can know the taste of water unless you drink it or
 unless it has rained on you or unless you jump in a river."

D. "I have a documented case of one boy [traveling] across Texas with a
 chicken. Everyone wants to know why the boy came home? The chicken was
 worn out. A chicken can only take so much travel."

E. "You have created the monster. . .My faith in me is stronger than all
 your armies, governments, gas chambers or anything you want to do to me."

F. All are no-nonsense Perotisms.


Answer: Only (D),the rambling chicken story, is taken from a Perot speech,
delivered in Washington in 1984 on the topic of school reform. The rest of
the comparatively cogent thoughts---(A),(B), (C),and (E)--- are direct
quotations from jailhouse correspondance or ramblings of Charles Manson.
1996! 1996! 1996!

[from the February 1993 issue of Spy magazine; reprinted without permission;
 all typos are the fault of my brother, so blame him] 
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13963 soc.culture.african.american:14387
From: isbell@ai.mit.edu (Charles L Isbell)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Blacks on TV (was Re: LET THE BOYCOTT BEGIN!)
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:15:35
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
	<9113@news.duke.edu> <1993Jan27.022313.17558@midway.uchicago.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panther.ai.mit.edu
In-reply-to: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu's message of 27 Jan 93 02:23:13 GMT

thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
|In article <9113@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
|>green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes:
|>-Well, I think he had a point.  Give me one example of a positive black person
|>-on TV
|>
|>Lieutenant Uhura, Commander Sisko, Lt. Jordi (sp) LeForge :: all of Star
|>Trek series (pl) (original, Deep Space 9, Next Gen respectively). They
|>are all very intelligent people in positions of authority. I don't watch
|>Designing Women, so I can't comment on Meshach Taylor's role. Roc (Live)
|>has a wonderful ensemble of actors.

|My law school roommates watch a disproportionate number of legal dramas,
|and I can't help but notice how (1) the majority of judges on these shows
|are black, and (2) the majority of the black judges are women.  It's
|pretty astonishing, once you start looking for it.  There was a black woman
|judge in the Brenda Starr comic strip the other day.  In the movie version
|of "Bonfire of the Vanities," they had Morgan Freeman play the role of
|the crusty Jewish judge, which completely screwed up the point about
|racial tensions Wolfe wanted to make by having Judge Kowalski be white.

|Of course, in these cases it's just tokenism, because the shows in question
|are almost completely white, but I find it amusing how much of a cliche'
|it is becoming.  

You've missed the biggest cliche'.  Ever notice in cop flicks that the
LoudCaptainWhoAlwaysYellsAtTheUnorthodoxButGoodCop(tm) is almost
always Black?  Why is that?  I've never gotten it.
--
Peace.
"As I said yesterday,  'I'll only say this once....'"
           --Dan Quayle--who apparently loves subtle irony--1992 election
                                   -\--/-
    Don't just adopt opinions     |  \/  |       Some of you are homeboys
          develop them.           |  /\  | but only I am The Homeboy From hell
                                   -/--\-

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Deficit
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:15:54 GMT

In article <C18sw2.A51@unix.portal.com> mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
>Ted Frank (thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu) wrote:
>: 
>: Deficit as percent of GNP doesn't tell us enough -- I wouldn't mind
>: a high percentage, just so long as the economy is growing faster than
>: the debt.  I'm going to use debt/GNP rather than deficit/GNP.
>: 
>: As percent of GNP, debt (rather than deficit) was steadily declining
>: from Truman to Nixon, levelled under Nixon, stayed level until Reagan,
>: and has been skyrocketing ever since.
>
>Why not consider debt to income ratio?  

Income is GNP.  GNP is income.  
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13444 talk.politics.misc:69161
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Zoe Baird, Support Her !!!!!!!!!!
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:19:03 EST
Supersedes: <93021.213840KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>

In article <C18EDD.5zx@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer
kyle cramm) says:

>   Conservatives: now is the time to suppport a Clinton nominee.  Mrs. Baird
>is a good lawyer who believes in many conservative ideas, but she is being
>publicly lynched over a MINOR infraction.

Sorry, no, I can't  support this.  This is just like when all those feminist
groups supported Senator Packwood, who virtually confessed to sexual harass-
ment, because he believed the "correct" things about women's issues.

For us to support Zoe Baird would be doing essentially the  same thing.
The situations are  not identical, but they are very similar.  I will not
excuse someone of committing a crime just because I like what she stands for.

Zoe Baird has been nominated to be the nation's chief law enforcer.  How
credible can she be if she knowingly  breaks an immigration law for no
reason.  (As Cokie Roberts said, she could have afforded Mary Poppins.)

>   Bill's next nominee will not be as conservative as Zoe Baird, and we can't
>afford someone more liberals.

I think (as one of Rush's callers theorized) that Clinton -knew- that Baird
would not get confirmed.  He wanted to make a pretense of wanting some
conservatism in the cabinet, so people wouldn't think he was a liberal.  He
never intended for someone like Zoe Baird to be attorney general.  He just
wants you to think he did.  Ingenious little ploy of his.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Kurt  E.  Ludwick     | If PRO is the opposite of CON, then
 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -|
 kel111@psuvm.psu.edu  |             what's the opposite of Progress...?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,rec.arts.startrek.misc,alt.folklore.urban
From: asparrow@cs.umr.edu (Angelia Sparrow)
Subject: Re: Blacks on Star Trek and other places
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 22:57:36 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla, Rolla, MO

In article <1993Jan27.022859.17716@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>|> maybe someone can give me some good role models for blacks on TV.
>>  I don't watch that much TV, but how about Star Trek?  
>>    Original--Uhura-Chief Communications Officer
>>    Next Gen--Jordie (sp) -head engineer
>>    Deep Space 9-- the commander of the space station is black
>
>Oh yeah?  What do you think Starfleet Academy is?  You don't think that
>they don't have quotas?  What about Gene Roddenberry's original memo
>requiring that 40% of the crew of the Enterprise be women?  Or that
>William Shatner's wife played the chief nurse?  Is that nepotism, or
>what?
>
>For that matter, how many blacks were on Buck Rogers in the 25th Century?  
>That was a much better show than Star Trek, anyway.  Gil Gerard could beat
>up William Shatner any day.  That'll teach Kirk to have an affair with
>Spock.
>a

Ahh, a debate I can use facts in!

1) The ratio was 3:1 men to women.  1:1 would look like there
   was sex going on.  3:1 the other direction would be having
   harems.

2) Starfleet Academy is no more a "government program for the advancement
  of minorities" than is William Jewell College in Liberty Mo.  It
is designed to train the best and brightest for starship work.  There
are equal numbers from The United States of Africa as there are from anywhere
else.

3)  The Majel Barrett point has already been made.  I like her better
  as Number One and Luxwna Troi.

4) I don't remember enough of Buck Rogers.  But it strikes me that
either all the blackls were wiped in the plague (not unlike _Logan's
Run_) or there was one on the high council.  I can't remember.  i
was too busy covetting Ardala's clothing.

5)  Ahh, the K/S legend get around.  Homosexuality is not
logical.  Vulcans have enough trouble with the sex stuff.
They wouldn't put themselves through it if they could find a better
way to reproduce.  To do it without the possibility of reproduction
is abhorrant since it involves being out of control.

Angel, into SF for 16 years

ObRush Limbaugh:  Am considering sending a video starring my
Vampyres list character expounding the Children of the Night's
platform plank of "No Bubbas"  Any ideas on how many videos
he gets vs. how many he uses?


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Government and religious freedoms
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:36:30 GMT

J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>   Here's an observation I've made several times, and I direct it toward 
>those who oppose private school vouchers while favoring federally funded 
>abortion. 

    That's not me, but I have something to say here. 

[big snip]

>  Just for the record:  I favor vouchers for private schools, and I'm also
>in favor of keeping abortion safe and legal--but I don't want the government
>to fund it.

    The thing that I'm curious about is how you reconcile the position 
of favoring vouchers for private schools while opposing funding of abortion. 
It seems to me that your position is just as flimsy as that of the people 
who favor funding for abortion but oppose vouchers. I'm obviously biased on 
the subject, but I would have thought that the only thoroughly consistent 
positions are to either oppose government funding of both (which, for the 
record, is where I stand), or to favor funding for both (the ultimate "Big 
Government" position).

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: DC Myth # 302 :  A tax increase will lower the deficit
Keywords: taxes, deficit, lower
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:20:09 GMT

In article <C1JI84.7Cu@news.cso.uiuc.edu> kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>   Of course, while the tax burden nearly doubled, the deficit spireled       
>through the roof.  [ no need to flame Reagan/Bush, they tried to decrease
>spending, but Congress wouldn't do it ]

By submitting unbalanced budgets?  Interesting strategy, to bad it
didn't work.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner    Phone: 512/346-8380    MHS: bboerner@novell
Internet: bboerner@novell.com     \  Please use either if replying
   or  Brendan_Boerner@novell.com /  by mail exterior to Novell.


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: eab@msc.edu (Edward Bertsch)
Subject: Re: Your own words, of course != bigot
Organization: Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Minneapolis, MN
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 02:16:06 GMT

there's a big difference between a Catholic mass and an abortion clinic.

The purpose of an abortion clinic is to kill human beings, at an
early stage of development.

A Catholic mass has no such activity.

--

Edward A. Bertsch (eab@msc.edu)   Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Inc.
Operations/User Services          1200 Washington Avenue South
(612) 626-1888 work               Minneapolis, Minnesota  55415
(612) 645-0168 voice mail         [DISCLAIMER: MY OPINIONS; NOT MSCI'S]
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm)
Subject: Why are conservatives so stupid ?
Summary: Liberals believe that conservatives are neanderthals
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 23:04:17 GMT
Keywords: liberals, conservatives, intellegence

  There are a great number of regularly posting liberals who apparently think 
that conservative = idiot.  Most of the time this is an inference; others
say it explicitly.  Why do liberals think they corner the intelligence market?

  I agree that some conservatives are red-neck, uneducated people, but an 
equal number of liberals are sheep following the crowd to slaughter.  There
are many conservatives who listen to RL and have high IQ's.  We listen to 
him because he is entertaining, and he is the only conservative voice in the
mass media.            

  I am sick of hearing liberals that dismiss everything RL says as drivel      
calling people that go to the opposite extreme 'dittoheads'.  Conservatives
need a similar term for these liberals, maybe 'eraseheads' after that wonderful
David Linch movie.

  Sorry, just needed to vent my spleen over these 'know-it-all' liberals.


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: "david meadows" <david.meadows@canrem.com>
Subject: turning it back aroound
Reply-To: "david meadows" <david.meadows@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: alt
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:31:32 EST

Sorry, I seem to have missed a message ...

DX>gadson@zeus.tamu.edu writes:
  >] In article <1993Jan22.4673.12392@dosgate>, "david meadows" <david.meadows@canrem.com> writes...
  >] |
  >] |        It is logical to assume that the child does have a right to
  >] |some of his or her dad's estate. If so, that child must have a legal
  >] |personality in the womb, no?
  >]
  >]       No.  The child/foetus need not necessarily have any legal
  >] rights while in the womb.  Rights might be granted only after birth
  >] as a result of the paternal link.... which does not imply personhood
  >] while in the womb.

What the heck does `rights might be granted only after birth as a 
result of the paternal link' mean? Does this mean that such rights 
might not be granted? What the heck is a paternal link? Do only 
fathers confer rights on their children? If a child in utero can be 
held capable of inheriting, he or she must have legal personality.

To continue ...

DX>Why was it that the IRS ruled that a couple, that
  >tried to claim their as yet unborn child as a
  >born child for tax purposes, had brought
  >a frivilous suit?

Simple: for tax purposes, a child as yet unborn at the end of the tax 
year is not eligible for a tax deduction. I don't know how the tax 
system works in the U.S., but up here in Canada, you can also take a 
deduction for  dependent children until they are eighteen years of 
age. Of course, not many children are born exactly on December 31 of 
any given year so if someone turns eighteen, say, on October 31, the 
amount of the deduction is adjusted accordingly. It does not mean that 
they cease to exist ... they just cease to exist for the purposes of 
taxation. 

Take it a step further ... if the IRS allowed such a deduction, it 
would also have to allow businesses to deduct expenses for something 
which they intended to do next year.

DX>Is this suggesting that the IRS is a ProChoice Organization?

Hardly (actually, I suspect you have little choice when it comes to 
the IRS)

DX>Does this Suggest that the IRS was in Direct Opposition
  >to the Reagan/Bush ProLife Position????

Probably not; a case could be made that it was in support of it 
though: if the IRS allowed such deductions, then people would be able 
to use their aborted foetus as a tax deduction (they were pregnant, 
after all).

DX>That Reagan and Bush were Never able to get the
  >full agenda across? That they new that allowing
  >tax exemptions on UnBorn Persons Might be construed
  >as a drain on the Federal Budget?????

Rather, I suspect they *knew* that allowing tax exemptions on unborn 
persons might be construed as a drain on common sense


David Meadows

Oh, the wonder of it all ...
---
  1st 1.02b #813  Semper in obscuris quod minimum est sequimur -- Ulpian
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: ag173@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jason Hitesman)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.douglas-adams
Subject: Aside..
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:32:44 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ag173@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jason Hitesman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


Since DNA is indeed a big Macintosh fan, and therefore a computer fan, (can
anyone at all guess what I'm leading to..) It would make sense that somehow
he could gain access to usenet.  IF so why hasn't he?  Has anyone attempted
to reach him through conventional means and get his connected?  Just
blithering midnlessly after reading MH...

_/_/_/_/_/_/  |ag173@cleveland.freent.edu
     _/    _/ |clyde@pwrtools.wariat.org
    _/_/_/_/  |"And if I go insane, please don't put
_/ _/    _/   |your wires in my brain"-Pink Floyd
_/_/    _/    |