HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-VMS-To: MCDEV1::POLITICS
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 09:10:16 -0500
From:         "Chris A. Sloffer" <SLOFFER_CHRIS_A@LILLY.COM>
Subject:      Re: meaningless phrases

>Can you list 3 specific things your learned in college (in the classes,
>not in the "atmosphere") that had a real value to you later in real life?

I can't imagine.  I could spend all day listing the things learned.  If you
answer no to this question, what (if anything) did you study?

>Second question:  Is your current job or area of study closely connected
>to your undergraduate degree?

Err.......I guess it's more or less "closely connected."

>--Missy P 2 B

Chris
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 11:24:43 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: cutting off one's nose to spite one's face

Okay:

The difference is oil.  Oil, being necessary to the day-to-day existence
of the country, is a commodity that requires preservation for the national
interests.  Bosnians are not.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 29 Aug 1992 18:51:03 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: misc. responses
              29 Aug 1992 15:32:19 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU>

Hi Kerry:

I'm a bit curious about your concern that "the system" doesn't
provide much support for people who adopt developmentally
disabled and disabled children.  The people I have met in my
studies who so adopted did not get any help from the system,
nor did they expect it.  They most likely would not take it
if it was offered.  It is their position that their family is
their responsibility, and they work extremely hard to provide
for those families.

This is a very key difference between conservatives and liberals
(as we use the terms today).  Conservatives believe that the job
of the government is to see to it that there are no unreasonable
obstacles (perhaps undue burdens?) in the way of effort.  Liberals
believe that it is the job of the government to provide assistance
to that effort.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:25:00 EDT
From:         rf35 <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Polling Pitfalls
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

>>From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
>
>>The stated margin of error is a LOWER bound on the margin of error; it
>>isn't an upper bound.  It is based on assumptions that competent
>>pollsters know to be incorrect.
>
>It is neither a lower nor an upper bound.
>
>The figures given in a poll MIGHT be EXACTLY right, thus zero error.
>They could, conceivably, be off by virtually any amount, if the
>pollsters got REALLY unlucky.
>
>The margin of error is something like the distance from the figures
>cited that they'd have to be wrong by for the bias in the poll
>(whether systematic or random) to be "extremely surprising," where
>that vague term has some more precise definition, like "only a
>tenth of a percent chance of such a freakish result," but I don't
>know exactly what it is.
>
>
>Jamie

Greetings:

        The margin of error represents a range of either two or
three standard deviations from the number reported.  If it represents
two standard deviations, then the chance that the actual numbers
fall outside of the margin of error is 5%.  That is, the actual
numbers are within the standard of error 95% of the time.  If
the margin of error is three standard deviations, then the actual
numbers should be within the reported margin of error 99% of the
time.

        Recognizing that accuracy is difficult in polls, they generally
tie the "margin of error" to two standard deviations.  Consequently,
if a respected poll reports the following:

        Clinton:                61%
        Bush:                   49%

        Margin of Error:        5%

        It would be safe to take a 20-1 bet that Clinton was going to win
the election.

                                        Richard A. Fyfe
                                        rf35@umail.umd.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:55:00 CDT
From:         "The Truth (some assembly required)" <T9AA@SDSUMUS.BITNET>
Subject:      A correction . . .

> >Well, he teaches Philosophy at Brown University

> Why am I not surprised?

I'm not a psychic, so you tell me.

> >and has a bookshelf that impresses me.

> I like nice furniture too.

I meant that he had a prodigious personal library, some of which
hasn't been colored in yet.

> >Do you accept anecdotal evidence from a disinterested third party?

>Nope, sorry.  I'm afraid it would not live up to the demanding standards
>of this list.

Smile when you say that, Pilgrim.

B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B) B)

>---Robert

Dave, with the assistance (guess which line) of rufus t. firefly
t9aa@sdsumus.bitnet
At college age, you can tell who is best at taking
tests and going to school, but you can't tell who
the best people are.  That worries the hell out
of me.
              --Barnaby C. Keeney

Disclaimer:  The opinions contained in this post are not the
opinions of the Administration, Faculty, or Student Body of
South Dakota State University.  Hell, they might not even
be mine.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:08:14 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: child care tax credit

A much simpler method, if only your employer supports it:

You can (legally, I dunno if UWV will do it for you) get a fixed monthly
amount of your paycheck set aside in a fund to pay for child care. You
can then submit receipts from the provider to the controller of the
fund, and the fund will reimburse you from the pre-tax money. You never
have to pay taxes on the money that goes into the fund. So you pay for
childcare with tax free salary.

One hitch: if you put too much into the fund, more than you actually
spend that year, you lose it.

You say you got reimbursed for about 23% of your expenses from
the credits. If your marginal tax rate (not your AVERAGE tax rate,
that would be lower) is 23% or more, you'll do better to use
the tax free fund instead of the credits. And it's a lot easier.

Jamie, may apply for a position at H&R Block
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 10:05:43 CDT
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      an ounce of prevention, etc.

It seems blatantly simple that the easiest way to reduce the number of
abortions is to reduce the number of UNWANTED pregnancies. Yet, the rtl
groups are opposed to sexual education and distribution of birth control
in the schools. Just say no is just as effective for birth control as it
is for drugs, that is, if you add an W to the end of the slogan it will
reveal the prevailing attitude toward sex.

I didn't catch the source but a poll on the radio today said that 68%
of americans are in favor of distributing condoms in schools. Missy
tells us that only 10% of americans favor a total ban on abortions.

I think that the republicans have seriously underestimated the public
pulse on this issue. The democrats are assured of the white house due
to this issue and the state of the economy. Did anyone else see the
report about GM closing it's last california plant and moving to Toronto
because they won't have to pay health insurance costs in Canada? Maybe
we could learn something from our neighbors to the north.

fred
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:30:00 EST
From:         Tyrone Slothrop <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: To Missy: On Wrongness

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: To Missy: On Wrongness

What *makes* you "desire an aversion"?

--Missy P 2 B

**********

i suspect that this sort of question requires a rather intensive
investigation into specific behaviors rather than vast generalizations
based on preconceived theory.  however, it is entirely possible that
the subjects investigated would not be suitable for the list.  if
anyone wants to take this off list, i would be happy to engage the
question.

"kakophelia: when something is really disgusting, but you sorta like
it, you know?" --dave a.

brni
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, 26 Aug 1992 15:34:06 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      torte reform

well, steve, i kinda like kirschentorte and sachertorte.  no need to
reform those.
no, lest this be construed as wasted and frivolous bandwidth, i would like
to say "yes, i agree that tort reform is a good idea."
ahem.
yes, i agree that tort reform is a good idea.  while we are at it, maybe
we could overhaul a variety of things with the legal system.  but...
i doubt that any sort of judicial reform will do any good at all as long
as there are lawyers to burn (hey, there's an idea!).  are there any people
at all who are still becoming public defenders?  like, of their own free
will?  i admittedly don't know all that much about law.  i only got
interested in constitutional law in college, and that doesn't come up
much.
(hypothetical situation to follow:
anneliese:  "oh, gosh, i'm sorry!  i hit your bumper!  oh, wow, gee, i mean..
             here's the name of my insurance agent.  did you hurt yourself?"
guy in pickup truck:  "uh, yeah.  my neck really, really hurts.  see you
                       in court, red."
anneliese: "but wait!  mapp vs. ohio clearly states that i can look in your car
               for evidence that you had been drinking!  and bustamonte vs.
            schneckloth gives me a prerogative to open your trunk!"
um, close parentheses.  more later....           * * *liese
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:24:54 EDT
From:         Tim Johnson <PH408014@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Rape as violence or sex.

> You can think or read whatever you like, but your comments are common
> among people who think they can understand something they have never
> experienced.

  Do you mean that the rapist is the only one qualified to discuss
the motivations behind rape?  I don't want to stomp in my cleats
all over anyone's personal and private and unpleasant experiences,
but I guess it isn't obvious to me that a victim of rape is more
qualified to speak of the rapist's motivation than, say, a male
(and therefore potential rapist).

                                       -Tim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 11:26:30 -0400
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET

 *** Resending note of 08/26/92 08:44

 >> Do I also take it that you are first an American and then a
 >> Christian or is it that your morality/religion/ethnicity takes
 >> precedent while others should be pushed under the rug.
 >> -KAT

 > I get the feeling that your trying to characterize me as an extreme
 > nationalist.  In response, I would point out that an "America First"
 > position ( a few years ago ) was considered *patriotic*.  Only recently
 > has it been twisted to mean *isolationist*.

 >>Well, nice of you to drop the other part of your post that I responded
 >>to.  But lucky you, I still have your earlier post.  This is what
 >>you said:

 > I'm on the *rolls*, from your comments I assume you are too.  Pat Buchanan
 > hasn't said anything that particularly alarms me.  Maybe it's because I
 >think of myself first as an *American* and secondly as having Indian heritage.

 >>See, you were telling this other person that he should be first
 >>American THEN think about his Indian heritage.  My question to
 >>you is/was: would you also first be an American and then think
 >>about your Christianity?  Or do you think your Christian feelings/
 >>obligations supersedes your obligations as an American citizen.

 I dropped it because it didn't apply to the issue at hand.  A relationship
 with "G"od is not comparable to patriotism.  My relationship with "G"od
 is beyond earthly concerns.

 Put simply, "G"od comes first.

 ---Robert
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:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:29:02 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: The City on the Hill

Jamie:
>>Maybe not.  On a short clip from a Quayle interview, he said something to
>>the effect of "our first priority is to get the president re-elected.  Then
>>we'll think about '94."
>
>Did he say "94" or "96"?

He said "94".

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:08:03 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Human Life Amendment
              30 Aug 1992 22:13:33 EDT from <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>

KAT:

I have no problem with the idea of having an anti-life amendment, either.
If this is an issue that needs to be debated, why shouldn't we do so
through the process of constitutional amendment?  Same reason I have
no problem with petitions to get people onto the ballot--let them
try it on a level playing field.  The system we live in is one of
open debate on matters of social and political relevance.  We do no
service to the nation by either avoiding the debate or having the
Congress do an end-run around the issue by passing their own acts
to enforce one position or another.

Let's put it on the table for, say 7 years (that's what ERA got)
and see what the people decide.

--Missy P 2 B
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Income Tax
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:33:24 GMT

Hi.

I'm a raving anarcho-capitalist.  So when I first heard this theory
about the 16th amendment being invalid a couple of years ago, I was
really interested.

I checked into it.  

It is a pretty stupid theory.

--Jimbo

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:05:20 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Human Life Amendment

Dave:

No, sorry.  You must have missed it.  I am "Missy P 2 B" because I
am going to be President when my running mate (Kerry other President
in Waiting) and I win the virtual election.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:02:00 EDT
From:         TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Fired for an abortion...

Was this suit filed in state or federal court??
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:45:31 -0400
From:         "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      mastur... what?

 Sorry KAT.  My eyes were crossed and I couldn't quite read it.

 ---Robert

 "Abortion has saved us from looking at a lot of childish art"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 08:23:34 CDT
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      republicans take the high road

I just heard a news report that Texas republicans are hiring an Elvis
impersonator to follow Bill Clinton on his bus tour through Texas.
Boy, you let one actor get elected from your party and every election
becomes an exercise in theatre. Doesn't bush realize that thinking
people are offended by this garbage? Doesn't he see that immediate
action is needed on domestic problems if he has any chance to win?

I don't understand the no-fly thing in Iraq, other than it shows that
bush is active in foreign policy decisions. I don't think that foreign
policy of this nature will be too important to the electorate; I think
people will be afraid of another war. The foreign policies we should
be working on deal with improved trade relations and humanitarian efforts.

fred
"Before you accuse me, take a look at yourself" - E. Clapton
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:39:26 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: More Comments on the 1992 Election ...

On the election:

I was watching CSPAN this weekend, and they were interviewing the
guy who keeps the archives of campaign commercials, and they showed
Presidential campaign commercials from every election since (I
believe) 1952.  There was one thing common to every one of them.
Every single candidate said something to the effect of "I know the
economy is in terrible shape right now, but....."

What's going on here?  Has the economy *always* been terrible?  Is
it really no more terrible now than it has been before?  As a matter
of fact, "the economy" didn't become news until *immediately* following
the Hill/Thomas hearings, when the media suddenly started talking about
how terrible the economy was (I thought it was odd then, now I suspect
it might have been deliberate.)
How do we *know* the economy is any worse now than it was in 1952?
(I was *very* surprised to see that commercial, since everyone has
always told me that the 1950s were the time of prosperity and joy--
or whatever.  Anyway, things were supposedly better then, especially
the economy.)  We can't use unemployment, since its definition changed
3 times during the Reagan administration.  The economic indicators
have changed, too--something about mortgages and rents, which I never
quite understood.  Are there more homeless people--or have we just
started counting them instead of calling them bums?  Whose numbers
can we trust?
Is the economy a creature of the election year cycle?
This is really weird.

--Missy P 2 B
From: bush@whitehouse.gov (George)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Woody dumps daughter fer Fergy. Film at 11
Date: 27 Aug 92 00:49:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <ncovey.714841469@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>, ncovey@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (neil covey) writes...

[...]

>At least Clinton (and earlier Brown and Perot) knows what the net is and
>seeks to communicate with/through it.  One wonders what century Bush
>lives in.

We really don't know if Clinton's knowledge of the net is different 
than G. Bush's. The only evidence that we have on the Clinton side is 
a letter that came from Mary Jacob's account signed "Bill Clinton."
Do you think that Clinton really signed the letter?


=============================
Robert Weiss
psyrobtw@ubvms.cc.buffalo.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:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 11:46:11 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      it worked!

And I now have the Democratic party's platform.  Yay!  If anyone wants, let
me know and I'll send it to you.

Kerry
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:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:11:47 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: The City on the Hill

Jamie:
>I have no prediction about that. Well, I think there is some
>chance that the economy will do fairly well under Clinton. But
>I agree that the smart Republicans are starting to position for
>'96, if that's what you're implying. (And I guess I've just
>unintentionally called Quayle a "smart Republican," go figure.)

Maybe not.  On a short clip from a Quayle interview, he said something to
the effect of "our first priority is to get the president re-elected.  Then
we'll think about '94."

Kerry
p.s.: I've read some speculation that says smart candidates are avoiding
this term, because no matter who wins, the economy is going to be rough.
Under this scenario, smart demo's are supposed to hope Bush wins so they
can take '96; smart Repubs are supposed to do the opposite :)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CDELL
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:52:44 -0500
From:         "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Rape; violation, sex or whatever...

Nope. Apples aren't oranges, and rape, and the violation it IS (not what I
feel it is!) is NOT the same as abortion, the two issues are not equatable.
That kind of over-simplification belittles all those who have made the tough
decision to abort and all those people who have been VIOLATED, for that IS a
reality, which cannot be blithely explained away, and attempts to twist facts
to fit what YOU want to believe. THe two are separate category events, and
cannot be analyzed the same. VMS
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: Deadly Force, We Need Help, Justice??
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:40:41 GMT

Kerry writes:
>We don't need to know what
>people *think* the law should be, based on gut instinct.
>What we are trying to ascertain is "What does the law actually
>*say.*?"

Actually, we ought to be interested in both of these questions.
It is important to understand the current legal framework if we
are to discuss it intelligently.  But we also want to discuss
what the law ought to be.  Of course, I agree with Kerry that
'gut instinct' is not sufficient. 

Kerry, do you think that people ought to have the legal right
to shoot intruders?

--Jimbo



Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:20:47 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Deadly Force, We Need Help, Justice??
              26 Aug 1992 19:40:41 GMT from <jwales@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

Jimbo:

No, I do not.  (Where "should" refers to an ideal situation, rather than
to approved conduct under current law.)

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 10:59:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: CLINTON BIRTHDAY THANKS TO YOU

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

hey dunstan, ask missy. she knows all about blind faith :).
me, i just believe everything everybody tells me cause its easier. gotten me
in trouble sometimes, but it makes my boyfriend laugh.

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU