HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma"
X-VMS-Cc: E7L8RAF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:49:47 -0400
From:         Steve Rafferty <E7L8RAF@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject: Re: George Bush on Abortion

>Oh, Please!

>Do we have to go through this again?  Bush articulated the compassionate
>prolife position eloquently.  The question "who else's would it be?"
>is NOT an admission of prochoice sentiment; it is an acknowledgment of the


Point 1:  Bush has never articulated *anything* eloquently.  He mangles
          english syntax so badly that Dana Carvey's job was easy.

Point 2:

What bothers me about Bush's and Quayle's responses to the abortion
question is what those responses mean about their motivations to be
pro-life. (I'm not trying to be provocative now, I'm quite serious).

If the motivation to be pro-life is that abortion is murder, I would
like a response something like:

          She wanted to abort my grandchild? Murder her own child?
          Certainly, I'd try to talk her out of it, make her aware
          how seriously I see the situation.  As long as abortion
          is not illegal, I could not *stop* her from doing it, but
          though I would still love her, and try to forgive her -
          our relationship would probably *never* be the same.

Much as I love my son - if he murdered someone - deliberated, decided
to do it, and carried it out - I can unequivocally say that our
relationship would undoubtedly change.  My *horror* at what he had
done, at what he was *capable* of doing, would stay with me for a
long time.

If the motivation for being pro-life is a philosophical conviction
that the unborn have rights, there would seem to be some less
*urgency* about prohibiting abortion, and more of a tendency to
work toward making abortion less necessary.

IMNSHO, (happy Missy?  ;-)  ) I think that what B's and Q's statements
indicate is a general confusion about the issue.  It seems that they
feel that *their* family members could decide this tragic question
appropriately - If only every other woman in the country had the
decency and intelligence to approach the decision with enough thought.
They really believe that there are hoards of women out there who do
an ept in the morning while planning their day and say "damn, if I
skip lunch, and take the afternoon off, maybe I can get this taken
care of."   I know several women who have had abortions - not one
of them is without remorse - of course, most of the women *I* know
are the *good* ones.

Steve               "George Bush is the most deeply unprincipled
                     man I have ever met."
                                   Bill Moyers

*Vote Yse Guys*   1-800-4NO-GOVT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 09:14:28 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: CLINTON BIRTHDAY THANKS TO YOU
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>
              21 Aug 1992 14:53:40 BST from <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO. UK>

On Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:53:40 BST Dunstan_Vavasour said:

>How do I know this is from Bill Clinton ? How do you know that the
>message you are reading is from me ?

"Trust me."
-GHWB

>What is the netiquette about using a list in this fashion ?

Especially when there is a CLINTON-L list recently announced on this list...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%UCF1VM.BITNET@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 20 Aug 1992 10:51:00 -0400
From:         "Men-- can't live with 'em,
              can't shoot 'em" <JULIE%DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Somewhat Unusual "Family Values"

Rufus: Most every feminist woman I know of respects women who choose
to be homemakers and would do nothing to invalidate their right to do
so, but that doesn't mean that the idea of doing it themselves would
be appalling to them.

--Julie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 12 Aug 1992 08:01:01 MST
From:         Roger <CARROLL@SCC.BITNET>
Subject:      Bush-orama, Bush-omatic, Bush-ilizer

Hey, you on the East Coast!  What's the real scoop??  Saw this morning that
the NEW YORK POST is claiming Bush had an affair in 1984 with aid Jennifer
Fitzgerald.  Bush says it's "a lie".
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%UCF1VM.BITNET@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 14 Aug 1992 11:43:00 -0400
From:         "Satan For President-- Let's Get it Out in the Open"
              <JULIE%DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Throwing my helmet into the ring...

>Oh, come on, Julie. We've already tried that stuff.

We have?  Oh dear.

>Don't you know this is the year of "change"?
>
>Jamie

Oh yeah-- I forgot.  Better alter my platform to say "CHANGE the
capital gains tax."

Maybe I should just be the "radical absurdist" candidate...?

>Ray Rickman for Secretary of State
>I dunno if he's any good, but he would increase the Hipness Quotient
>of Rhode Island Politics by at least 100 points.

He seems cool.  He's pretty friendly with people in ACT-UP/RI, for
what it's worth (well it's one of _my_ qualifiers, anyway).  The guy
who is running for his seat in the house however (Tom Berson) is a bit
of a dweeb.  He'll vote in ways I want him to but that doesn't stop
him from being a jerk.

--Julie

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@  _____  @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@ / ___ \ @@ Julie Waters                 @ Mother: "Is it a boy or @
@ / /   \ \ @ P. O. Box 23040              @   a girl?"              @
@ \ \___/ / @ Providence, RI 02903-0394    @ Doctor: "I think it's a @
@@ \__ __/ @@ (401)-273-4851               @   bit early to start    @
@@  _| |_  @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@   imposing roles on it, @
@@ |_   _| @@ Email addresses:             @   don't you?"           @
@@   | |   @@ Julie@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu @  --Monty Python's THE   @
@@@  |_|  @@@ Julie@drycas.bitnet          @    MEANING OF LIFE      @
@@@@     @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:27:23 CDT
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      ghwb=missy justice (ms justice

I have finally figured out why half of the kerry ticket is so rabidly
supportive of the present administration. It is because you have both
flopped on issues more than a kid with the car keys in the light socket.

By your own postings, you have told us that you used to be rabidly
pro-choice but are now anti-choice(my term). You are a converted xian
rather than a born xian.

Sounds like an attempt to win favor at any cost by measuring the
present mood of the electorate. While this is a common political
philosophy, it doesn't do much to present you as the best choice
for the THINKING voter.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:46:16 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Slips of the tongue
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:57:38 -0500 j.b. cormier said:
>How is it that elected officials can lose the connection
>between their brain and their tongue so easily.
>
>I was reading _Newsweek_ earlier and noted that Bush,
>when talking about Clinton said he was from Arkansas,
>that state "between Texas and Oklahoma".  As anyone
>with a map handy can tell, there are no states between
>Texas and Oklahoma.


Perhaps he meant in a fashion other than geography?

The GOPers aren't the only ones /c a lack of knowledge.  Evan Bayh,
current Indiana Gov and seen as a future bigtime candidate for the
Dems, recently read portions of "The Road Not Taken" and attributed
it to George Bernard Shaw.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
You get what you pay for.  And if you don't, then you didn't.

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 00:42:00 EDT
From:         more noise please <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      this is one convention you won't put on pause when you leave the
              room

Well, Phil Gramm's speech was certainly...um...long.  Or at least it seemed
like it.  The content didn't vary from any of the other speeches that night,
which, while avoiding the clumsy mis-orchestration of the previous night,
failed to produce anything as stirring as Reagan's speech or as repulsive
as Buchanan's speech.

The best speech of the night had to be Jack Kemp's.  He made some good points
about the problems with the economy and the lack of capital in urban areas
for urbanites to invest, though he didn't mention (more likely was not
allowed to mention) that most of the ideas he offered were stubbornly
resisted by Bush for most of Bush's term.  It will be interesting to see if
he runs for President in '96.  If Bush loses, Republicans may look to him
as an alternative to Quayle, Baker, or Gramm.

Newt showed up also, making the sort of speech I had expected from Buchanan,
with veiled references to tolerance and how it meant they didn't really have
to be tolerant to those they didn't tolerate.  Unlike Pat, Newt's smart enough
to leave the code phrases coded.  The crowd seemed to be having fun saying
"Newt".  Wouldn't you?

John Engler, for those of you who missed him, was his typical annoying self.
It was rather amusing to see Phil Gramm repeat Engler's car analogy, word for
word.  Guess he figured Republicans have short memories...:)

So the Republican tuesday night was like the Democratic monday night...long
and only occasionally interesting.  Tune in tomorrow, same gipper time, same
gipper station...

Gary W. Olson                "And we cry out with joy as we drive through the
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU  rain, and our enemies claw from every goddamned
77 days and counting down...  side."-Fatima Mansions,"Only Losers Take the Bus"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 20 Aug 1992 11:52:41 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: About Buchanan

>> >For what it's worth, the one number I remember is this:  if the wealthiest
>> >2% were still paying the same rates they were before the 80's cuts, their
>> >taxes in 1991 would amount to about $70 billion (or maybe it was million --
>> >I'll have to check).
>>
>> Okay, that's a total figure. But how much are those 2% paying now?  If
>> the increase is nominal, then it supports my concern(s).  As an example,
>> if those 2% are now paying $50 billion and changing their rates increases
>> it to a {total} of $70 billion, then from the perspective of the
>> federal budget, it's not all that much...
>
>That would be an increase.  Another estimate is that if the entire
>Federal tax system was restored to its pre-1981 state, revenues would
>increase by about $100 billion per year.

We know that the tax system is now taking in more than it was, so
that's not an easy argument to make.  You can't just plug in marginal
rates, because collections are based on AVERAGE rates, and deductions/
credits (many closed in 81) cause a difference between the marginal
and average rates.

I thought that govt is now taking in a greater fraction of GNP than it
was then, if so, it's not obvious how going back would result in an
even greater fraction.  We know that the rich are paying a greater
share (I think even if you adjust for the wealth shift).  We also know
that the rich don't have enough to make much difference, so Clinton's
"we'll take some more money from the rich and do all these great
things" doesn't fly.  That's what we've learned since 1990; more of
the same isn't likely to do any better.

The marginal rates dropped, but the revenue went up and the rich paid
a greater fraction.  To the extent that the first caused the other
two, increasing rates will undo them.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 17 Aug 1992 10:06:21 MST
From:         Roger <CARROLL@SCC.BITNET>
Subject:      Reading Lists

After all of your marvelous responses, I am kind of hesitant to reveal that
my main source of news is the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.  That's where I found out
about the UFO revealing a secret diet to Al Sharpton.

On a serious note, when George Will was questioned yesterday about Bush and
the Republicans reverting to "dirty" politics he said it reminded him of the
candidate who was quoted, "I will not get into 'sleaze', I honestly believe
my opponent has all the qualities of Abraham Lincoln.  That is, if you remember
Lincoln as fat, lazy and a liar."

--------------------------------------------------
Another in the series of topical George Bush quotes...
..(thanks to Gary Stephens - Dublin City University, Ireland)

"You know, every day, many important papers come across the desk in that
marvellous Oval Office, and very few items remain there for long. Got to keep
that paper moving or you get inundated. Your snorkel will fill up and there
will be no justice".

   - on the difficulty of keeping up with his presidential duties, September
     1991.
                                                 _ __
                                                ' )  )
                                                 /--' _   _   _  __
                                                /  \_(_)_(_)_(/_/ (_
                                                         _/
      I have yet to meet a person wanting their tombstone engraved....
                 "I wish I had worked harder at my job!"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 13 Aug 1992 15:48:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: did y'all miss me?

we missed you.
glad you finally got into your new home. hope everything went smoothly for you.
take care
good luck
linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN::"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 12:43:24 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      I hate family values

That's the new battle cry in my home these days :)

KAT: interesting information -- thanks for posting it.  For what it's worth
, I rather suspect we'll hear tonight about the increase in the percentage
of single-parent families and how that's destroying the country, etc.
Well, in the last month or so, I read an article (and no, I can't remember
who wrote it or what 'zine it was in -- I've lost a bunch of stuff in our
recent move) which pointed out that the rise in the percentage of single
parent homes is mostly due to the decrease in the number of middle-class
folks having babies (or delaying same).  The author stated that the actual
number of women having kids out of wedlock hasn't risen that much.

If anyone has confirming/refuting numbers on this, I'd like to see them.

Thanks
Kerry
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: ncovey@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (neil covey)
Subject: Re: George Bush on abortion
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:34:16 GMT

In <POLITICS%92081211321429@OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU> KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET (Kerry Stephenson) writes:

Nice try, Missy, but you miss the point, which is that George Bush,
while stating a humane position in regard to his relatives, is also
seeking to make abortion illegal.  While he may forgive his granddaughter
for her hypothetical abortion on a personal level, he still is seeking a
situation which would make her a criminal for seeking and having that
abortion.  While you are right to point out that there is a point where
ultimately the choice of whether of not to have an abortion is the
pregant woman's and that no law can keep her from making that choice,
you ignore the fact that in a world where abortion is illegal a woman
who makes that choice can be thrown in jail.  Indeed, by the logic of
the Republican platform the woman and her doctor should face the death
penalty.  Abortion is murder; a woman and doctor who make an appointment
to perform an abortion are certainly premeditating that murder;
premeditated murder is punishable by death.  While I don't expect an
"pro-lifers" to advocate the death penalty for those who solicit and
perform abortions, I do believe there is an hypocrisy present in those
who choose only to talk about punishing doctors; as you so well put it
in your post, the women who have abortions do make the choice to have
them.  While Bush does say he'd "stand by" a child or grandchild who
committed other crimes, he hasn't said he'd oppose the laws, which would
put them in jail.  Perhaps a better question for him to answer than the
ones put to him by the CNBC interviewer is "Even while you would support
your grandchild after she had an abortion, would you still back the
system which would, of necessity, seek to punish her for having it?"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 14 Aug 1992 22:54:00 EDT
From:         more noise please <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is (Barbara) Bush pro-choice? (answer: yup)

MacPhil conjectures:
>>as they head into their convention next week.  Others, like Phylis Schafely,
>Which reminds me:  I think tomorrow is Phyllis Schlafly's birthday.
>[P. Schafely & P. Schlafly aren't related by chance, are they? :)   ]

Phylis Schafely is Terry Randall's mistress.  I thought you knew.

(I'm too tired to focus closely on newsprint like that, especially when it's
Friday.  Maybe I'll visit the mall tomorrow and clear my head... :) )

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

Gary W. Olson                 "The great and direct end of government is
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU   liberty.  Secure our liberties and privileges,
81 days and counting down...   and the end of government is answered.  If this
                               be not effectively done, government is an evil."
           - Patrick Henry, Speech against the U.S. Constitution, June 25, 1788
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 20 Aug 1992 13:25:51 CDT
From:         Sue Clark <SACLARK@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Bush and Banks

Good afternoon,

Outside of this list, I have had several conversations with people concern-
ing Bush and the Congress, and one suggested that he should use comparisons
in his speech.

1) Bush should do away with the 'kindler and gentler' attitude toward Congress,
and in his speech compare what he had planned to what Congress actually did.

2) Compare his ideas and plans with Clinton's plans, and their intended results

3) How and should Bush open up the money supply by allowing easier access to
business loans to establish new small businesses and stimulate more employment
and the economy.

4) Explain why the banks are so tight with money today.

I was amazed at the amount of talk dealt with the banks and the money supply.
Is there any way that Bush could open up the money supply for more business
loans?

Sue Clark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 11:31:59 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: separated at birth?
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Fri, 21 Aug 1992 11:05:55 EST Kerry Stephenson said:
>Look:

>It really amazes me that some of you people (your people, you people,
>and you know who you are) can listen to speeches and not know what
>was in them.

Kerry...you are missing what motivates them:  for the first time in
a very long time, the Democrats have a candidate who has been
through the wringer and survived and he's not as gorky as The Duke
was, riding around in a tank and using a twenty-five year old
snowblower.  Clinton may or may not be a good president if elected,
but the Dems feel for the first time they really have a chance.

For the same reason, however, that Clinton leads in the polls:
not because he is so great, but because Bush has done so poorly.

If the economy were better, Clinton would be another wasted candidate
for his party -- unable to win through no fault of his own.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:46:22 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      remedial civics; or,
              moral outrage as the lingua franca of the gop

carl:  i have no serious wish to get in an argument with you, but i would
like to point out that your most recent post conflates the term "right"
with the term "liberty", and this is most irregular.  this messes up
a lot of things, if these terms are, as you have indicated, interchangeable.
so, get it clear...and you might drop jerry falwell et al. a line on this
one...they are not one and the same thing.  rights and liberties are
different.  say it with me.

the "shining city on a hill", jason, is poughkeepsie.

                               * * * anneliese "my aunt mary johanna chairs
                                     the kentucky chapter of right to life...
                                     there goes the genetics argument" l.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 13 Aug 1992 10:02:00 EDT
From:         rf35 <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: George Bush on abortion
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

Greetings:

        Bush's response is consistent with the pro-life position.
It is true that, if he considers abortion to be murder, he has an
obligation to prevent the abortion, but there are limits to what
can be done under the circumstances.  For example, I consider the
arrest and punishment of a person for sodomy to be immoral, but if
the police came to arrest my neighbor for such a crime I would not
attempt to fight them off.  In the present circumstances, there is
nothing which Bush can do to prevent his grand daughter from having
an abortion.  But this is quite consistent with holding that the
sitution ought to be different, that there ought to be ways consistent
with the law of preventing his grand daughter from having an abortion.

                                        Richard A. Fyfe
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU