HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 10:01:32 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: a real question about international affairs...

Although this might be a trap, I will risk and step
on it.   :-)

From:         Tim Johnson <ST402711@BROWNVM.BITNET>

>   There was recently an event in one of the
> South African black homelands in which
> South African troops fired upon peaceful
> demonstrators, at the order of the local
> thug in charge of operations.

>   I have a few questions about the incident
> that I haven't been able to find answers for
> in the local news coverage of the event.
> (This is almost two weeks old now, I think,
> so the MTV generation may have put it out of
> their mind already.)

>   The news described "South African Troops"
> and the regional president (or whatever he
> is called) as the villians in the incident
> (and rightfully so - I don't dispute that.)

I don't recall that they were called SA troops.
On the other hand I won't dispute that they said
that.

>   Given, however, that this was a black
> homeland, it seems likely that the head
> honcho was black - I guess I take that
> for granted, though someone who knows may
> wish to confirm this for me.

I hereby confirm that.

>   The "South African Troops" in question, though,
> were they Black or White?  The papers had no mention
> of this, and all news photographs of the events (that
> I have seen) show wounded Black demonstrators and
> no sign of the armed forces responsible.

My assumption is that they were blacks, since I thought
they were not SA troops.

>   In a situation which is as racially charged as
> that in South Africa, I would think that this would
> be very relevant information.  Does anyone with
> better news coverage know the race of the troops?

The "charge" is that the homeland was set up by SA.
That the head of the government is a SA puppet and
that the SA government *controls* the army.  That
many of the high ranking advisors to the homeland
army are ex SA security officials.

>                              -Tim

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: response to Brni
Date: 13 Sep 92 16:18:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

If a whole bunch of employers get together and decide that a, b, and c type
of people it can also get hard to find another job.

Remember this is a good plug for the free-market system.  In a system where
the government is the only employer, what do you do when they won't hire you
(especially if they then come around and throw you in jail for not working!).

Chris
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:46:00 EST
From:         Tyrone Slothrop <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is homosexuality immoral?

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is homosexuality immoral?

JB:

You attribution of the Wiccan Rede to Jesus cannot go unchallenged.
When asked what the greatest commandment was, he replied that *first*
we are to love God and *then* love our neighbor.  This is *not*
the same.

--Missy P 2 B

*******************

so, uh, let me get this straight.  so some of the commandments are
more important than others.  or in other words, some of the words
of god are less perfect than others, and we don't really have to follow
them, as long as we love god and not people of the same sex.  got it.

(i shure is glad i isn't a christian)

brni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 07:30:03 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: clinton and college

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

> I was just listening to Bill Clinton on CSPAN.  He suggests that *everybody*
> should be sent to 2-year college or trade school so they can get
> "good jobs, not dead end jobs."

> That sure sounds great.  Then something occurred to me.  If *everybody*
> gets a good job, who's going to do all the crummy jobs?  What happens
> when everybody is a manager and nobody is a service worker?

> Or does Bill think that *every* job is a good job?  (Clearly not, or
> the dichotomy makes no sense.)  So, what *is* a good job, what *is*
> a dead-end job, and why shouldn't both be done by *somebody*?

I am no economist but it seems to me that if a higher percentage
of our work-force becomes even more educated then:

         - The whole workforce becomes more efficient and more
           productive and we will afford to pay a higher min
           wage.  A min wage that one can live off of it.

Ideally, no one should hold "dead end" jobs as a career.
It should be looked at a temporary position.

BTW, what was your point?  That we should somehow shy away
from educating everyone since no one would want to do the
menial jobs anymore?

> --Missy P 2 B

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 10:44:56 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Alleged Overpoulation (was Re: let's rephrase the question)
              10 Sep 1992 09:51:35 BST from <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>

Dunstan is right.

Population is not the problem.  And it is even less of a problem in
the United States, where the population growth has remained below
replacement level since 1972.

We aren't having too many children; we are having too few.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 12:58:16 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: rest rooms

I don't get the "bathroom thing."  I lived for two years on a co-ed floor
in a co-ed dorm; we had a co-ed bathroom.  No problem.  I have visited more
than one business establishment with single restrooms used by both men and
women (generally not at the same time, unless the guy is under about 3
years old).  The bathrooms in my house are co-ed.

Good grief :)
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 20:00:01 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is homosexuality immoral?

>You attribution of the Wiccan Rede to Jesus cannot go unchallenged.
>When asked what the greatest commandment was, he replied that *first*
>we are to love God and *then* love our neighbor.  This is *not*
>the same.

Again, I must say that you are putting words into my mouth.
I did not attribute the Wiccan Rede to Jesus, but merely
pointed out a similarity between that and the Golden Rule.

j.b.
>--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 10:00:35 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Andy, Leader and maybe Dave on the Environment

>>Care to name an owned and in-demand species that has gone extinct?
>>That's the option we're talking about, not un-owned in-demand species.
>
>Oh!  I get it (finally :)).  Hm.  It seems, from experience, that this
>ownership strategy would only work if individuals own the resources -- not
>the state (or, rather, the state or federal governments).  Also, it will
>only work for those resources that have an immediate market value.

Even if the short-term expenses exceeds the revenues.  Remember
orchards.

>And for some resources, at least, it will only work if people can perceive a
>benefit that might accrue after their deaths

That isn't required at all.

>I'm not at all convinced that most folks (or most businesses, or most
>governments, or whatever) are really capable of planning over ecological
>time.  I'm also concerned about resources that won't work within this model
>.

Hunters are; they've done it repeatedly.  How are elephants different
from mountain sheep or other species that hunters have brought back?
(Note that elephants are easier, because there are thriving
populations, but there won't be if the ivory ban continues because
those populations are held by folks who did hunter-style management
and they can't afford to keep that up without the hunter-revenues.)

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 02:08:00 EST
From:         Tyrone Slothrop <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

>  The great treasures of our culture were not created with the funding
>   of the mainstream; what makes you think the treasures of tomorrow
>   can be?

Hint: most NEA money goes to art from OTHER cultures, dead cultures.
Look at what orchestras and operas play.

        orchestras and operas play what they do because most of their
        funding comes from rich white folks who want to have someone
        keep playing mozart and tschikovski.  stravinsky is rarely
        seen, nor is john cage.  why?  because people have a certain
        conception of classical music that they do not like challenged,
        and if the orchestra doesn't play hit tunes, they don't get
        funding.

Art from our culture gets along just fine without NEA help.  If you
can't find that art, you don't know anything about American culture
and art.

The great treasures of American culture are commercial films and
American music, not to mention rodeo, and car racing.  (The great
american art form is monster truck racing accompanied by R&B.)

        great.  _Satan's Cheerleaders_ and Boston's "more than a feeling"
        are great treasures of american culture.  hoorah.  don't
        forget the Care Bears cartoon and Designing Women...

NEA money goes to art that American's didn't produce and don't
value.

        i suppose that robert mapplethorpe wasn't american.  nor is
        karen finley, or judith schechter, laurie anderson.  funny,
        they all talks like americans...

        so, your art is monster truck racing, eh?  no wonder its
        so expensive.  i think that you would be hard pressed to
        defend it as an art, tho.

        brni
-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, 14 Sep 1992 09:26:46 CDT
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      andy chastitizes fred

Andy seems to be implying that I want other people to fund my ideas.
Is this only acceptable for republicans and not for democrats? George
and ronnie have successfully gotten the american public to finance the
deficit which is fueled by their policies. I can't wait to see your post
claiming that clinton sponsored the deficit as soon as he is elected.

Why do you think that the japanese paid ron 2 million for a speech? Is
it because of his business expertise or his trade policies? Why is the
american public financing the s & l fiasco?

Our government is now the largest that it has been at any time in our
history. I bet clinton is responsible for that as well. Ron has a lot
of nerve criticising clinton for avoiding the draft when he spent the
war in hollywood. I have yet to hear clinton claim involvement in
combat as reagan has in some of his speeches.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 11:44:00 EDT
From:         "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Is homosexuality immoral?

> Franklin was right.  When the nation forgets the God who gave it
> birth, it becomes divided by the petty concerns of individual
> selfishness.  Today we are seeing the result of 30 years of denial
> and rebellion.  We cannot unite because we have no basis on which
> to do so.  We are a factionalized people with no foundation.  And it
> is time to second Franklin's modest proposal.

You might want to choose your words more carefully, keeping in mind
the content of Swift's "modest proposal."

:-).

Best,
Peter

BTW, I like Franklin's acknowledgement that the goal was "establishing
government by human wisdom."  Wonderful phrase.

> --Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 08:10:43 MST
From:         Roger <CARROLL@SCC.BITNET>
Subject:      Neil Bush

Sometime, over the weekend, I heard a network promo for a "news magazine"
program that was going to report on an investigation of Neil Bush, his
connections with Silverado, and other influence peddling.  I'm pretty sure
it was on one of three networks and was a show like "Street Stories",
"Prime Time Live", or one like it.  And, I think it was to be tonight.

Anyone know anything further.  Thanks.
                                                 ---roger
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:40:13 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

>>>        hey, to me (and hence to just about everyone) $.64 ain't
>>>        a whole lot.
>>
>>Then why did you people scream about the $2k coffee pots?  The
>>individual share of those was much less, yet suddenly its the
>>total spent, not each individual's share.
>
>     If you think art is a waste of money along the same lines
>    as a $2k coffee pot, then you're leading a rather empty life.

Ooh!  I've just been put in my place by someone who thinks that
the NEA is art.

>>>        i mean, you might still be able to find some
>>>        penny candy for that much, but its getting rare.
>>
>>So?  Why shouldn't that be MY decision?  Moreover, it obviously can't
>>buy much art either.
>
>    Actually, your penny buys you every artistic resource in your
>  community.  If you enjoy ANY of them, even once a year, you've
>  gotten your money back.

No, that $0.64 contributes to a small fraction of the art in my
community.  Even for the art it helps support, it's a small fraction
of the support.  If the patrons don't value it enough to make up the
difference , why should anyone else?

NEA spending on art is a small fraction of total spending on art.  People
who think otherwise don't have much appreciation for art.

-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:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:01:37 -0400
From:         "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      food for thought

 Might I recommend:

 Forbes Magazine, Sept. 14, 1992, "A de-moralized society?".

 A short quote from the article: "Liberal intellectuals have, in short,
 divorced themselves not only from conventional morality but also from
 all those conventional people who still adhere to that morality.  The
 moral divide has become a class divide."

 ---Robert

 "Abortion has saved us from looking at a lot of childish art"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:21:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: New York Senate Race

I was joking, I know you're not a Puritan.  You probably do quite well at
work and I am sure you dress appropriately (I am not going to speculate on
how well you dress because that might be interpreted as sexist).

I was just implying that most people I know seem to feel that their work
is an ordeal that they have to put up with for the money, or else they like
it for the wrong reasons and put their whole life into it to the expense of
other things.  I think that work should be a fairly pleasant or at least not
unpleasant part of a balanced life.

I also do not think that people should get jobs just because they have
graduated from college.  It should be on the basis of their potential and
what they have done with that potential (although I do like to see employers
try to diversify their work force at least a little even if just for the
good of their company).

Chris Morrison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 00:30:45 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Bosnia conflict
              11 Sep 1992 09:34:07 -0700 from <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>

Hi all:

Just to lighten the load a bit.  The mention of the Lincoln Brigade
brings to mind an old Tom Lehrer lyric:

Remember the war against Franco?
That's the kind
where each of us belongs.
Though he may have
won all the battles,
We had all the great songs!

             --From "The Folk Song Army"

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:02:21 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Alleged Overpoulation (was Re: let's rephrase the question)

>  The question is, how do we solve the problem?  It is necessary to
>  realize that here in the US, people like to oveconsume.

What's "overconsume"?  People in the US overproduce relative to the
rest of the world.  How much of that above-averge consumption goes
into production?  How much is a reasonable return for such production?

Even compared
>  to European countries, with a standard of living at least comparable to

Of course the US standard of living can be compared to the European
standard of living; both can even be compared to that of Somalia.

Having lived in Europe, I really prefer the US standard of living
to that of Europe.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.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:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 10:15:06 -0400
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: democratic platform

>Speaking of educational priorities, I know of a school district that
>decided that its new superintendent, who has never been a
>superintendent or even a high official in a district as big, should
>make more than the outgoing guy.  The increase just happens to be the
>amount saved by firing some library assistants.

>The public systems are adminstrator heaven.  They have enough money
>to do what we'd like them to do, but they have different values.
>Maybe we should have other suppliers.

An interesting note on this topic; here in Maryland the state legislature
is currently in a state of low-key uproar over the fact that despite
the fact that 2300 state workers have been laid off over the past
couple of years to make up for serious budget shortfalls, the cost of
the state payroll hasn't dropped. Seems that 6,000 state employees have
received sizable raises and a lot of outside contractors have been hired.

Wanna bet there's a scandal somewhere in this?

Meanwhile our tempermental, tyrannical Gov (Schaefer) is in hot water
again... He got so p.o.'d by seeing his image on a cardboard cut-out whose
message called him to task for recommending tax rate increases in a local
businesses' window that he made a statement to the effect that "all businessmen
are crooks and theives."

Shame he'll probably catch hell for telling the truth. B) (just kidding)

>-andy

-other Andy
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:         Sun, 6 Sep 1992 19:39:00 EDT
From:         DFIELD1@ITHACA.BITNET
Subject:      SUBSCRIBE ME

Please subscribe me. My address is dfield1@ithaca.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 18:50:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Ethics in public discourse (was RE: Is homosexuality
              immoral?)

On Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:30:03 GMT "Daniel B. Holzman" <holzman@FNALNO.FNAL.GOV> s
aid:
>> In this country, public morality has largely been shaped with refere nce
>> to the tenets of the Judeo-Christian ethic.  Thus, it is a fair subj ect
>> for discussion with reference to this issue, and the debate is meani ngfully
>> advanced by discussion of the content of that ethic.  However, other  moral
>> codes, particularly those to which American law and tradition make n o
>> positive reference, merely serve to confuse the issue.
> And here is where you are wrong.  If the Christian ethic (there is no such
> thing as the Judeo-Christian ethic, Judiasm is a different moral, ethical, and
> religious system of which Christianity began as a heresy) is the only valid
> ethical referent for public morality, then Christianity becomes the de facto
> established religion of the nation, in violation of the First Amendment.
I might be in agreement with you on the inclusion of Judaism in the
name Judeo-Christian ethic, but you know as well as I do that the
Constitution cannot prohibit de facto phenomena, as the Constitution is
a LEGAL document.  Pi will never be 3.14159... just because the
Constution may be amended to say so.  The first amendment can only
proscribe de jure establishment of religion.

> Those of us who do not subscribe to the Christian ethic have as much right to
> use our moral systems as referents to form policy in our nation as Christians
> have to use theirs.  The art of American politics is the arrival at a
> compromise acceptable to all parties in the dispute.  If we can not reach such
> a compromise, then the Great Experiment has failed, and we may as well disolve
> the Union.  Goddess help us if we do.
No, the art of American politics is the discovery and implementation of
the will of the majority.  And since when do individuals have the right
to make policy?

> Daniel B. Holzman                    | Eight Words the Witch's Rede Fufill:
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU