HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: garry@alice.att.com (garry hodgson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Clinton: "I am adamantly opposed to legalization of drugs!"
Date: 13 Oct 92 19:28:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23879
Reply-To: garry@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs

In article <1992Oct12.040338.9450@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:

   In article <1992Oct11.212254.11624@news.cs.indiana.edu>, 
   hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Paul Hager) said:

   > Sander Vanocur asked the question -- what about legalization or some
   > other alternative to the drug war.  Clinton said that he was
   > CONVINCED that his brother was alive because of the criminal justice
   > system.  I think that this validates my observation on Clinton --
   > that he is emotional and irrational on this issue because of his
   > step-father's alcoholism and his half-brother's cocaine use.  I
   > don't think Clinton can be reasoned with.  Drug reform will only
   > come over strenuous Clinton opposition.
   >
   > Gore is reputed to have said, "trust us..." on the subject of
   > cannabis.  I might trust Gore -- after all, he inhaled -- but
   > Clinton will fight rational drug policy every step of the way.

I'm afraid you're probably right.  But maybe, just maybe, there's
some small hope for some degree of rationality.  There is no such 
hope for George.

   You're probably right, but gods help me, I've gotta hope and pray for
   a Clinton victory anyway.  As President, Clinton probably won't move
   the nation one step in the right direction on drug policy, but I think
   he'll at least slow down its movement in the wrong direction.  If
   nothing else, a simple gut comparison of the two men leads me to
   believe that the nation will be *far* better off with Clinton filling
   whatever Supreme Court vacancies come up in 1993 thru 1996 than Bush.

Indeed.  I can't imagine what kind of country my children will grow
up in if George gets to wreak any more havoc with our courts.

As to Bill's response, you have to keep in mind the circumstance.
The first of the highly touted national debates.
Big build up in the press for weeks now.
Everyone waiting to see if anyone screws up.

Now, let's face it.  In these sad times, publicly supporting
legalization in a national debate is the screw-up to end all screw-ups.
Regardless how he feels about this, Clinton would be committing 
political suicide by advocating legalization, or even appearing to.
Bush, and the right, and the media would've creamed him.

Perot was the only one there who had the freedom to say whatever
he wanted.  He knows he can't be elected, so he needn't worry about
pissing anyone off.



-- 
Garry Hodgson			A slow winter day
AT&T Bell Labs			A night like forever
garry@alice.att.com		Sink like a stone
att!alice!garry			Float like a feather
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.individualism
From: tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox - (415)926-3105)
Subject: Re: Free Country WHERE?  (was: Products to be banned by the FDA)
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:38:20 GMT

In article <Bw3AwK.2BC@ddsw1.mcs.com>, zane@ddsw1.mcs.com (Sameer Parekh) writes:
> In article <1992Oct10.032037.14884@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek) writes:
>>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
>>
>>>Buy gold, vote Libertarian, and find a free country to flee to!
>>
>>And just where are you going to find a "free" country to flee to once the
>>USA is no longer free enough?  Some time ago I asked people to make a case
>>for various "free" countries, and judging from the response I got, there is
>>no place to run to.  Canada is the origin of some of our recent censorship
>>legislation.  In the UK, freedom of the press has the strength of legal
>>precedent, but no basis in the fundamental structure of the government.
>>Switzerland drafts every male who can stand up, and the church and state
>>are intertwined on a regional level (or so I've been told).  American women
>>who have visited New Zealand and Australia tell me they are not free havens
>>if you happen to be female.  Anyone got any suggestions?
>>
> 
> 	The moon?
> -- 
> 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
> Tue Oct 13 20:31:04 1992 US Debt: $4,094,377,090,538 Per capita: $16,021
From: bmasel@igc.apc.org (Ben Masel)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: I'M RUNNING FOR SHERIFF
Date: 10 Oct 92 08:13:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1484000060:cdp:1484000061:000:2222
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!bmasel    Oct 10 01:13:00 1992


						516 E Mifflin #4
						Madison, WI 53703
						608-257-5456 Oct.
						4, 1992

Rick Raemisch, Dane County Sheriff 210 Martin Luther King Blvd.

	As I am sure you are aware, I have declared my candidacy
for the office you currently hold, and to which you seek
re-election. I have registered my candidacy with the Dane County
Clerk. This letter formally notifies you of my intention to
personally campaign among the elegible voters in your custody at
the Dane County Jail and Ferris Center. I intend to visit these
prisoners in company of a voter registrar. We will be willing to
submit to a search before entering secured areas.

	You are reported in the Oct. 1 Isthmus as being unwilling
to approve my visit citing security concerns.  In view of my
willingness to co- operate on particulars in arranging access, I
can only conclude that your real reason for obstructing such
visits is concern for your job security.

	If this is indeed the case I believe your use of your
position to obstruct my campaign activity constitutes malfeasance
sufficient to cause your removal from office and criminal
prosecution. In any event I am prepared to bring action before the
Wisconsin Elections Board and/or Dane County Circuit Court to
compel access to all eligible voters in your custody.

	I also hereby request (persuent to the Wisconsin Open
Records Law) to be informed of any arrangement your department has
made to enable all eligible voters in your custody on Nov. 3 to
exercise their right to vote, and to inform them of the steps they
must take to do so. When I was in custody in the Ferris Center in
1986 I was told prisoners would only be allowed to vote by
absentee ballot. This is insufficient, as it disenfranchises any
individual placed in custody after the absentee voting deadline. I
strongly recomend you immediately take steps to insure sufficient
staffing for Nov. 3 that prisoners unable to vote absentee may be
safely escorted to their designated polling place. Since there are
candidates for Federal office on the Ballot this year, your
failure to do so could violate Federal, as well as Wisconsin,
Election Law.

					Tenaciously yours, Ben
					Masel Write-In Candidate
					for Dane County Sherriff
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: rcormac@eniac.cs.oberlin.edu (Cormac (Xbattle -rcormac) Russell)
Subject: FIJA info
Organization: Oberlin College Computer Science
Distribution: USA
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 19:24:40 GMT
X-Posted-From: eniac.cs.oberlin.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

I need info about FIJA, specifically legal backing for the right of
jury nullification... I have to have actual references that I can
point to that support the position and I need them by Tuesday for a
class... If anybody has the info or knows where I can FTP more
detailed stuff than the FIJA-FAQ let me know, e-mail if possible...
   Blessed Be,
      Cormac
--
Retch The Grate aka Cormac Russell    Amiga, The Computer for The Creative Mind
                      rcormac@occs.cs.oberlin.edu           
Vote Libertarian in 92! Marrou/Lord!




Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs,talk.bizarre
From: app45293@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (ZUSS)
Subject: Re: some notes on the presidential debate
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 02:06:41 GMT

   I like the fact that the moderator mentioned Will Buckley and 
Milton Freedman when he asked the question.  The answers were of
course an exercise in masturbation.  I think if Buckley, Freidman,
or anyone who supports legalization had been participating in the
debate for that question, it might have actually been interesting.

-- 
 --  Tony Pulokas
     University of Illinois, Urbana/Champaign
     College of Engineering
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Does President Bush Use Cocaine???
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:55:18 GMT

Did anyone notice that President Bush, during his answer to
the question about legalizing drugs, paused to wipe his nose
immediately after uttering the word cocaine?
-- 
Dave Feustel N9MYI <feustel@netcom.com>
 
[.sig on vacation]
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.individualism
From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
Subject: Re: Free Country WHERE?  (was: Products to be banned by the FDA)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 12:45:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.032037.14884@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek)       writes...
>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
> 
>>Buy gold, vote Libertarian, and find a free country to flee to!
> 
>And just where are you going to find a "free" country to flee to once the
>USA is no longer free enough?  Some time ago I asked people to make a case
>for various "free" countries, and judging from the response I got, there is
>no place to run to.  Canada is the origin of some of our recent censorship
>legislation.  In the UK, freedom of the press has the strength of legal
>precedent, but no basis in the fundamental structure of the government.
>Switzerland drafts every male who can stand up, and the church and state
>are intertwined on a regional level (or so I've been told).  American women
>who have visited New Zealand and Australia tell me they are not free havens
>if you happen to be female.  Anyone got any suggestions?
> 

Yes.  The countries that are free are those that do not attempt to legislate
to protect rights, as the US does, with the inevitable result that freedoms
are curtailed by enshrining them in limiting legislation.  Most of Asia is
still free in this sense - india, thailand, nepal, indonesia etc.

Laurence
From: Mike Rosing <mrosing@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:10 PDT
Subject: Libertarian/legalization in Illin
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1484000063:000:2005
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!mrosing    Oct 14 20:10:00 1992


		    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

	The Libertarian Party of Illinois is sponsoring a tailgate
party at the U. of Illinois homecoming game of October 24th in
Champaign.  They have a block of 100 tickets ($22 each) for people who
want to watch the game as well as politic with US Senate candidate
Andy Spiegel.  For more information contact Ken Prazak at 708-810-1974.

	At the state Senate level, Mike Rosing (Libertarian
candidate for Illinois district 41) is appearing on Thursday October
15th at the League of Women Voters Candidates nite at 8pm (same time
as presidential debate, but scheduled 2 weeks ago). The address is
7660 S. County Line Road.  The evening starts at 7pm and runs to 9:45
with lots of other candidates debating.  Actual time on stage will be
about 10 to 15 minutes.  For more info contact Margaret Butler
708-323-3430.

	I will also be at the League of Women Voters candidates nite
of Wednesday October 28th.  This is a free for all with high school
kids, no debates.  Location is Lisle Public Library, 777 Front Street.
Time is 7:30 pm to 9:00 pm.  This will give people a better chance to
talk to the candidates one on one.  For more info contact Roberta
Richards at 708-969-6250.

	For those in Chicago, Northwestern University is sponsoring
a debate about marijuana legalization on Friday Oct. 23rd  Dr. mike
is representing the Illinois Marijuana Initiative (IMI).  There will
be representatives from the Illinois Prevention Office, State's
Attorney's office, and 2 reps for rehab.  We each get 20 minutes to
speak then there will 20 minutes of Q&A from the audiance.  Location
is Harris Hall room 107 (at corner of Sheridan and Chicago Ave.) and
time is 7 - 9 pm.  For more info call Sandy Derks at 708-491-5910.

	On November 3rd - VOTE LIBERTARIAN!

Patience, persistence, truth,         reality:       mgr@anhep2.hep.anl.gov
Dr. mike                                 UUCP:    uunet!pyramid!cdp!mrosing
IMI, P.O. BOX 2242, Darien IL 60559    bitnet:              mrosing@igc.org
From: dolan@nrlmry.navy.mil (Kent Paul Dolan)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re:  spelling this stuff out clearly
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:32:00 GMT

Alan,

The problem of civil forfeiture laws, and similar abuses of the search
and seizure clauses of the Constitution, are problems of electing the
wrong politicians, ones who hold civil rights in contempt.

Bad law in a good cause is rampant throughout the criminal justice
system, and needs to be addressed as its own problem, perhaps by a
constitutional referendum affirming that we want the constitution
interpreted on its face when it comes to our rights, not on what is
convenient to the criminal justice system.

I hold probably less truck than you with RICO and a long list of other
abuses of the legal process recently legislated. There are just some
folks who can't stand "innocent until proven guilty", and insist on
vague statutes like "consipracy" so that they can get on with the
punishment business without ever having proved an injury done to the
law or to any citizen, and we keep electing them to Congress and the
White House, and appointing them to the police.

Just don't let the real need to eliminate _this_ poison turn you to
favoring introducing a worse one, legalizing wider substance abuse, in
its stead.

Let it send you to work with the League of Women Voters to help get us
a better class of politicians, a step that might do some actual good.

Kent, the man from xanth.
"The Birthright of humankind is the stars!"
--
Ignore the header, and don't expect me to see a news reply.  We don't get news.
Use email to: <dolan@nrlmry.navy.mil> or <dolan@192.138.87.240>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.politics.usa.constitution
From: wayne@mathematik.uni-Bremen.de (Wayne Tvedt)
Subject: Re: Boot camp?
Organization: 250 Million Pet Rocks
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:41:58 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Jyrki Kuoppala (jkp@cs.HUT.FI) wrote:
>What exactly _is_ a boot camp?  Some kind of a mandatory Hitler Jugend
>to teach people to respect Vaterland?  Where does the name come from?

  Shhh.  It is a place where they will learn to respect their
communities and themselves.  Of course it can only work if it is
voluntary, which it will be for those seeking an alternative to
10-year otherwise-mandatory minimums.

Jason Austin (jason@ab20.larc.nasa.gov) wrote:
>  It's only required to those that join the military, and
>military service is voluntary in this country except for in time of
>extreme emergency.  

  Which the Drug Crisis surely is.  

Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: doctor1@cbnewse.cb.att.com (patrick.b.hailey)
Subject: Patrick Hailey (doctor1) checks in
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 08:16:12 GMT

[Note: this same letter will be going to the folks on my e-mail and
snail-mail lists as well as t.p.d.]

Dear friends and correspondents in this forum:

Some of you may have noticed I haven't been about the place.  
About three weeks ago, I was too busy for several days to login and get
caught up on news, or to work on material for my snail-mail and e-mail lists. 
Dreading the work that had piled up, I procrastinated for several more days. 
Furthermore, there has been an increasing demand for my services at work.
Until I discover how to make a penny or three doing the political activist
thing (ha!), I suppose this should be looked at as a Good Thing - though I
find myself wishing that I could dispense with the computer biz altogether and
do political work exclusively.

To make a not-all-that-long a story not-all-that-short, instead of winding
down and taking a needed break, I felt suddenly overwhelmed and just gave up. 
I'm tired.

I'm not back yet.  A lot of material has come and gone, and I fear much more
will do so before I'm back on the job.  Catching up on the things I had going
will be impossible.  I will be starting fresh sometime soon.

On the upside, I have seized a few fresh opportunities to support the
Libertarian Party.  A question about my Marrou/Lord button started what I
*hope* will be a chain of events leading to the conversion of two VERY
prominent citizens of a small village near my town.  I have purposely avoided,
for the time being, any particular emphases on drug policy reform, taking me
even further from the action.

Also on the upside, I have nearly finished reading a most amazing book.  If
anyone has not yet followed the many recommendations on the net to read
Richard Lawrence Miller's "The Case For Legalizing Drugs", well, I don't know
why you'd suddenly listen to me, but I'm telling you anyway: Read It!  Even I
have been shocked at some of the unbelievabley *well documented* revelations
therein.  For example, even some of the "compassionate" people calling for
more treatment and less jail time have a hidden agenda that is ultimately
destructive for everyone.

Is this book in paperback yet?  I have this fantasy about organizing a bunch
of folks from around the country to buy and mail a copy to some key
congresscritters.  Perhaps if 5 or 10 copies trickled in over a couple of
weeks, a few of them would even read it.  It couldn't hurt for them to
realize that a growing number of people are becoming wise to their miserable,
bloody, destructive games.

Anyway, I'll likely be laying low for several more days to come.  E-mail
correspondence from anyone is welcome.  For those still wondering who the heck
I am, allow me to apologize for wasting your time.

  Thanks awfully,
             Patrick

Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: ebrandt@jarthur.claremont.edu (Eli Brandt)
Subject: Re: Debaters on drugs
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:49:17 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.235803.24002@netcom.com> feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel) writes:
>>Unfortunately, Andre Marrou was barred from a scheduled interview
>>on C-SPAN by the St. Louis police, but for comparison,
>
>What!!! Could you explain this please?

I should have pointed out that I got this information from an LP press
release, which I have not corroborated.  I'd have figured that it would
have made the rounds a few times, but as it appears not to have done so,
it is appended below:

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 17:30:54 MST
From: LPUS.Echo@dehnbase.fidonet.org (LPUS Echo)
Subject: MLC release: excl from interview

From: Joe Dehn <Joe.Dehn@f418.n104.z1.fidonet.org>
To: All
Date: 11 Oct 92  17:10:50

 Note: This release is being posted to LPUS for the information of LP
 activists who do not read Libernet.  Please limit discussion here to
 _party business_ relating to this release.  Any followup discussion of
 the political ideas referred to in this release should take place on
 Libernet.

NEWS RELEASE
St. Louis, Missouri

Local Contact: Steve Dasbach, David Carr - 314-330-2018

October 11, 1992
1:00 PM CST

                   LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
                     BARRED FROM C-SPAN INTERVIEW BY
                           ST. LOUIS POLICE

ST. LOUIS -- Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Andre Marrou, who
has been excluded from participation in the first Presidential Debates
tonight in St. Louis, today was barred by St. Louis Police from entering the
studio of C-SPAN for an 11:30 am interview and viewer call-in program.

Andre Marrou, who is on the ballot in all 50 states, had been scheduled to
appear on C-SPAN to discuss his exclusion from this evening's debates.  As
Marrou and C-SPAN interviewer Geoffrey Baum approached the C-SPAN
interview studio, they were blocked by St. Louis county police officers.  In
spite of Mr. Baum's verification of the scheduled interview, and in spite of
statements by a debate commission member that Mr. Marrou could be
permitted inside of the police lines, the police officers refused admission.

Hundreds of supporters of the Libertarian Party candidate have assembled
in St. Louis to protest Mr. Marrou's exclusion from the debates.  At 3:00
pm on campus, there will be a march demonstrating that Mr. Marrou is the
only candidate on the ballot in every state who will not be in this evening's
debate.  From 3:00 pm to 10:00 pm, Marrou supporters will demonstrate
outside the debate site at Washington University.

                                - END -



--- Opus-CBCS 1.13
 * Origin: Dehnbase Emerald (1:104/418.0)


--  
Internet: LPUS.Echo@dehnbase.fidonet.org

--
   Eli   ebrandt@jarthur.claremont.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.individualism,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.politics.ec,alt.politics.europe.misc
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: Free Country WHERE?  (was: Products to be banned by the FDA)
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 23:58:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.032037.14884@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, pciszek@nyx (Paul Ciszek) writes:
>And just where are you going to find a "free" country to flee to once the
>USA is no longer free enough?  Some time ago I asked people to make a case
>for various "free" countries, and judging from the response I got, there is
>no place to run to.  Canada is the origin of some of our recent censorship
>legislation.  In the UK, freedom of the press has the strength of legal
>precedent, but no basis in the fundamental structure of the government.
>Switzerland drafts every male who can stand up, and the church and state
>are intertwined on a regional level (or so I've been told).  American women
>who have visited New Zealand and Australia tell me they are not free havens
>if you happen to be female.  Anyone got any suggestions?

How about Finland?  Not very good as such, but when you compare to
others it doesn't look that bad.  On my limited knowledge it's one of
the few countries which seems to be moving in the good direction
instead of taking freedom away from people.  But the government wants
to join Finland to EU, so you'd have to hurry.  And
propertarians/libertarians might not like the social security /
welfare state system, though the government's working on that one.
Still, the economy is too much government-supported/controlled.  But
then it's hard to say from the inside.

Canada also doesn't sound too bad from what I hear, though the Usenet
censorship on sex doesn't sound good.

Denmark?  The Netherlands?  The Netherlands seems to be sending a
quite mixed signal - I don't know enough to say but my impression is
something like "there is intolerance but for practical reasons it's
quite free".  Or something like that.

waiting for flames from Sweden and Norway for not mentioning them in
this company,

//Jyrki

PS. how about that alt.emigration (or alt.society.emigration)?

PS2. how about that U.S. Constitution for the EC countries idea
     (perhaps with the Nordic countries added, perhaps not)

PS3. or how about USA with the U.S. Constitution?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.guns,alt.individualism
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Subject: Re: Another WOD death
Organization: Western Washington University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 03:18:08 GMT

tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker) writes:
	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com

>Gist of article in the LA Times this morning: 

{ Ventura County multi-millionare shot dead by LA County pigs
in another drug raid on the wrong house }

	Did they give the name of the slain man?

	So they killed a rich guy.  I'm sorry to hear it, but in 
a way I'm glad they hit somebody of substance this time.  I hope 
his estate sues LA County into bankruptcy.

	BTW, I have tried to e-mail you about 30 times in recent years
and it bounces every time.

Jim Del Vecchio