HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton will clarify
Date: 10 Oct 92 02:50:42 GMT
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH


In a previous article, deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM (Bob Deguc) says:

>In article 15518@linus.mitre.org, jmeritt@rod.mitre.org (Jim Meritt) writes:
>> 
>> Just like the drug-use question of the same period...
>> 
>> "I was in protests against the United States, but I didn't inhale^h^h^h^h^h^h
>> organize."
>> 
>> 
>> And for those with "that far in the past doesn't matter":  Care to vote for
>> Nixon?
>
>Well, if he it was a choice between Nixon and Bush, I'd vote for Nixon.
>At least he has convictions....errr sorry about that, he was pardoned.
>
>Besides, per the 22nd amendment, Nixon cannot run for President....
>

Er...are you sure about that?

I seem to remember a report (albeit some years ago) that constitutionally, 
Nixon could indeed become president again, as he did not serve fully 1/2 of 
his second term...

Any enlightenment?


>
>Bob De Guc
>
>Pot is an Herb,
>Bush is a Dope!
>
>
-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist  //  Newsflash from the Vatican: *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller  //  "Easter has been cancelled...*    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu  //  Someone found the body...."   *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.***************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: treilly@iastate.edu (Edward C Reilly)
Subject: Re: Quayle's a liar!^H^H^H^H^Hbit inventive!
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:53:17 GMT

In <1992Oct15.134256.22401@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:

>In article <treilly.719124552@vincent1.iastate.edu> treilly@iastate.edu (Edward C Reilly) writes:

>>billion (not 200 billion) dollars.  

>Quayle quoted $100 billion.

>>He then said that an environmental plan of that magnitude (world
>>wide) is needed, and that cost should not be bourne by the U.S. alone.  

>It does say (according to NPR) that the cost should be disprportionatly
>by the US.

>Perhaps you can tell us all just how much Clinton wants to spend to clean
>up other peoples environmental problems?

>   Allen

     Allen- 
     My refernece to the 200 billion dollar amount was to point out that
stupendous man was incoorect- 200 billion was stupendous man's figure,
not mine- i was pointing out that he was mistaken.
     Further, look at what gore said- the cost should not be bourne
by the U.S. alone.  Disproportionatley, maybe.  But not alone.  

     i do not know how much Clinton wants to pay for other countries
problems.  It is gore's book, not Clinton's and i have not heard clint
say he categorically will employ things that gore asserts in his book.  
My purpose is not to advocate Gore's p[olicies, but to point out that
his opponenets are using his assertions and figures in ways he did not intend.


Ted

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:50005 ca.politics:8502 ba.politics:5918
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: No on 9
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:27:26 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <1992Oct2.212215.12961@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
writes:
>    >Phil, you still amaze me after all the time I've been reading
>    >your postings on the net. Maybe it makes sense to you to
>    >compare violent acts against people with property damage, the
>    >"crime" of catching STDs and private acts between consenting
>    >adults...but I just don't get it.
>
>Well, would you rather get beaten with bruises, or lose all your
>property (house, car, money, clothes) with no chance of insurance or
>recompense?

Different issue.  The original poster was talking about gay-bashing,
an inexcusable act of violence which typically entails several people
with bludgeons thrashing one or two unarmed people.  The victims don't
have a chance to surrender their wallets, they are beaten purely out
of malice.  I believe this happens reasonably often; I have friends who
have been beaten by such cowards.  The property damage you mentioned was
a burned police car, not someone's private property.  

>Sometimes physical violence is less awful than property loss.

Sometimes.  For the most part, I'd say that physical violence, particularly
where violence and not theft is the object, is MUCH worse.  However, a
12 gauge or a .45 in the hands of someone who means business can often
discourage either crime, as people down in Florida are finding out. :)

    don
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        First they stole the fourth amendment.
                I said nothing because I don't deal drugs.
        Then they took the sixth amendment.
                I was silent because I know I'm  not guilty.
        When they came for the second amendment,
                I kept quiet because I don't own a gun.

Now they've come for the first amendment, and I can't say anything at all.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Baldwin  -  Software Engineer  - e-mail to:  donb@tamri.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: michaels@m2xenix.psg.com (Michael Sandy)
Subject: Election predictions
Organization: Pacific Systems Group, Portland Oregon US
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 03:46:52 GMT

I came across a sign that Bill Clinton is going to win:

The Republican campaign keeps going on about how the American
People are 'too intelligent' to elect a liar.

The _Democrats_ kept saying that in 1980, 1984 and 1988, and
back then it was a say of how self-delusional they were.

The Bush campaign has as much as admited that they consider
Clinton's draft record a more important topic to dwell on than
the economy or their plans for it.

By bringing in Baker to the campaign they show they consider
Bush's re-election more important than Bush's foreign
policy:  The Start II Treaty, the Arab-Israeli Peace Talks...

I personally think that the main reason Clinto hasn't 'come clean'
on the Draft and Moscow issue is that he prefers the Republicans
to concentrate on a dud issue that makes _them_ look bad for throwing
mud.  Maybe it isn't a plan as such, but it is an issue he has realized
he doesn't _need_ to respond to beyond:

"I was against the war.  I never participated in anti_US_ demonstrations.
I was never a "big" organizer of anti-war demonstrations.  I
participated in anti-war demonstrations in England.  I never did anything
illegal to avoid the draft but when a fair draft system was enacted I
submitted myself to chance."

What more can he say?



-- 
Michael Sandy
michaels@m2xenix.psg.com
"No Blood for Oil!" ?  But Blood is a renewable resource, Oil isn't!
From: gt7994a@prism.gatech.EDU (ORMOND,SEAN PATRICK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: War on drunk driving fails
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:32:24 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Oct15.084752.43867@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> dougm@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>
>What?  You mean jail won't cure an alcoholic?  Better start
>confiscating those cars and houses!  We do know how to turn a drunken 
>bum into a homeless drunken bum.

I'd be willing to bet that homeless drunken bums are responsible for 
less vehicular homocides than executive drunken bums.  Of course, if
someone's alcoholism led him into homelessness, it wouldn't be his fault.
He would be another unfortunate victim of society, the public school
system, and a failure of the media to properly educate the citizens as
to the dangers of drunk driving.  Oh, and let's not forget to blame the
bartenders who served him!

There isn't a person in this country who hasn't heard "Don't drink and 
drive".  Unfortunately, it's become a macho thing to do!  I've never
heard ANYONE say they were too drunk to drive; they always think they
can handle it.  I have heard MANY people brag about how many beers they
had before they "weaved" home and, invariably, they're laughing about it!

Jail won't cure alcoholics until alcoholics go to jail.  My brother and many
of his friends have received numerous DUI arrests and have never spent
so much as a single night in jail.  Of course, they were also involved in
an inter-state auto theft ring which culminated in our house being
surrounded by FBI agents with M-16s.  My brother never did time.  He was
on the phone with his friends the next day, bragging about being arrested
by agents with "machine guns"!  

We need stiffer laws and we need to enforce them.  We need to make 
vehicular homicide while under the influence a capital offense and expedite
the verdict.  How hard can it be to administer due process to some drunk
bum who is pulled from the wreckage of his car, after having driven down
the wrong side of the interstate and killed a car-load of people?
We recently had an off-duty cop run down three people: a man, a woman,
and her child.  Unfortunatly, the arresting officer neglected to perform
a urinalysis...how FUCKING CONVENIENT!  Instead of life (or the chair),
the guy gets 1 yr./victim to be served CONCURRENTLY, if I remember
correctly.  One year (possibly three) for a TRIPLE HOMICIDE...great message!


>***************************************************************
>"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor
>should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God."
>					(x-?)Pres. George Bush

Man, it's a bummer being an atheist conservative!  :-)

-- 
Sean P. Ormond
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Clinton '92 - "Read my lips: NEW TAXES"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier)
Subject: Re: All deficits are not created equal.
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:01:52 GMT

In article <56494@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> markn@firenze.orc.olivetti.com     
(Mark Nass) writes:
>
>   Under Bushs administration the U.S. government has run up something like
>$950 Billion dollars in defecits. This is about 25% of the total us defecit, 
>he did all of this in only 4 years. What on earth leads you to believe that
>he is going to or even has any intentions of reducing the federal defecit?
>  
>Mark Nass
>
Yes, and he did it all by himself, right?  All by his lonesome, Bush raised
taxes and spending.

Sounds like someone here doesn't remember exactly who writes the laws,
approves the budget, etcetera, so forth, and so on.  Think back real hard to
the Constitution.  Remember who helped out now?  Goody, I knew you could!


-- 
Douglas C. Meier		|  Remember to vote this election year,       
Northwestern University, ACNS 	|  you probably won't get another one. 
I don't claim them, they don't	|  
claim me.......			|  dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Legislator's voting records available online?
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:23:21 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
Originator: proberts@moose

Doubtless this is the wrong forum to ask this question, but it seems worth
a shot....

Does anyone know if the Congressional Record, or at least a list of Bills,
who proposed them, who voted for them, who voted against them, and what
happened to them, is available online in any form?

Seems that we have the means to produce very detailed reports along the
lines of "Here are legislative issues you have told us you are interested
in. Here are how you representatives voted on these issues."

Same question for the California State legislature.

I now return you to whatever flamewar is in progress on t.p.m these days ...

Paul
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:50791 ca.politics:8607 ba.politics:6019
From: stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU ()
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: "He claimed he got involved in homosexual activities 'to punish myself' after being raped at age 15."
Date: 10 Oct 1992 21:26:49 GMT
Organization: Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: orchid.ucsc.edu

In article <12705@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>
>Everytime I turn around, there's a bit more anecdotal evidence that
>fits with the data and hypothesis I recently presented in The
>Mother of All Flame Wars.  From the Santa Rosa Press-Democrat,
>10/9/92, p. B1:
>
 You do seem to be obsessed with this particular issue.

>    He claimed he got involved in homosexual activities "to
>    punish myself" after being raped at age 15.  He said he 
>    doesn't know if he was infected by homosexual activity
>    in prison or by using hypodermic needles to inject drugs.
>
>All the elements are present: childhood sexual trauma; drug
>abuse and homosexuality to deal with it; antisocial behavior
>that got him sent to prison.  At least Miller knows why he became
>homosexual.
>-- 
>Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!

We will notice that he 'claims' this is his reason.  Has AIDS, but doesn't
know how he contracted.  Here is a prime example of using this as an
argument=  A rapist and ex-con... now I really believe what this guy has
to say.  

He is punishing himself- well he obviously needs mental therapy.  But at
this time in his life it won't do him much good.  In fact, we can probably
say that at the time all of this occured to him, there was no help 
available for him. 

I am sorry, but as I stated before, in my opinion you cannot derive any
support for your arguments (premises) and conclusion from such stuff
as this.

Did you ever think that it might be the opposite case... maybe he felt
at his age '15' that he was different for others, in that he had an
attraction to other men.  Maybe he went out by himself to seek what
he thought he wanted, got involved with the wrong person.  So we can
see what happens when we attempt to deny to someone their identity.

In others words, we don't give support to people who need it, and 
therefore allow them to make decision about themselves that makes
them feel good about themselves.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Clinton has already won the election!
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 18:28:06 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA


In a previous article, strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis) says:

>ABC reported that Bill Clinton is has three hundred more electoral
>votes than George Bush.  Namely:
>
>	367 for Clinton to a mere 67 for Bush
>
>This can only mean one thing:  The race is over.

   Clearly Mr. Davis has a short memory and does not recall 
   what the polls had to say about John Major only days before
   this year's election.

   N.B. The above is no defense of the President.   I personally feel
   that none of the 3 major contenders have any more qualification
   to be President of the United States than the scum that forms
   in the bottom of my trash barrel if I accidentally leave it out
   overnight in the rain.


---peter
From: kmoore@ncsc.org (Kevin Moore)
Subject: Re: ==> Gore Statement On The First Political Debate
Reply-To: kmoore@ncsc.org (Kevin Moore)
Organization: North Carolina Supercomputing Center
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 03:49:26 GMT

In article <92285.221915U56503@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
 >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 >Information in the public interest which does not imply that it
 >is the opinion of UIC.  Contact 75300.3115@compuserve.com for
 >further information.
 >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
 > OCTOBER 11, 1992
 >
 >
 >                   Statement of SEN. AL GORE
 >        On the first debate among the presidential candidates
 >
 > George Bush finished fourth -- behind Bill Clinton, who was the clear
 > winner, in expressing a plan for economic recovery, behind Ross Perot
 > in an understanding of why the economy is in trouble, and even behind
 > Jim Lehrer, the debate's moderator, in an ability to present a plan
 > for America's future.
 >
 > If anyone doubted it before, they can't any longer: it's time for
 > change and it's time for George Bush and Dan Quayle to go. America
 > needs the leadership, ideas, energy, and courage Bill Clinton offered
 > during tonight's debate and offers America in this election.
 >
 > With the attention of the nation focused on him, George Bush failed
 > to provide the American people with a single reason to re- elect him
 > or a single idea to get our economy moving again and create jobs.
 > George Bush offered more of the same: the same stale, tired policies
 > that have brought us recession and cost us jobs.
 >
 > George Bush kept the American people waiting for nothing. Anyone who
 > hoped this debate would give them a reason to vote for Bush and
 > Quayle is going to sleep tonight planning to vote for Bill Clinton
 > and Al Gore. And, for good reason. Bill Clinton reached out to the
 > American people with a plan for change and economic recovery, with a
 > reason for hope and a genuine commitment to putting people first.

I wonder what day last week Gore wrote this.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
||  Kevin Moore                      North Carolina Supercomputing Center   ||
||  Scientific Support Analyst       3021 Cornwallis Rd.                    ||
||  (919) 248-1179                   Research Triangle Park, NC 27709       ||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
From: kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 03:17:14 GMT

hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:

>In a previous article, weverett@jarthur.claremont.edu (William M. Everett) wrote:
>>In article <14OCT92.21213487@vax.clarku.edu> hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>>>In a previous article, sa114984@longs.lance.colostate.edu (Steven Arnold) wrote:
>>>
>>>[stuff deleted]
>>>Excuse me, but isn't "voluntary and avoidable behavior" by the man also 
>>>involved in this process?  Do you think it is fair to force women to pay for 
>>>consenting to sex with their health and possibly their lives without insisting 
>>>on the same consequences for men who consent to sex?
>> 
>>	Men are required to pay child support of they get put in jail. I'd
>>call that paying.

>Once a child is born, unless it is put up for adoption the man and woman both 
>have a financial obligation to it.  A woman who refuses to buy food for her 
>child can be thrown in jail for neglect/abandonment.

>The inequality is that DURING a pregnancy, only the woman is paying.  As far 
>as I know there are no laws forcing men to pay for maternity clothes, the 
>extra food a woman must have, etc.  And, as I mentioned above, women pay for 
>pregnancy not just financially but also with their health.  Men who consent to 
>sex are not forced against their wills to endure back pain, nausea, weight 
>gain, massive hormonal changes, restrictions on their diet and exercise, etc.  

Well pardon me, but if she can choose an abortion unilaterally because it's
in her best economic and physical interests to do so, than her choice to 
carry to term is ALSO something that must be based on her best 
economic and physical interests.  So take your stupid complaint list 
somewhere else, because it doesn't apply - *SHE* CHOSE TO DO IT, THAT MAKES
IT *HER* PROBLEM, in the pro-choice scheme of things.    

>So why do you think it is fair for women to face a much tougher punishment 
>than men, when they have both done the same thing (engaging in sex)?

She chose it, let her deal with it.  The man can choose to hang in and 
deal with the plusses and minuses of being a parent, or he can walk and
avoid it.  Millions of men do it every day.  Why are you complaining
when they are simply exercising their "right to choose not to be a father"
as the Tennessee court so bluntly put it?  That's what being pro-choice
is all about Heather.  Try to be consistent. 

Notice that this argument gets even EASIER to make when drugs like 
RU-486 are legal.  "Well, Your Honor, it's not like she couldn't have
just popped a pill.  It was HER choice to carry to term.  She's an
adult capable of knowing what's in her best economic and physical
interests.  Why am *I* here?  *I* don't have any say at all in whether
or not she should be able to have a child.  It's hardly *MY* fault if
she makes a choice that she doesn't like a year down the road."

>				.... Heather.

Steve Kellmeyer
-- 

Steve Kellmeyer 
kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
From: csulaima@titan.ucc.umass.edu (CYNTHIA R SULAIMAN)
Subject: Re: Choice for life (was Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:14:34 GMT

In article <1992Oct3.031102.1065@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>But when I talk to a pro-choice advocate, abortion seems to be the only
>choice they want to discuss.  Here's a good choice for couples: abstinence
>until they are fully ready for children.  I mean, in all the arguements that
>concept always gets lost.  And some folks think you just beamed down from a UFO
>when you bring it up.
>
>Simon


Well, Simon, you did!!  What if the couples not ready for chiildren for
10 years or so?  There goes the honeymoon!!!  Besides you seem to  
discount what many psychologist, psychiatrist and clergy think is an
essential part on the marital relationship.

CRS


Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:50575 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6568 alt.politics.elections:15867 talk.abortion:41626 alt.sex:32457 alt.politics.clinton:9405 alt.politics.bush:8422 soc.singles:27395 alt.politics.homosexuality:6394 talk.bizarre:33456
From: diana@wetware.com (CatWoman )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,soc.singles,alt.politics.homosexuality,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: A Most Pressing COncern
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:48:33 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare MouseCatcher

walkerr@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Robert A Walker) writes:

] >Orgasms, in the main, are messy things,
] >and Really are not the sort of things
] >that decent persons with good personal
] >hygeine standards would wish to involve
] >themselves in/with/towards.
] 
] 
] 	Sounds like this person can't get their rocks off to me.
] Its only messy if you shoot somebody in the face or your so wet that
] you flood your bedroom.
]         
If sarcasm was posted to the net, would anybody notice?

(Well SOMEONE had to say it)

Diana
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc