HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The politics of Andrew
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:15:13 GMT
Distribution: talk
Organization: Stay Awake Software

<1992Sep3.023157.27589@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) said:
>dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL) writes:
[FLA damage area]
>>Bill Clinton is planning a trip there this week, too.  Would someone please
>>explain *one* good reason why the residents of that area need him there?
>
>>Why can't these people just get the f*ck out of the way?
>
>Good points.  I saw an interview with Marylin Quayle tonite on CNN.  She
>has been in Florida since Sunday and apparently nobody in the media knew
>she was there.  When asked why she was keeping a "low profile", she
>said, "I was working.  You can't get much done with a entourage from the
>press around you all the time."

Yeah, and if Clinton doesn't show up then the Republicrats use it against
him as "not caring enough to even visit the suffering".  I wonder if Bush
hates brocolli more when it's bounced off his head?


Gordon
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: Top 10: Why Bush should be baseball commissioner
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:00:22 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.120835.13733@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:

   Top 10 Reasons Bush should be the new baseball commissioner
   -----------------------------------------------------------

   10. No Congress to deal with.

No, just the owners.  Ask Fay Vincent if he'd rather deal with Congress
or the owners.  I'll bet a week's wages he'll take Congress.

   9.  He won't be asked to make any decisions.

Yes he will and then they'll beat him up for making the decision they
wanted in the first place.

   8.  He can bail out his other son for a change.

Why should his other son need bailing out?  His other son has Jose
Canseco.

   7.  Someone has to bounce out the first ball of the season.

You know for a guy who played first base at Yale he's got a lousy arm.

   6.  He won't let Willie Horton play in the majors.

Nope, there's no such posisition as penis-cutter-offer.

   5.  He'll need a new job come January.

Like Joe Morgan did?

   4.  Danny needs the connection to a job as batboy.

Why would he wanted to be connected to a job?  He's connected to a
newspaper.

   3.  He'll try not to throw up on the Mariners owner.

Especially when he sees how they're doing.

   2.  He'll use force, if necessary, to get the Cubs out of the East.

Nah, he's a traditionalist, he'll leave 'em where they are.  It's the
Giants who're going to have to watch out.  He might move them to the
East.

   1.  The "Draft Clinton" movement is bound to fail.

Of course, he was at Oxford during the first round.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: naumoski@cs.ruu.nl (Goce Naumoski)
Subject: Greece and democracy (reposting)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 07:46:41 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science


After insisting of some readers on the net, I decided to repost the
article from SCY to SCGreek, EunetPolitics and TalkPolitics.

In <1992Sep9.082354.17059@cs.ruu.nl> naumoski@cs.ruu.nl (Goce Naumoski) writes:

>I'd like to say a few words about the democracy in Greece.
>
>Yesterday evening (8 September) from 20.25 to 21.00 (7.25-8pm GMT) 
>on the Dutch television channel one, in "TIJDSEIN", there was
>a story about the Thrace and the Turkish population living there.
>They are called "Greek Muslims" by the Greeks, they have no right to
>call themselves Turks. The camera-team was everywhere followed by
>the Greek secret police (the same as early this year when a Belgian
>team has made story about the Macedonians in the Aegean Macedonia).
>Evry step of the team has had to be known, their camera was distroyed.
>The Greek authorities were saying "The Thrace is Greek, and will
>always be Greek" (the same as about Macedonia), and that the West
>didn't understand what was happening, and that there was a danger from
>the muslims.
>
>We were able to see "a democratic" behavior of a country (EC member),
>against the journalists from other EC countries.
>It was very interesting.
>
>Regards,
>Goce.
>
>PS. For the Greek friends: just keep thinking about the greatest democracy
> 			    on the world.
>
>
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45183 ca.politics:7731 ba.politics:5264 soc.motss:38961 ba.motss:1613
From: rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,soc.motss,ba.motss
Subject: Re: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: 13 Sep 1992 23:53:05 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <dvxncwq.phil@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
->I am against any so-called "rights" which are really coercive interference
->into the right of Freedom Of Association.
->
->And you logic, well, sucks (is a mild word). By your reasoning, to say
->that we don't want any child molestors working at "this" company means we've
->just granted special rights to the non-child molestors.

Well, there are some differences here:

A) Child molestors are criminals ; queers are not.
B) Child molestors have chosen to do what they did, and have hurt other people
   in the process ; queers have not.
C) There's a hell of a lot more queers than child molestors.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roy S. Rapoport       rsr@soda.berkeley.edu      wi.5836@wizvax.methuen.ma.us
Disclaimer:  "It wasn't me!! Must have been a fake posting or something!! I
              would NEVER say something like that!!" 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43869 talk.politics.mideast:19637 misc.headlines:6214
From: eggertj@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines
Subject: Re: Fair Swap
Date: 5 Sep 92 03:28:56 GMT
	<1992Sep3.201539.9597@das.harvard.edu>
	<EGGERTJ.92Sep4121103@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Sep4.181853.28566@das.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41

In article <1992Sep4.181853.28566@das.harvard.edu> adam@sparkle.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>   In article <EGGERTJ.92Sep4121103@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu> eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu writes:
>   >This is a simple nonsequitur.  There was no Israeli presence in
>   >Jerusalem in 1947, as there was no Israel.  International law does not
>   >mandate against Jews in Jerusalem, but rather against the Israeli
>   >occupation of East Jerusalem.
>
>   But anytime a Jew tries to move into a house in East Jerusalem, he is
>   branded a settler.  The settlers are called "illegal."  Therefore,
>   Jews can not move into East Jerusalem without certain people claiming
>   that its an invaison.
>
>   Tell me how a Jew can buy property in East Jerusalem and live there.
>   Tell me why Jews buying back homes they were driven from in the 1930s
>   is caled "occupation?"

The occupation is not by Jews per se, but by Israel.  There are many
Arabs and Druse who are Israelis, too.  You seem to mix the concepts
of Israel and Jews.

>  If Israel pulls out, there will be no
>   legitamate governing body to control Jerusalem.  Therefore, Israel has
>   a right to rule Jerusalem, until such time as (Hell freezes over and)
>   a negotiated settlement is achived.

Your premise is wrong, and your conclusion doesn't even follow from
it.  Israel would not "pull out" of the occupied territories without a
negotiated settlement.  Such a settlement would of course involve the
establishment of a governing body that is acceptable to Israel, and
therefore as legitimate as you wish.

Even if you think that such a governing body would not have legitimacy
(whatever that means to you), that still doesn't give Israel the right
of occupation in contravention of international law.  You may as well
deduce that Albania has the right to occupy East Jerusalem, because
East Jerusalem has no legitmate government of their own.

>...
--
=Jim  eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Bush is a mother fucker
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 9 Sep 92 12:03:11 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In <1992Sep9.040425.21247@tygra.Michigan.COM> jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) writes:
>In article <1992Sep6.081835.25466@ucc.su.OZ.AU> jasonh@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Jason Haines) writes:
>"From article <RLK.92Sep5204746@underprize.think.com>, by rlk@underprize.think.com (Robert Krawitz):
>"> In article <1992Sep5.153736.6743@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
>"> 
>"> BTW, it's about time someone called Bush on the "tax and spend" issue,
>"> particularly after the blatant handouts of the past week (the grain
>"> export subsidy and the sale of aircraft to Taiwan).
>"
>"Yes, Bush has bought farmer votes with the mortgages of Australian farmers,
>"who produce wheat more efficiently than american farmers, but cannot compete
>"with grain sold below cost by virtue of subsidies.
>"
>"George Bush can go to hell.
>"
>
>George Bush is also a mass murderer who ordered the killing of about
>250,000 of our fellow human beings in the Persian Gulf. For that reason
>alone, I can never vote for him again. 

	John, go back to alt.stupid.bunnies where you don't sound so sophmoric.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:44972 ca.politics:7666 ba.politics:5218 soc.motss:38868 ba.motss:1586
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,soc.motss,ba.motss
Subject: Re: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:29:24 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Sep10.214355.6235@fico.uucp>, ala@fico.uucp writes:
> In article <12164@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# #Racism?  What are you talking about?  Homosexuals are a race?
# 
# Racism is a universally understood term referring to the degradation and

Hardly universally understood in the weird sense you've picked out.

# lack of civil rights of a group of people from the same cultual background.
# Take for example a 5th generation Jewish person from California and a Jewish
# person from Jerusulum (?SP?).  Both are Jewish but they may have VERY different
# upbringings and life experiences that would indistinguish themselves from
# their common culture.  Anyway, the point is, any group of people sharing
# a commonality can be considered a Race.  I mean, the KKK think of themselves
# as a race and they don't include all whites (I am not sure about that one,
# could you look it up in your handbook?).
# #
# #A true liberal -- Mr. Bucuvalas believes that the correct
# #response to free speech is jail time.
# 
# And so does the justice system when the intent is malicious and meant to
# upset a number of people and possibly cause damage.  It's called 'Criminal
# Solicitaion'.  I'd look it up Clayton, because I am sure that as soon as
# this posts, about 20 other people will, and they will all be gunning for
# you.
# 
# Adryenn

Go look it up.  You are wrong (of course).

Incitement to riot is a criminal offense.

My intent isn't malicious in any case -- I just want the homosexual
community to abandon its fascist campaign to run other people's
lives, and leave children alone.



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton and Responsibility (Contradiction in Terms)
Date: 15 Sep 92 11:56:58 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Sep10.203637.3750@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

> In any case, in the words of James Carville, "The economy, stupid."

I find it ironic that Elizabeth G. Levy (a woman given to feminist
ideals, if I read her postings correctly) would quote James Carville.
Carville is a scumbag (like Clinton -- birds of a feather flock
together, apparently) who has been given to comments concerning women
which would be regarded by any self-respecting feminist as "sexist".
For example, here is an incident from when Carville was working on Jim
Florio's gubenatorial election effort in New Jersey several years ago:

There were a couple of young men who were working on Florio's campaign
who had accomplished some task in a manner that was, in Carville's
estimation, praiseworthy.  While Carville was thanking them, there was
a young female student who was interning at Florio's campaign working
at a copy machine nearby.  To show his appreciation for the young
men's performance, Carville said to her, "Suzy, front and center!
Bl*w jobs for these two young men right now!"

This is the kind of man that James Carville is, and this is the kind
of man that Bill Clinton associates himself with, because,
undoubtedly, this is the kind of man that Bill Clinton is himself.
(Ask Gennifer Flowers.)
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 01:34:16 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <BuMBH6.5BJ@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
    >Japanese companies routinely discriminate against half the
    >population (I have no idea what they do about gays) and it
    >doesn't seem to have hurt them. US companies during the 60's
    >and 60's, i.e., the greatest period of growth for US
    >corporations in history, routinely discriminated against
    >anybody who wasn't a white, heterosexual male. Often on the
    >net we hear that discrimination is self-defeating, but I
    >think this is mainly religion -- I don't see lots of
    >empirical evidence for it.

It was more than race and sex -- in the 1950's and much of the 60's,
companies also routinely discrimated against white males that didn't
dress just right, went to the wrong church (Christian church at that),
had a socially unacceptable mate or were divorced, and most certainly
(if) they had the wrong political views -- much like an outspoken
well-qualified professor who decried Affrimative Action before tenure
and now has 0% chance of getting tenure.

Come to think of it, what is tenure all about -- placing people above
the common prejudices of the day (in theory etc.).



-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45307 talk.politics.theory:4170
From: tdsmith@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Timothy Smith)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Canadian vs US health care
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:52:54 GMT
Reply-To: tdsmith@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Timothy Smith)
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: usa
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.politics.misc, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:

>                            ...My approach requires flexible
>  access to doctors (especially since part of the task is finding a doctor
>  who will tolerate a patient like me!) and labs.  This is easier to
>  achieve in the US system than the Canadian one.

    FALSE!

    In the Canadian system, as I understand it, anyone can go to any 
doctor and the government pays the bill.  "Frivolous" and unnessesary
procedures are tracked statistically and denied.  Nessesary care is
tracked statistically and ensured.  The economy of scale reduces costs
and improves the allocation of equipment.

    In the U.S. system there are several possibilities:

1) You have old-style health insurance, which means that you can go
to any doctor who accepts the coverage.  Some doctors will not be available
to you.  In general this is the most expensive form of care, especialy
if you are high risk, i.e. need to see a specialist often.

2) You have an HMO, in which you can visit a specialist after you get
cleared by your GP.  You can only go to the specialists approved by or
participating in your plan. Most doctors will not be available to you.
While ususaly less expensive than option 1, option 2 is still restriced
to permanent staff of medium and large corporations, and the independantly
well off.

3) You can get government supplied care, in the form of medicare, medicaide,
veterans, etc.  In general this system is marginal.  Many doctors refuse
to take these "poor" patients.

4) None of the above. Unlimited access to all doctors, just like in 
Canada, as long as you can afford their fees.  For most people in this 
category there are effectively NO doctors they can visit.

    The U.S. system suffers from mis-allocation of resources. Some cities
have 4-5 very expensive machines (CAT scanners, etc.) which are 80-90%
idle, and other cities have none.  There is no formal mechanism for
tracking the allocation of resources or the usefullness of various procedures.
Hence, great waste.  This waste is ironically forced upon us by free
market competition! (EVERY hospital must have the latest and greatest
to compete; coordination between hospitals is discouraged.)
    Also, in the U.S. system we pay for one of the most greedy and inefficient
health insurance systems in the world.  In Canada, less than 2% of medical
costs go to administrative burdens; in the U.S. it is closer to 30%.

    Unfortunately, neither candidate in this years presidential election
is taking us to a Canadian system.  Clinton should be bolder in his
approach, IMHO.  Bush wants to entrench the private insurance industry
even further, which IMHO is a small step backwards.

Tim Smith
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis)
Subject: Re: Perot Again?
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:16:35 GMT
Organization: The Gizmonic Institute

kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu writes:
>
>Look for TV images of chicken farms and rivers, rebroadcasts of the Clinton-
>Flowers tape, images of Bush being rescued by the submarine, Al Gore and 
>the environment.

What? No picture of Bush abandoning his plane in a panic, leaving his
fellows to be sliced and diced by machine guns, then in the water,
in a reflective mood, meditating on the separation of church and state?*

No picture of Bush's brother making goomba big bucks selling oil
well fire control equipment to the Kuwaitis? No picture of Neil
Bush making goomba bucks filleting investors in Siverado? No pictures
of diplomatic cables authorizing the illegal use of agriculture
credits to the Iraqis? No recitativs of George Bush backing Gorbachev
over Yeltsin? The Soviet Union over the Balkans? No pictures of
George Bush squeamishly ducking out of helping the coup attempt
against Noriega? No pictures of Tiennamen Square? No weeks-later
toasts by Bush to the Chinese leaders? No current montage of him
attempting to buy jobs by selling planes to Taiwan, thus undercutting
his rationale of currying favor w/ the Chinese in the first place?
No montage of all the goofily catatonic repeats of the word "prudence"?
No Read My Lips sound bites? No voodoo economics? No refusals to
tell the truth, when challenged, about Senator Dole's tax stands?
No ludicrous pictures of his doofus attempts to mimic Reagan's
mimicry of John Wayne's rolling gait? No reports of the nose dive 
that the stock market took when his friends thought that news of
Jennifer with a J was going to hit the press? 

I guess the Clinton camp is going to be thread bare if the going 
gets nasty. If I were Bill, I'd tank it and save my campaign funds
for '96.
----------

*the above consists of the same incident from 2 points of view: some
of the people who watched Bush thought he ditched too soon, and Bush
later in one of his Sleeps of Reason reported that, as he floated about
in the water waiting to be rescued, he meditated on the Separation of Church
and State. I'm not making any of this up.

-- 
Coach Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu> Season: 0-3 Lifetime: 0-5 
It's raining goats! Alleluia!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:44163 alt.activism:16038 misc.headlines:6250
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines
Subject: Re: Health care will-o-wisps
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 8 Sep 92 11:09:12 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Sep4.130458.13870@uunet!tellab5!odgate>, mike@uunet!tellab5!odgate (Mike J. Kelly) writes:
> <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> 
>>>In <9209011924.AA00410@poly.math.cornell.edu>, harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU
>>>(misc.activism.progressive co-moderator) writes:
>>>        My dad had a heart attack last week.  He obtained immediate acces to a
>>>cardiac critical care unit, and his angiogram is being done today.  Not next
>>>month.  Not next year.  And yes, I think the increased cost is worth it.
> 
>>If his need was urgent, he would have received the care in Canada, too.
> 
> I just can't believe that intelligent people would take seriously the 
> propaganda that Canadians are dying because of lack of access to care.

	Canada was not the point.  The point is that for people who earn money,
the health care is there.
	If you want everyone to have health care, make it easier for them to
get a job.

	Health care here in the US needs some reform, but not Canadian style
health care.

> Canada is not a poor country.  The standard of living is fairly similar
> to the U.S.  It is a democracy.  Do you seriously believe that Canadians
> would put up with a system that wasn't serving their needs?  Why do you
> rarely hear *Canadians* complaining about their system?

	When I was in North Conway, NH on vacation, I heard plenty of
complaints about Canadian health care.

	Too-high taxes, mediocre care.  Assembly-line like conditions.  Waiting
lists.
	Yes this was from Canadians.

> Let's have some common sense here.

	I couldn't agree more.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45730 ca.politics:7862 ba.politics:5381