HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:54:04 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Potty Training
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:58:47 MST Roger said:
>>The reason that there are no shared bathrooms is that the vast majority
>>of people do not want them.  Am I spoiling everybody's fun?
>>
>>Chris Morrison
>>CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
>
>Where are your poll results?  How do you know what the vast majority of
>people want?  If it cost less in taxpayer dollars to provide single
>bathrooms in all government buildings, I would certainly support it.
>
>And yes, you are spoiling my fun.  I'd like to see what women write on
>the bathroom walls.

Maybe that's why it takes their lines so long to process @ ballgames,
concerts, etc....they're busy writing on the walls?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 17:22:47 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Interest Rates
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

Missy:
>KAT:
>
>What's going on in Sweden?  There must be a *reason* for the jump.
>Do you happen to know?
>
>--Missy P 2 B

The 75% was an overnight market rate, not a base rate. I think it all
has something to do with the Swedish (and Finnish for that matter)
governments dropping a policy of following ERM parities.

Dunstan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 14:05:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      RE: "On Bosnia, Another Set of Thoughts" (#769)

Hi, Val, nice to hear from you!

I think too many people have died and too many little attrocities have
taken place for any of these people to ever live together again.  It is
getting to the point where the only solution is to redraw all the borders
and have a big population exchange, with some cash flow to make everybody
feel better about it.  Then there will have to be some sort of international
peace force in the area to keep them apart.

I would really like for the West to go in and try to 1) guard the aid
deliveries and 2) keep the level of fighting from going above a certain
level (Say, we will accept that there will be snipers, but field howitzers
are out -- if anybody uses them they will be bombed.  Perhaps they might
also move in the radar units that are capable of tracking the source of
any artillery rounds that come in, and then hit them with their own
artillery.  But the U.S. and EC are going to wimp out on this.  Anyway,
there are a lot of people in Russia who are backing the Serbs, and there
are plenty of people around Europe who agree with them, though they
aren't too vocal right now.  It is also true that the Croatians are no
angels.  Personally I wish somebody would just shoot Milosovitch and
Tudjman.

                                     Chris Morrison
                                     CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 16:04:42 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Term Limits

So that Andrew MacRae knows that POLITICS is exactly where
he left it (in a general sense of way) let me say a word
or so about term limits and also welcome Andy MacRae back.

Well if is the advantage of being an incumbent that we are
worried about and *if* we acknowledge the bad side effect
of term limits as an anti-democratic law, then why not
try to do the former without effecting the latter.

Why not look at federal matching funds as an equalizer,
that is something that equalizes the unfair and unwanted
advantage by an incumbent.

We can say no matching funds for the incumbents or a rate
half as much as that for the challenger.

What do you say, MacRae?

--KAT nice to see back.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:35:46 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

>From:         todd pukanecz <CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET>

>Ohhh..... You mean the "Good Book".  That shouldn't cost a dime.  Just
>snag them from hotel rooms and let the Gideons replace them.

Gideons would be glad to give you all the bibles you can stand.

I got mine from some Gideons on the street. It was a very pleasant
encounter.

I asked if it was the King James version. They said it was, and that
they find the "Good News" version disgusting. I agreed. We had a nice
conversation about the relative merits of translations. They extolled
Exodus. I praised Song of Songs.

They asked if I went to church. I said I don't, preparing for
a vitriolic exchange or at least some proselytizing. They said,
"Good. We think you shouldn't go to church. The church is corrupt.
It stands for molesting children, simony, and worldly power."
We discussed some current events in Southern New England.

If Jesus ever does come back, he'll be quite pleased with the
Gideons, I think.

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 02:38:00 EST
From:         Tyrone Slothrop <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      zits and jobs

From:         ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Little answer

>so suppose that your employers notice that you have a big zit
>on your nose, and they don't like zits, so they fire you.
>
>this is ok?
>
>sounds like bullshit to me.
>sounds like something that one could sue for.

Of course its okay.  Employers can hire or fire for whatever reasons they
please, given the terms of the initial contract.  I imagine that Cindy Crawford
would find her employment opportunities limited if she developed such a zit, as
would any salesman.  In any case, if an employer is stupid enough to fire a
productive employee because of something like that, he probably won't be in
business too long.

On what grounds would you sue to get your job back?  What right do you have to
force a business-owner to enter into a contract with you if he chooses not to
do so?  Can I force you to pay me to paint your house, even if you were going
to let a relative do it?  I doubt it.

>brni

Jason

        ok, so november 1st your employer calls a meeting of all employees
        and tells them that he has had people spying on them and knows who
        everyone wants to vote for.  he tells you all that if you vote for
        clinton, he will fire you.  now of course, the ballots are
        confidential, so he decides that he is just going to fire anyone
        who vote, period, just to be safe.  and he has people who will
        watch who goes in or out of the polling places to make sure.

        you decide that you want to vote, and do.  does your employer
        have the right to fire you?  after all, can you force an employer
        to pay people for some job if they vote in political elections?

        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:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 09:02:43 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      NEA et al.

Hi, y'all:
Just out of curiosity, how many of the listers who favor getting rid of the
NEA (I'm ambivalent, myself) also favor getting rid of the National Science
Foundation?  The NIH?  Why or why not?

Kerry
p.s. this is not a snide or rhetorical question.  It's something I think
about occassionally, and have had some interesting discussions about
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:26:04 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: who(M) do you trust

Chris:

"Bill Clinton came by his opinions honestly."  Um, okay.

As opposed to what?  *Stealing* them?

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:32:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Interest Rates

Yes, I heard about that, too.

Also, as of today the dollar is going back up.  The Beeb says that it is
because John Major issued a statement saying that it should.  Now if he would
just issue a statement saying the U.S. should eliminate the balance of
payments deficit, cut taxes, and create a full employment economy at the same
time!  With powers like that it's a shame Gorby didn't have the guy working
for him.

Chris Morrison
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: Is homosexuality immoral?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 13:56:51 GMT

In article <POLITICS%92091319003231@OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU> Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET> writes:
>Jimbo:
>
>If the phrases you quote are evidence of the wit you claim to have
>fathered, I think you have a very good basis for recalling your
>genetic material.  The product is irreparably defective.

No, the wit came from 'Liese.  The viciousness came from me.

--Jimbo


Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:47:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Alleged Overpoulation (was Re: let's rephrase the question)

I believe it has been accepted that birth rates tend to go down when
standards of living go up, for one thing.

Chris Morrison
From: ads3@po.CWRU.Edu (Andrew D. Shults)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Term Limits
Date: 14 Sep 1992 05:39:57 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ads3@po.CWRU.Edu (Andrew D. Shults)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, acm@Sun.COM (Andrew MacRae) says:

>As you may recall, trying to find ways to level the playing field when
>someone challenges a long time incumbant is of interest to me.  Last spring
>I suggested that a total ban on paid political advertisements might go a
>long way toward reducing the overall dollar amounts that are needed
>to mount a successful compaign.  This suggestion generated a few
>responses, including (unexpectedly) some from people who actually *liked*
>sound byte commercials and thought that they brought value to a campaign!
>(Oh well, there's no accounting for taste.)

>In Pennsylvania, a political neophyte is giving an incumbant Senator (Spector)
>a real run for his money.  She (I don't remember her name) came out of
>nowhere, inspired to run by Spector's performance during the Thomas
>hearings of a year ago.  She managed to win the primary despite almost no
>backing ($).

     From a Pennsylvanian quite involved in politics (and a Democrat to
boot), Lynne Yeakel doesn't stand a chance.  Its not that hard to win a
five-way primary when you're a solid single-issue candidate, but she's
got zero chance against Arlen Spector.  About all she's doing right now
is yelling "vote for me, I'm a woman."  Spector is also pro-choice so that
won't swing too many votes her way.  Labor unions (tradidional democratic
stronghold) aren't even falling behind Yeakel.  There's about a 50-50 split
between the two candidates.  AFL-CIO can't muster the necessary 2/3 majority
to endorse either.  Spector has also been drowning out Yeakel with a ton of
positive ads which are driving his credibility through the roof.  I have no
doubt that Yeakel will have a sizeable and strong base vote, but that's not
going to be enough to get a majority.
     If you really want races to watch in PA, try two congressional races:
Don Ritter (R-15) has his hands full with challenger Paul McHale.  Right
now, this one of the DCCC's top challenger races in the Northeast, if not
the top one.  As a major plus to people who want to see an easier time for
challengers, Paul supports limits on PAC contributions coupled with a cap
on individual contributions and some public funding in order to level the
playing field.
     On the flip side, Pete Kostmayer (D-8) is also having trouble with his
challenger, I believe the person's name if Fox.  Kostmayer's never had an
easy time, and this is his year to go.  He was the state's top check-
bouncer and is facing a _moderate_ Republican for once.

     ---Andrew

P.S. I worked on the McHale race this summer, so I could go on and on to
     anyone who is interested, but I wanted to keep this short.
From: 199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET (Tyrone Slothrop)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: homosexuals and marriage
Date: 9 Sep 92 07:38:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

Jamie:

Okay, let's try to explain it then.  My statement: "If the state defines
'marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman, your argument
[of discrimination] is wrong."

        ok, try this one.  "if the state defines government as an
        institution of rich white men," then it is not discriminating
        against blacks, orientals, women, or any other group, and the
        blacks in south africa are NOT being discriminated against,
        because, after all, government is *defined* as not including
        blacks.

        or this one "marriage is a legal union between a man and
        a woman of the same race"  or "born in the same county"
        or anything else that one can turn into a definition.
        just because the powers tht be define something in a certain
        way doesn't mean that the definition itself is not discriminatory.

You claim that the marriage laws discriminate against homosexuals.
No, they don't.  If "marriage" is definitionally a legal union between
a man and a woman, then homosexuals are not discriminated against, any
more than men are discriminated against when insurance coverage
includes the condition of pregnancy (a condition to which men are
not subject).

If homosexuals wish to marry, they are free to do so, provided that
the marriage is a union between two persons of opposite gender.  There
is no obstacle to such an activity.  There is no law that states that
persons expressing a particular sexual preference are disallowed from
entering into a legal union with persons of the opposite gender.

The union between two persons of the same gender (legally recognized
or not) is not and has never been "marriage."  If the state wishes to
recognize such a union in law, it will have to find a new term for it,
and define laws specific to it.

Ya just gotta play by the rules.

        thats what they told mlk.
        when the rules suck, you change them.

        brni

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 08:49:48 EDT
From:         jcs <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The War Between the Jasons

>Posted on 9 Sep 1992 at 22:42:10 by Kerry Stephenson
>
>Re: The War Between the Jasons
>
>From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
>
>Travis.
>
>Thanks.  I'm glad *somebody* got my point.  You are right.  The segregation
>of gender in public restrooms is based on "pubic  morality."
>
>Good call.
>
>--Missy P 2 B

I don't think the segregating of public bathrooms has anything
to do with pubic morality.  I think it has everything to do
with the fact that women can't pee standing up. Well, not
easily anyway.

jcs
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  JNET%"politics@ohstvma"
Original_cc:  HOUSSAH5
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 7 Sep 1992 13:33:00 +0200
From:         HOUSSAH5@EGAUCACS.BITNET
Subject:      RE: To MacPhil (and interested parties) on Bosnia

Well, you say that the US has still not preferred one side over the other in
the Bosnian conflict. Well, I disagree with you. The United States as well
as the rest of the international community have clearly and explicitely condemne
d
Serbian actions in Bosnia. This is clear from the sanctions taken against the
Serbian republic, not allowing the Serbs to take part in the last olympics as
well as many other actions already exposing the opinion of the international
community on that issue.
Moreover, I also disagree on looking at the Bosnian problem as being
"internal" as you seemed to suggest. This problem became a problem between
two independent states the minute most countries (including the US and Europe)
accepted the state of Bosnia as being an independent state.

-Gilbert
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, 11 Sep 1992 09:55:00 EDT
From:         GRACZ1@ITHACA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Bosnia conflict

>I guess you all heard that the Iranians are starting to send arms into
>Bosnia.  They are starting slowly, I guess as a sort of wake-up call to
>the West, telling them "if you don't do something we will."  I have been
>hearing a lot about Bosnia on Radio Kuwait, Voice of Turkey, etc.

     Yikes!  MORE weapons?  This could get even uglier, fast.  We'd
    better do something soon that doesn't involve giving the combatants
    greater firepower (that's a good way to extend the conflict,
    especially since not everyone in the world thinks the Serbians
    are at fault and would presumably be willing to back up that
    opinion with a few pieces.)

>Chris Morrison
>CMorriso@snyescva.bitnet

G. Racz
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:         Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:51:35 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: bill of responsibilities

I do like what you said Kerry, and I've given
this a little thought myself.

If the Constitution is a contract between society
and its government, specifying the responsibilities
of the government, don't the laws and legal codes
contain the responsibilities of the citizens?

Your observations were very vague and inspecific(as
they should be coming from the Preamble), but if
there are any specific responsibilities, wouldn't
they be contained in the law?

I may not be making myself sufficiently clear and
I am not really up on the content of most of the
laws of our land in terms of their content, but
it is just an idea.

j.b.
From: CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Is homosexuality immoral?
Date: 13 Sep 92 16:44:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

There is a story about a man who went to the teacher Hillel, after going
first to another teacher and being rejected.  He said that if Hillel could
teach him the entire Torah standing on one foot he would convert to
Judaism.  Hillel said to him "Do not to your neighbor what you would not
want your neighbor to do to you.  This is the whole of the Torah, the rest
is commentary.  Now go and study."

At the time of the Jewish New Year, when it is the tradition that everyone
is to repent of their sins of the previous year, it is also said that God
only forgives sins against God.  Sins against other humans must be forgiven
by them (it is a sin to not ask, it is also a sin not to forgive when asked).

Chris Morrison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 09:46:36 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: read my lips: I have family values
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

Missy:
>KAT:
>
>What makes you think that private schools start with better students?
>
>--Missy P 2 B
>
>PS:  It has just occurred to me that this entire discussion might be
>confusing to those who are not in the United States.  Our use of the
>terms "private and public" don't apply in some countries (as I under-
>stand it, in Britain, a public school is what *we* call a private
>school.)  Public school in the US is state-sponsored, state-funded,
etc.

I know. I bet we were using the term public school long before you
were. We call free schools state schools, despite most of them being
run by the counties (though a growing number are becoming directly
funded from central government). We're going through a pretty
fundamental reform of our education system, and if you don't watch out
I'll start posting the list all about Grant Maintained Schools, the
National curriculum Council and Her Majesty's Inspectorate....
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:24:37 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Rights, and other comments ...
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

Dave:
>I would not make these "responsibilities" compulsary, but I would
>accept a general list of things that make up "good citizenship,"
>and while I would be uncomfortable making a law requiring voting,
>I would have no problems whatsoever saying that voting is the first
>requirement for good citizenship. Keeping aware of the issues would
>be second.

Towards the end of her time as PM, Margaret Thatcher started talking
about the idea of the "Active Citizen". The active citizen is the one
who becomes a school governor, puts their name forward to become a
councillor, pays attention to local affairs.

A few years ago the Council in Rugby wanted to redevelop some dreadful
prefab steel houses built immediately after the end of the War.
Letters were sent to 150 households telling them that we were going to
knock their houses down, and would they like to come to a meeting next
Thursday to hear about it and express their views. Less than 50 people
turned up, representing, say 30 households. Those who didn't come were
probably not active citizens.

A school local to me has a governing body of about a dozen, and the
school has around 250 pupils. By law the governors must hold a meeting
every year for parents to attend and hear about what the governors are
doing with their kids' school. Usually there are more governors
present at this meeting than parents. Those who don't come are
probably not active citizens.

There is a public gallery above the Council Chamber in Rugby. There is
usually nobody there for committee meetings, and rarely more than one
or two for full Council meetings, even when we are setting the level
of local tax, or the rents for our tenants. Obviously not very active
citizens.


Anybody over there got any ideas about what active citizenship would
comprise ?

Dunstan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 14:03:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Not Registered To Vote? Read This Post.

Now see--another shining example of states' rights!
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU