HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,misc.legal
Subject: Re: "Monsters Among Us", Frontlines, November 10, 1992, PBS
Date: 13 Nov 92 19:58:27 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <Bxny3z.Aww@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:

>Why is your judgement on homosexuality
>superior to his judgement?  Society used to ban homosexuality and child
>molestation.  Now you are working to make sure it only bans child 
>molestation. [...] You dislike the idea that society may proscribe homosexual
>activity because you engage in homosexual activity.  Too damn bad.  There is
>action which, no matter how pleasant it may be to the actor(s) involved,
>should not be allowed in a society.  

Tell us all why homosexuality "should not be allowed in society", dreary.

We're all ears.

Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cramer@optilink.uucp (Clayton Cramer): Message-ID: <12133@optilink.UUCP>
I realize it's difficult for a person as depraved as [Brian Kane].
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,
Boston, MA 02215. True personal salvation is achieved by absolute faith in
ones true self.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.philosophy.misc,alt.individualism
From: smcguire@nyx.cs.du.edu (Scott McGuire)
Subject: Re: Property Rights
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 21:23:56 GMT

starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:

>I'm not an anthropologist, but I know people who play them at UC Santa Barbara.
>Haven't there been any stateless agricultural societies?

This has to do with a class I am now taking, History of the World (sounds
ambitious doesn't it).  It seems that the first states rose where agriculture
required significant infrastructure that could only be built with central
planning.  Usually this ment large scale irrigation.  The most notable place
to have a stateless agricultural society was in Europe, after Rome and before
the states we know today formed.  The reason no states were needed was that
rainfall was adequate for farming.  The states didn't form until there was 
something really big that needed to be done (or that people could be convinced
was needed) that required central authority.  This is generally taken to be
warfare after the invention of guns etc. which made armies very expensive.


>}For example, anthropologists have studied division of game in many societies.
>}Usually the hunter and his family have the right to the choicest portions,
>}and the rest get to divide the remainder.

>This just seems like a variant on the Anglo-American common law rule of
>first possession.  The only contrast between it and the libertarian concept of
>it is that we'd think that the hunter would have the right to it all, a priori.
>Of course, contractual arrangements could alter this for things like this.

From the reading I have done for my class, it seems that the successful hunter
gave what he did not need to others with the (unspoken) understanding that 
they would do the same.  No one would force him to share but if he did not, 
he would no longer be able to rely on the others for food when he was
not successful (which would generally be often).


>Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

>"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
>oneself and others." - Voltaire

Scott McGuire
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu ("Broward "Foamy" Horne")
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: RE
Date: 13 Nov 92 00:24:49 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA14335; Thu, 12 Nov 92 16:23:38 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA07477; Thu, 12 Nov 92 16:23:33 -0800
X-Received: from IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU by idbsu.idbsu.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 2802; Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:26:21 MST
X-Received: from IDBSU (GCTHORNE) by IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 4909; Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:26:21 MST
X-To: talk.politics.misc.usenet

Newsgroups: alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!
From: yystg@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (STEVE GRAHAM)
Subject: Re: Clinton = Hitler (was: A New Reich)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 12 Nov 1992 11:03 EST

In article <1drb15INNgij@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brow

>>    The "Government funding for AIDS".  Another one.  It's already
>>    receiving the lion's share of medical funding, yet I keep hearing
>>    " MORE MONEY, MORE MONEY" for a behavioral disease.

>behaviorial disease??  Maybe it would take you getting it from a non-
>behavioral method for you to change your mind.  Such as your dentist
>intentionally infecting you.

       I usually don't share my needles with him.
       Plus, I always use a condom.

       I'm more worried about rabies.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Election Analysis
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 16:07:10 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Nov4.084729.9552@hemlock.cray.com> rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
]If the economy shows more signs of life (>1% GDP growth)
]and unemployment goes down, Clinton will be re-elected in '96.

By that logic, Bush should have been reelected. The economy has been growing
at >1% for 18 months, and unemployment has gone down the last couple
of months.


]Abortion is a non-issue.  About 10% of voters strongly care
]about the issue and they are about evenly split, so they
]cancel out each other.  Voters care about the economy, so

I'm not sure I believe this. The Republicans this time were tarred with
wanting to "run people's lives" although it wasn't stated that way. I
think the abortion issue was one of the main reasons, so it may have
subtly influenced people who didn't say that abortion was their
reason for voting against bush.


-- 
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
Get into Ham Radio today! Morse Code no longer needed! It's a hobby, a sport, a
convenience, a technical challenge, a public service. Go rec.radio.amateur.misc
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:59817 alt.activism:18695
From: f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
Subject: Re: Fully Informed Jury InformationREAD/NEW
Date: 12 Nov 92 11:23:39 CST
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: us
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <kmarko-101192102826@krmarko.boi.hp.com>, kmarko@boi.hp.com (Kurt Marko) writes:
> The following are excerpts taken from _the FIJAactivist_, Newsletter
> of the Fully Informed Jury Association.  For more information about
> the association, contact: FIJA 
> 			  P.O. Box 59
> 			  Helmville, MT  59843
> 			  
> What is "FIJA"?
> 
> "FIJA" means Fully Informed Jury Amendment, Act, or Association.
> 
> FIJA would require by state law that judges resume telling jurors
> about their right to vote their consciences when deciding on a
> verdict.  Jurors would have to be told they have the right to acquit
> someone because they believe that the law itself is wrong, or is being
> wrongly applied, even when the facts of the case would support a
> conviction. 
> 
> FIJA is also the name of the organization sponsoring this and related
> jury-rights amendments.  But FIJA's ultimate goal is to tell everyone
> the truth about the rights of jurors, whether or not laws requiring
> that judges "read them their rights" are ever passed.

[Text deleted]

	Thanks for posting this.  I had heard of this movement but
until now knew few of the details.  It sounds like something that
would go a long way towards bringing us a healthier court system
and restoring the 'rights of the people'.  The jury system is one
our great democratic strengths and it has certainly taken it on the
chin in recent years.  I am reminded of one case with which I was
familiar in which the defendant was convicted of a minor infraction
and then told by members of the jury that the jury was quite sympathetic
and felt the defendant was in the right but that "the law is the law."
It is this attitude that is strangling justice in our courts.

	Do any states currently have legislation supporting  FIJA
type ideas?  Is notable progress being made anywhere?  What can an
individual do to help move FIJA forward?

-Joe Gaut
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu ("Broward "Bailout" Horne")
Subject:      RE: Bail, Baby, Bail!
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 16:44:29 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA19741; Fri, 6 Nov 92 15:50:09 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA03999; Fri, 6 Nov 92 15:50:05 -0800
X-Received: from IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU by idbsu.idbsu.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 7064; Fri, 06 Nov 92 16:48:02 MST
X-Received: from IDBSU (GCTHORNE) by IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 6987; Fri, 06 Nov 92 16:48:02 MST
X-To: talk.politics.misc.usenet


In a previous article, tommy@hilbert.att.com (Tom Reingold) says:

>
>I've heard this argument many times but never seen any evidence of it.
>When people's tax rates go up as a result of increased income, people
>don't decide that it's not worth the trouble and then seek lower-paying
>jobs.  When I see people not bothering because the tax rates are too
>high, then I'll believe this argument.

        Never, EVER say stuff like this on the net.

        Okay, now you can believe this argument.

        Because *I* took a lower-paying job.

     In Los Angeles, I made $29K.
     I quit, came to Idaho, and now make an annual salary of $20K.

     Guess what?  I live just as well, plus I pay 1/2 of my previous taxes.
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: A Coffee-House Conversation with an Imaginary Nadja (Was Re: Eva Clayton bio)
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:31:36 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Nov12.034659.26945@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
> In article <1992Nov11.093559.6167@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
# #"Ok, I'll Bite.  Weren't these the same *enlightened* founders that made
# #sure that their defined rights still enabled them to be slave owners?
# 
# About half of them did. The other half were violently opposed to the
# practice, and wanted to end it. They decided an imperfect Constitution
# was better than none at all (and then worked to eliminate slavery
# within the new system of government.) 

And even some of the slave owners were fiercely hostile to
slavery, but couldn't figure out how to free their slaves without
being impoverished themselves.  Better a hypocrite, than a person
who doesn't even realize that what they are doing is wrong.

#                                             Frank Crary



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Racism is "class struggle" applied to ethnicity.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier)
Subject: Re: Feckless Libertarian Party
Reply-To: m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 05:02:36 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.035226.18125@oz.plymouth.edu> m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier) writes:
>In article <Bx90nx.G1s@world.std.com> rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker) writes:
>>I am a libertarian by inclination and philosophy, but I hold out little
>>hope for the party. I think the Libertarian party should concentrate on
>>getting dog-catchers elected before they dream of putting a man in the
>>White House.
>>
>>If the Libertarian stategy is to force a "major" party to take up the
>>Libertarian political agenda, then the Libertarian party ought to get
>>people elected to the House and Senate, so the program can be taken
>>seriously by the others.
>>
>>Now the good news. In that state of New Hampshire, 4 Libertarians were
>>elected to the state Legislature. That is the ticket. Good start!
>
>Not really much of a surprise.  Actually, I expected the Libertarians
>to get more here in NH.  Get out of the cities, and Libertarian ideals
>are very popular, even among people who have never heard of the party
>or know what it stands for.  I like the chances the Libertarian Party
>has of becoming a viable third party in Ner Hampshire.  I even voted
>for a couple, as high as U.S. Senate.
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Correction:  U.S. Congress
>
>God bless,
>
>Michael
>
>>
>>Conan the Libertarian "If you can't love the Constitution, then at least
>>hate the Governement"
>
>
>-- 
> Michael Le Houllier           *  John 3:16  * Nov 12, 1991 - Dili      
> (m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu.us) *  Remember: June 4, 1989 - Beijing
> Plymouth State Women's Soccer - #2 in the nation (Div. 3)  (15-0-2)
> Three wins from the national championship.  v. U MA Dartmouth  Sun.


-- 
 Michael Le Houllier           *  John 3:16  * Nov 12, 1991 - Dili      
 (m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu.us) *  Remember: June 4, 1989 - Beijing
 Plymouth State Women's Soccer - #2 in the nation (Div. 3)  (15-0-2)
 Three wins from the national championship.  v. U MA Dartmouth  Sun.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:58217 alt.rush-limbaugh:9045 alt.politics.elections:22655
From: dennist@sw.stratus.com (Dennis Tetreault)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections
Subject: President Clinton's Cabinet
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:00:55 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

Guess what I heard on Bos radio, and read in the Herald. cabinet choices.

Think of it: Sec of Housing & Urban Development - Boston Mayor  Ray Flynn
             Sec of Education : Michael Dukakis  (he's baaaaaack!)
 Others: Jimmy Carter, John "watch this Biden tape" Sasso, for Chief of Staff
and a host of others.

Good Luck!
The Dentist
"Hey, who's hand is on my wallet?"

Post responses pls.
These are MY opinions. My company is not responsible for them, so back off.
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Stockdale is a Bumbling Idiot
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:04:56 GMT
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA

Keywords: 

In article <10NOV199213105440@zeus.tamu.edu> aec6699@zeus.tamu.edu (CAMPBELL, ANGELA EVETTE) writes:
]Well, as long as we're quoting Giap and all, he's also said that the NVA 
]could not defeat the US in open battle, and hence wouldnt try for another
]Dien Bien Phu.  ARVN military history records give credit to the NVA for 
]devising the battle for Khe Sanh as a diversion, to draw troops away from the
]central areas of SVN, which General Westmoreland mistakenly thought he had
]secure.  Sure, it would have been nice to win, but it also would have been
]nice to drag off a few more battalions, such as, say, those under
Interesting that Westmoreland claimed that Khe Sanh was a lure to
try to get the NVA to try to repeat Dien Bien Phu. It was designed to
get lots of NVA to attack it so they could be ground up. It worked for
that purpose.

What Westy missed in the whole war (other than the problems on the home front)
was that the North was quite willing to cynically breed new soldiers as
fast as we could kill them.
-- 
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
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
 - - It is not enough to be right. One must also be effective! - -
From: smay@boi.hp.com (Scott Smay)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Do you remember 1970 to 1980?
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:58:51 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

Broward Horne (GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu) wrote:
: 
:        As part of a impromptu research project, I'd like to know what
:    YOU thought the single most important ( dramatic, traumatic ) event
:    was, between 1970 to 1980.
:
1. Nixon's resignation.

(2. The withdrawal from Viet Nam.)

cheers,
scott (age 34)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Clever medical choice
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:55:36 GMT


Clever.  The US has a "public medicine crisis".  So who do they put in
charge?  The same guy that has been running the state with the worse
measure of public health in the US - arkansas.  Maybe so the rest of the 
US can live up to the high standards that Clinton has imposed on Arkansas
for the same time he has been governor there (which just happens to be as
long as Ronnie & George put together).

As Sam (QL) might say - oh boy.....


--
James W. Meritt:  m23364@mwunix.mitre.org - or - jmeritt@mitre.org
The opinions above are mine.  If anyone else wants to share them, fine.
They may say so if they wish. The facts "belong" to noone and simply are.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: bhorne@nyx.cs.du.edu (broward horne)
Subject: Re: Bespectacled Bill C.
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 20:25:31 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.181326.28052@u.washington.edu> tzs@carson.u.washingt
n.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
>an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>>>have you? Clinton was regularly shown studying for the debates with hi

>>>glasses on.
>>
>>      No, I surely don't remember Clinton having glasses during
>>the debates, and I saw ALL of them.
>
>Perhaps *you* need a pair of glasses. :-)  You seem to have missed the
>words "studying for" in the posting you quoted.
>
>--Tim Smith


    Gee, does this mean I get FREE glasses with my FREE health care?


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: larryr@saturn.sdsu.edu (Larry Riedel)
Subject: Re: Trickle Down Economics
Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:48:31 GMT

Ted Krueger (krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu) wrote:
> In article <27161@dog.ee.lbl.gov> mike@shemesh.lbl.gov (Michael Helm) writes:
> >For growing the business, I would think the tax on profits would
> >be the main consideration, not the capital gains tax, until it came time
> >to sell the business.
> 
> Do you think that there is a difference between the tax on profits and 
> capital gains tax?  What do you think capital gains taxes are?

Capital gains are a type of profit, but there are other types of profit.
Presumably Mike is talking about the (revenues - expenditures) type, and
possibly in particular the taxes on corporate profits.


Larry
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu ( BOB HOOKER)
Subject: Anwar Mohammed's possibly fraudulen (was Re: Trickle Down Economics)
Organization: ILS
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 21:40:07 GMT

In article <1126@bug.UUCP>, stevef@bug.UUCP (Steven R Fordyce) writes:
> 
> matt@physics.berkeley.edu writes:
>  Among the views espoused were that blacks are "apes".

Once again, as has been supported by members of Bush-organization here on
the net,  I have never posted any assertion that blacks are apes.  This was
simply a sick action of character attack by a very stupid Anwar Mohammed. 
This may be a little difficult but I would like it if such lies were
removed from the conversation.  

I would also be interested in what people on these groups think about the
Bush Organization College E-Mail group conspiracy to hide Bush's support
for Pro-Life groups from College age voters?  What do Pro-Life people think
of this.

In fact I would say that this group was engaged in a wholesale betrayal of
the most loyal members of the Republican party.  Some of the groups own
organizers said;

 "...most of which were not posted, tried to find ways to make the
republican parties appeal more acceptable to the moderates - by down
playing the right wing crap that no one would have acted on in all likely
hood -  congress would have blocked them utterly. I also tried to push for
moderates getting a stronger voice in the party."

"...	Most of what i was advocating was an attempt to get the damn social 
conservatives to shut the hell up so we could win the election. No one
reads the damn platform - most republicans do not back"

"But morals are very minor points."

">>1.  Abortion is murder and anyone who supports it is evil.
	One opinion. I have two responses.

Point 1: Who in the Hell gave you the right too tell a woman like my 
sister or my girlfriend what she can do with her body????? I got a simple 
policy on abortion - If you don't want em, DON'T HAVE ONE!!!!!!!" 

Seems to me that the liberal rich spoiled intellectual side of the
Republican party is-a-going gunning for the Right Wing.  Considering that
the right wing was the only group not to turn on Bush,  this would seem
like fairly harsh and unfair treatment.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.rumors,alt.activism
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Anita Hill to Head EEOC
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 01:12:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.173128.16909@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> tcanham@kilroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Tim Canham) writes:

>>    Even from a liberal point of view I believe that it's blatantly 
>>obvious; we blew it. We wanted to prevent Thomas's confirmation very badly 
>>but we flubbed our homework (we didn't make sure that Hill had irrefutable 
>>proof). Then, even after it was clear that we had flubbed our homework, we 
>>continued to push through days of melodramatic and pointless testimony 
>>apparently in the hope that the voting members of the Judiciary Committee 
>>wouldn't notice that we didn't have anything written on our homework when 
>>we turned it in.

>This seems a tacit admission that the hearings and sexual harassment charges
>were simply a desperate grab by the liberal leadership with a lack of 
>solid eviidence or proof in order to block Thomas' nomination.  This is exactly
>what Rush has been talking about - liberal gamesmanship regardless of the cost
>to the target.  I find it despicable and yours and your "leadership's" 
>end-justifies-the-means methods pathetic.

Since Nathan Engle is not part of the liberal leadership, I find it hard
to imagine that he can "admit" anything.  It's *his* belief about what
happened.  It isn't an "admission" of anything.

But I wouldn't expect anyone who quotes Rush to understand the difference.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Mike Mussina 1993 AL Cy Young Winner
niepornt@phoenix.    |------------------------------------ 
   princeton.edu     | "I still believe in a place called Hope."
Clinton/Gore '92.  Don't stop thinking about tomorrow.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.rumors,alt.activism