HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alex@umbc5.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain)
Subject: Re: EQUITY and Barbara Jordon
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:47:26 GMT

In article <mykes.0a7f@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:

	[RE: Carter & BCCI]

>Alex, your tone sucks.  However, I will answer your questions.  BCCI is being
>investigated by congress and there are hearings on C-SPAN from time to time,
>as well as other politicians on the committees making speeches.  You can also
>see plenty about BCCI on FNN - which is definately a different slant on the
>news...  But C-SPAN is unedited, without commentary, etc.  I am just reporting
>what I have seen and heard.

	I'm familiar with the investigation, it turns up around page 14 of
the Times national section periodically. Still, I haven't heard anything about 
Carter in about a year, and I'm ready to toss your accusations in the same
pile with "12% unemployment under Carter" and "Gold is rising because of
Clintons showing in the polls". 

	I would be happy to check out any real dirt on Carter and BCCI, I
would find it interesting. I just haven't seen any, and the justice department
couldn't find any either, last I heard. The only accusations have come from
you, and you're not batting a thousand, lately.




-- 
Anybody who agrees with me deserves what they get.

					Alex Crain
					UMBC Academic Computing Services
From: alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain)
Subject: Re: Political Math
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:11:50 GMT

In article <1728@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:

>If you index the yearly deficit as a percentage of GNP, it was going DOWN as 
>reagan left office. Congress's post reagan spending spree and the S and L
>bailout has caused the yearly deficit to increase substantially as a per-
>centage of GNP under Bush. 

	Um, right, sortof. The only way that worked was because the Fed
decided that the Social Security surplus was income, like taxes. If you
didn't count social security (and put it in escrow, like some people
though you should), the deficit wouldn't have dropped.

	Even if you count social security as OK, it's still fishy to
call it deficit reduction, because it all comes back when social security
crosses back into the red, in about 10 years - but Reagans best problems
were all left for someone else to clean up.

	My favorite number shuffle came in 1983, when the recession was
starting to clear up and the white house wanted to reduce unemployment.
They did it by creating a new "long term unemployed" catagory, so that if
you were out of work for a certain amount of time, you were no longer
unemployed, and got pushed off into another statistic. The trick was very
low key, and dropped the unemployment rate by about 2 points overnight.

	Interesting, if you use the same schedule to calculate unemplyment
today, it would put the numers at over 9%, far worse then 82-83. As it
is, the USDL didn't change the headings over their statistics, so most
people don't notice.

	Ain't statistics grand?
-- 
Anybody who agrees with me deserves what they get.

					Alex Crain
					UMBC Academic Computing Services
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain)
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 16:12:33 GMT

In article <mykes.0a2c@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:

>Any acts that Quayle has taken to overturn Roe would apply equally
>to his daughter.  You have ZERO credability :)

	Quayle has been quite clear that abortion == murder. If my son
comes to me and explains that he inteneds to murder someone, I think that
I may consider doing more then "support him in whatever decision he makes".

	Dan Quayles position strikes me as being inconsistant, Maryln
Quayles dow not. I would at least expect Dan to go after the doctor that
performed the operation, in his mind the doctor has performed a crime
against god, and while there is no legal recourse, there are certainly other
forms of retribution, like giving the doctors name to Terry Randal.

	Abortion is either murder, or it isn't, and murder is still a
moral infraction, even if the murderer is a family member. I don't fault
Quayles response, I just find it inconsistant with his stated public policy.




-- 
Anybody who agrees with me deserves what they get.

					Alex Crain
					UMBC Academic Computing Services
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:3855 talk.abortion:29076
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: The price of freedom
Date: 22 Jul 92 23:44:34 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <nate.364@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
 - text deleted -
> The growth of the budget deficit
>was just as alarming and out-of-control under Reagon as it's been under
>Bush.

If you index the yearly deficit as a percentage of GNP, it was going DOWN as 
reagan left office. Congress's post reagan spending spree and the S and L
bailout has caused the yearly deficit to increase substantially as a per-
centage of GNP under Bush. 

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,rec.arts.misc,rec.music.christian
From: harling@pictel.com (Dan Harling)
Subject: Re: Whose Truth? (was Re: Free speech and artistic style at the NEA)
Organization: PictureTel Corporation
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:44:03 GMT

In article <BD.92Jul21081446@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
>
>Dan, would you feel comfortable if prayer was brought back to the schools,
>and the adminstrator of your child's school thought Wicca or Voodoo
>were the "religion of choice" for his/her school children?  I wouldn't.

I think it is pretty clear from my previous posts that I would not want
*anybody* designated as the "leader" of prayer.  A "moment of silence"
is an impartial opportunity for students who have religious beliefs of
*any* kind to use that time as they see fit.  Those students who do not
hold religious beliefs can spend those 15 seconds reading a quarter of
a page of notes, or anything else that does not disturb others during
that time.
____________________________________________________________________________
Daniel A. Harling                        (harling@pictel.com)
PictureTel Corp.             Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
Peabody, MA  01960                 PictureTel, but they ought to be!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Intellectually Challenging moments in Modern history
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 03:43:54 GMT

mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
] Women were never ever made criminals.  Doctors were held responsible.
] This is before Roe, since there has been ZERO legislation against
] abortion in the 20 years since.


don't get out in the big world a whole lot now do you?

forget about a place called pennsylvania?

forget about a place called guam....

and why is it that now when AntiAboritonistsRhetoriticianists
rattle on about abortion laws, they do not talk in terms
of returning to the days before R.v.W -

but instead speak in terms of "abortion is murder" and
seek to criminalize it to a level it never knew before.....

So Mike, step back, get out of your pleasant little
cozy hovel in Los Altos and see what is going on
out there in the big world...

then figure out which side of the liberty issue
you want to be on....

ciao
drieux


-- 
I Do Not Believe in .sig files
as they are such a Known Waste Of BandWidth,
And Therefore Not a Morally UpRight Choice.
But I Can See the HideousHienousHandOfHeteroSexualityBehindItAll.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:3938 alt.rush-limbaugh:3174
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Incompetent S&L deregulation
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:40:56 GMT
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA

Keywords: 

In article <1992Jul28.165058.3375@dg-rtp.dg.com> crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
]Given this, the Federal guarantee, if not eliminated, should have been 
]drastically reduced.  Let those who can afford to put 100,000 dollars into a 
]savings account be aware of the risk they are running.  Reducing the guarantee
]to 10,000 would have covered the vast majority of us (I believe the median 
]balance is around 5,000), and limited our exposure as taxpayers to the crazy 
]lending practices sponsored by the "too big to fail" policy and the 100,000 
]guarantee.

Better would be to simply set it to x% of deposit, up to a maximum. If there
was even a 5% risk, most people would check before depositing. If it was
20% they would look pretty closely.

If you just set it to a small number, the crooked S&L's will simply
soak up a lot of small deposits by running newspaper ad's with high
interest rates.

-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Saddam Hussein... he just keeps going... and going... and going - -
From: tjz20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Zych)
Subject: Re: "Family Values" in Hollywood
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:07:22 GMT

mhl@spirit.ece.cmu.edu (Mikko H. Lipasti) writes:


>3.  Comments to the Bar Association re. too much litigation going on.

On this comment, I'd give Quayle 10 out of 10 for an intelligent comment, but
minus several million for his choice of audience.  (Apologies to Douglas Adams)

Tom Zych   tjz20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@umbc5.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain)
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 20:07:06 GMT

In article <BrwoKC.C45@solbourne.com> kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski) writes:

>I'd like to see a similar interchange with Mr. Clinton, asking him what he
>would do if his daughter grew up and joined Operation Rescue.  If he said
>that he hoped she wouldn't but would still love her if she did, does that
>make him pro-life?

	Mr. Clinton is not trying to make joining operation rescue an illegal
act. A better example would be "How would X feel if their kid went off and
joined a jamacan drug Cartel".

	The pro-family folks cheered when an 8 year old girl turned her drug
using parents into the police - Ronald Reagan congradulated the girl personally
as a good American citizen. I realize that Quayle and Reagan are not of the 
same administration, but they seem to be preeching the same gospel, and that
being the case, I would expect Quayle to use whatever means necessary to 
prevent what he claims is a hidious crime, from occuring. His support for
operation rescue suggests that he supports using force to prevent abortion 
from happening, it wasn't clear that he would apply the same standard in his 
daughters case.

	Note that I don't object to his answer per-se, I would do the same
thing - but I don't equate abortion with murder, either.






-- 
Anybody who agrees with me deserves what they get.

					Alex Crain
					UMBC Academic Computing Services
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: padutton@wpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton)
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 14:41:01 GMT


After reading yet another Mitch Sako post:

Ever hear of "hate the sin but love the sinner"? Have you ever noticed
that many parents of actual convicted murderers do not disown their
children but grieve over them AND STILL LOVE THEM? Are you saying that
only conservative Republicans have the NERVE to stand by their family,
right or wrong? Do you have any sort of clue whatsoever?

Peter


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: thyat@sdf.lonestar.org (Tom Hyatt)
Subject: Re: The depth of Right wing BS
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:43:16 GMT

In article <76360@ut-emx.uucp> zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mark Gansle) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.145543.23931@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain) writes:
>>	What is going up, as a result of the latest poll, is that fear
>>level among right wingers that Clinton will win. This won't effect the
>>markets as much as it will put a halt to the right wing agenda that
>>has been working its way through the country in recent years. 
>
>What is also going up is fear among entrepeneurs (you know, those people 
>who create jobs) that Clinton will win and impose his punitive economic plan
>on the business(wo)men of America.  Did anyone besides me notice the fact that,
>when Perot dropped out, stock prices shot up?  And that every time Clinton has
>been announced as leading in the polls, prices have plummetted?
>
>
A bit of clarification here:  From the reports I've heard, the reasons for the
momentary (lasted a couple days, recovered quickly) dip in the NYSE and other
world stock markets was the rumors flying about concerning the possibility of
Bush dropping off the Republican ticket due to failing health. These rumors
were false, and the stock market adjusted accordingly. I personally don't see
any collabaration between stock markets at this point and who will or will not
win the election four months' hence.  On a side point, what are you talking
about when you mention Clinton's punitive economic plan?  The only one that 
I've heard is that he will more closely enforce environmental and OSHA safety
regulations if elected, and also that he would not support the Bush version
of the capital gains tax cuts, but only for families' long-term investments
(like housing). Short-term investments that got selective few really rich still
will have the same tax on them.



>+-------------------------+-------------------------+
>|Cloud-gathering Zeus     |Think globally.          |
>|                         |Act locally.             |
>|zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  |Eat my shorts totally.   |
>+-------------------------+-------------------------+
>



-- 
==========================================================================       Tom Hyatt                          | My disclaimer:  I am not affiliated        USENET: thyat@sdf.lonestar.org     | with any USENET sites, organizations       RIME:  -->LUNATIC (Tom Hyatt)      | or personnel. The views given by me        Prodigy: KKDH77A (quit yer laffin!)| are mine, and nobody else's.  Nyah!       ==========================================================================
-
---
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: crb2@Ra.MsState.Edu (Chad R. Berthelson)
Subject: Re: The real deal
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:08:10 GMT

mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako) writes:

>Your feelings exactly agree with mine.  His non-thinking lackeys are quite
>a bunch.  I used to go toe-to-toe with a few of them on RIME but they all
>withered away when they realized that they had no leg to stand on.  I don't
>mind his arrogance so much but I do object to his lack of tolerance for
>anyone who disagrees with him.

I don't know if they 'realized that they had no leg to stand on', or if they 
realized that talking to an idiot is really a pointless adventure.  I 'give up'
alot when listening to radicals and liberals, because I figure they are already
crazy, and it's gonna take more than sensible talk to 'fix' them.

One example was right here (or maybe on alt.rush.limbaugh) when Zack Sessions
took on the scientific community (or at least a chunk of it) in an argument
over global warming.  We all gave up, because when you would state what science
'really' knows (states), he would ignore reason and spout a bunch of leftist,
envoironazi jibberish.   

Point:  Just because your the last one talking in an argument (discussion),
doesn't mean that the other side was won over, or even that they conceded.

Chad


--

Chad R. Berthelson		Graduate Research/Teaching Assistant
crb2@ra.msstate.edu		Biological Engineering
cberth@abe.msstate.edu		Mississippi State University
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: fuhry@think.com (Debbie Fuhry)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Date: 24 Jul 1992 15:41:33 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: leander.think.com

In article <1992Jul24.150219.21396@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain) writes:

	KING: What if your daughter grew up and had a problem, came to you
	and with that problem that all fathers fear? How would you deal with
	it?

	QUAYLE: Well, it is a hypothetical situation. I hope that I never
	do have to deal with it, but obviously ----

	KING: What would you do?

	QUAYLE: I would council her and talk to her and support her on 
	whatever decision she made?

	KING: And if the decision was abortion, yould support her, as a parent?

	QUAYLE: I'd support my daughter. I'd hope thath she wouldn't make that
	decision.

[...]

>	My own problem is that, for Quayles perspective, he essentially
>is saying that he would support his daughter if she chose to become a
>murderer. Given that he is actively trying to make abortion illegal,
>one could conclude that abortion is ok for his daughter, but not ok for
>anybody else. After all, if your willing to go to great lengths to keep
>stranges from performing a sinful act, then you should be willing to go
>at least that far for your own kids.

He *is* willing to go that far to prevent his own *adult* daughter from
having an abortion.  However, since we're talking about an *adult*
daughter, that's all he can do.  Once she's gotten the abortion, should he
disown her?  I don't think he was saying he'd tell her "Oh, it's alright
honey, do whatever you think is best, and we're behind you all the way."
I'm sure it's something like "You know what we believe about this decision,
but you're still our daughter, and we won't stop loving you because of it."

I think there's a massive gulf between those two sentiments, Alex.
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: alt.fan.rush and alt.rush, how to avoid the repetition
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:35:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University

yin@ucsee.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>I have grown tired of having to see almost every article appearing twice.  
>Is there anything I can do?

    Well, you could get a can of black spray paint and apply it liberally 
to your monitor screen. I suppose that in the interests of making this a
multi-cultural posting, I should ammend that suggestion by noting that 
you can use practically any color of spray paint...

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:3741 alt.rush-limbaugh:2986
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: The price of freedom
Date: 23 Jul 92 14:55:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: psygate.nate.371
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University

steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree) writes:
>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>> The growth of the budget deficit
>>was just as alarming and out-of-control under Reagon as it's been under
>>Bush.

>If you index the yearly deficit as a percentage of GNP, it was going DOWN as 
>reagan left office. Congress's post reagan spending spree and the S and L
>bailout has caused the yearly deficit to increase substantially as a per-
>centage of GNP under Bush. 

    Well, maybe it's unfair of me to do so, but I'm still old-fashioned 
enough to hold Reagon at least partly responsible for the S&L mess. 
Reagon's deregulation of the S&L's created a really neato short-term 
economic growth pattern which made Reagon's statistics look better as
he left office ("Golden Parachute"?), but I hope we would agree that 
the deregulation of the S&L's was not one of Reagon's most successful
policies?

    Call me a nutcase, if you wish, but I still think that much of Reagon's
"economic recovery" was gained at the expense of selling out the future.
That's why I'm frustrated by Reagon's continuing "Teflon" surface. 
Many Republicans invoke the name of Jimmy Carter as though he were the 
devil incarnate, but when it comes to the mud that ought to be sticking 
to their fair-haired boy it seems like they develope a case of selective
color-blindness.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:26:16 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Logic Corporation

In article 17559@hemlock.cray.com, rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>I don't criticize Dan for his "unconditional love" for his daughter, but I
>do flame him for not having the same unconditional love for *all* women
>in similar circumstances as his daughter.
>If he would not treat his daughter like a criminal, he should not support
>legislation to make other women criminals.

It fits the conservative dogma to act this way.  Selfishness, every man for
himself, get yours now, etc.  It fits with his Chicken-Hawk stands and is
very consistent.  He would send our kids to war but he would never go.

---
Mitch Sako	LSI Logic Corp.		Phone	408-433-4187
internet:	msako@lsil.com		FAX	408-433-8796
uucp:		lsil!msako
RIME:		->REDBARON, conference=POLITICS
Disclaimer:	The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh