HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mrt7455@evtprp0b.UUCP (Michael R Tucker)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Term Limits and Abortion
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:41:49 GMT
Reply-To: mrt7455@evtprp0b.UUCP (Michael R Tucker)
Organization: Boeing Computer Services Everett Propulsion, Everett WA

In article <1992Nov7.002041.19744@beaver.cs.washington.edu> graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) writes:
>In article <MS-C.721091783.377401575.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> Mark Crispin <mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
>>Don't these people realize that they are, in effect, in bed with the people
>>who are howling for the courts to overturn last year's Abortion Rights
>>Initiative on the grounds that somehow, with some suspension of disbelief, it
>>can be `unconstitutional.'
>
>No, I don't think so. My understanding of the Consitution leads me to believe
>that an amendment is required to limit the number of terms a Congressman
>can serve. Individual states have no power over federal offices.


The commentary that the networks were putting out on election night
with respect to the term limists issue was basically "If term limits
are unconstitutional then Congress will be forced to pass an
ammendment to the Constitution to make term limits constitutional."
The reasoning was that on November 3rd, 1992, one third of the states
required to affirm a constitutional ammendment, did so in one night.
Congress has been faced with term limits  before and swept them under
the tabe, bottled them up in committees, whatever.  This time they
have to face 13 states (and powerful California was one of them) that
have said this is what they want. In addition to that, apparently a
large number of the new congressmen elected RAN on a pro-term limits
platform.  What will those people do when faced with their promises
and their actions.



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The expressed opinions are mine and are not the Boeing Company's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Tucker                           Boeing Computer Services
(206) 342-6168                           M/S 04-EU  P.O.Box 24346
...uunet!bcstec!evtprp0b!mrt7455         Seattle, Washington
mrt7455@evtprp0b.boeing.com              98124-0346
Newsgroups: seattle.general,alt.activism
From: donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.motss
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 9 Nov 92 06:07:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: brat.1314
Organization: Tandemonium, Kent, WA

In article <1992Nov8.152311.1223@kopachuk.uucp> dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman) writes:
:
:Why wouldn't such a law be unconstitutional?  

I don't know, but attempts are being made to put it on the
ballot whether it is constitutional or not.  

:If you are denying
:people equal protection under the law, that sounds just about as
:unconstitutional as it gets.  

The problem is that the OCA wants you all to believe that equal
rights are special rights.  If you give protection to one group 
then you *must* apply it to all, or it is special rights.

:I mean, it's kind of like saying that people who talk
:with an accent are subversives, or people who are over 6' 8" are
:antisocial, or something like that, and should be denied their
:rights. 

It's not really like that.  Most heterosexuals know little of 
homosexuals aside from a lot of myth ans stereotype.  Because of 
this, many of them are suseptible to campains like the OCA mounted
in Oregon.

:I'll admit I didn't follow this issue very closely because
:it didn't take place in Washington, and I've been in southern 
:California during the election where it isn't being mentioned at
:all, but there must be something more to it than what I've stated
:above. 

Here is all there is to it.

Fundimentalists believe that they are right and they have a right
to impose their lifestyle on others.  If you are gay, they do not
approve, and some of them will go to great lengths to deny you
rights, attempt to get the state to declare you perverse and
unnatural, and basically legislate you out of their lives.  Then
they can close their eyes and go back to the dream world of
Leviticus.

:Was Proposition 9 a reaction to a "special rights" law?

No, it was not.  It was a fear reaction that gays may somehow
be accepted in our society as human beings.

I'm not exaggerating.  

:What's the whole story?  

The whole story is bigotry.  

:"Ignorant Washingtonians want to know." :-)

I think you will when Lon Mabon starts up here next year.

I'm not being a smartass.  It will happen and you will be
asked to vote on limiting the rights of a group of people
because of the sex of the adult they sleep with.




         Donn Pedro ....................a.k.a. donn@brat.wa.com
	
	       "You talk the talk.  Do you walk the walk?"

		    There are no ordinary moments.
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: quendor@hardy.u.washington.edu ()
Subject: Re: Term Limits and Abortion
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 10:03:35 GMT


>No, I don't think so. My understanding of the Consitution leads me to believe
>that an amendment is required to limit the number of terms a Congressman
>can serve. Individual states have no power over federal offices.

   As I understand it, the constitution sets a very heavy precident in the
fact that it limits the terms a president can serve. Fro this therefore we
can limit terms.

 Now the question is who can limit the terms of national elected officials?

   Members of congress differ from the resident and Supeme Court justices
(both of whoms terms are explicit) in the fact that they are tied to the
states that they come from. We already require residency, for example.
  So my belief is that the precidents are there if the courts wish to view
the matter that way. It's not explicitly stated, but I am certain that our
founding fathers never expected career politicians. Of course, they probably
didn't expect the courty to last this long either.
  

                                           Don Sowell
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: green@fylz.wa.com (Washington Green)
Subject: Nicaragua Alternative Technology talk
Organization: Washington Green -- State Newsletter of the Greens
Distribution: seattle
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:17:58 GMT
Keywords: Nicaragua talk

On Saturday, November 14, Luis Quan and Juan Enrique Morales will be
speaking on alternative technology in the El Cua region of Nicaragua.
Luis Quan is the mayor of El Cua and Juan Enrique Morales is an
agronomist.

For those unfamiliar with the El Cua region, this is where Ben Linder,
the UW mechanical engineer was killed while working on small scale
hydro projects.  These people will be talking about integral
sustainable development of the Cua-Bocay region including small scale
hydro.

The event is at Prag House, 747 16th Ave E on Capitol Hill.  It's free
but I am sure you will be encouraged to send some portion of your
life savings to Nicaragua.  For more info call Wayne or Chris at
723-5415 or Dan (who lives in Prag House) at 323-3622.
-- 
Washington GREEN -- the newsletter of the Washington State Greens
8315 Lake City Way #207, Seattle, WA 98115  -- (206)526-2919 x28
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: green@fylz.wa.com (Washington Green)
Subject: Panama Deception showing, Nov 15
Organization: Washington Green -- State Newsletter of the Greens
Distribution: seattle
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:22:50 GMT
Keywords: video

On Sunday, November 15 I will be showing _The Panama Deception_, a
video by The Empowerment Project (Coverup) on the invasion of Panama.
This was showing in the Seattle area theatres up until a month ago.
It does an excellent job of showing what  "official sources" were
saying and what people who were there had witnessed and lets you draw
your own conclusions.

When: The video will start at 7:30. 
Where: 549 NE 80th in Seattle.  This is a grey house with white trim
between I-5 and Roosevelt on the 305 bus line.

More info: 526-2919 and press 6 (voice mail system).
-- 
Washington GREEN -- the newsletter of the Washington State Greens
8315 Lake City Way #207, Seattle, WA 98115  -- (206)526-2919 x28
From: kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Term Limits Initiative
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:02:10 GMT
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<

In article <1992Nov5.164050.18646@beaver.cs.washington.edu> graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) writes:
>In article <1992Nov05.100034.18413@gibdo.engr.washington.edu> bobk@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Bob) writes:
[...]
>>  As a long time supporter of Common Cause and other "good government"
>>  groups and causes, I was happy to see the term-limits initiatives pass 
>>  in all 14 states that voted on them yesterday.  Now that the ice has
>>  been broken, expect many more states to follow. 
>
>Does Common Cause actually support term limits? Usually they have more
>sense than that.

That's all the Common Sense License Server will let them have.
Legally they had no choice :) :) :) ...
-- 
kurt@grogatch.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
 Nostalgic conservatives are already referring to the Bush Era as
 "those Halcion days of yesteryear".
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: jallred@spdg.com (John Allred)
Subject: Re: Term Limits Initiative
Organization: Stratos Product Development Group (Seattle)
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:54:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.155934.13423@u.washington.edu> monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
>The US constitution sets the term lengths for president, senator, and
>representative.  The constitution was amended to limit the president to
>two terms.  To limit US senator and representative terms would also take
>an amendment to the constitution.

I remember looking at the fine print of the Washington State
initiative that "limited" terms for politicians other than President.
The initiative didn't actually say "No one may be <insert office here>
for n years", rather, it said "Anyone who has been <insert office
here> for n years shall be denied ballot access", i.e., can't be
printed on the ballot.  The politician in question _could_ still could
be a write-in candidate, so, in the strict sense, their terms aren't
limited.  

John Allred (jallred@spdg.com)
--
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Term Limits Initiative
Date: 6 Nov 92 01:21:15 GMT
Distribution: seattle
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95

robs@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert Sipe) writes:
>   I have a question re: this issue too.  If it is constitutional for 
>the presidential position why would it be unconstitutional for other
>elections?  I know Foley claims that it would be and Arizona has ruled
>that it is.  Seems like a contridiction!
>

It's constitutional for the presidential postition because the constitution
was amended to make it so.

--Tim Smith
From: jdt@voodoo.boeing.com (Jim Tomlinson)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Travel agent rec. requested
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:24:01 GMT
Reply-To: jdt@voodoo.boeing.com
Distribution: seattle
Organization: BoGART To You, Buddy


We're trying to plan a spring break trip to Hawaii (the Big Island),
and are a little daunted by the choices.  Does anyone have a travel
agent in the Ballard/N. Seattle area they could recommend to help us
out?  Also, are there any places you'd recommend we visit/stay at while
there?  Please post or email; much thanks in advance.
-- 
Jim Tomlinson    BoGART Project    Boeing Computer Services    Bellevue, WA
jdt@voodoo.boeing.com       ...uunet!bcstec!voodoo!jdt        (206)865-6578 
          "It's the end of the world as we know it; I feel fine."
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: kurt@eskimo.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general
Subject: remembering Jesse Bernstein
Summary: Jesse was a PNW poet and performance artist in the Bukowski tradition
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:42:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: eskimo.1992Nov10.214235.8819
Distribution: pnw
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<

Friends of Jesse Bernstein are invited to gather on his birthday,
December 4 `92, not so much to mourn his death as to celebrate his
life.

Potluck dinner, 6-8 pm

Performances of short pieces of his work and pieces about/inspired by him,
by an enormous variety of Jesse's friends, 9pm-?? (at least midnite)

At the OK Hotel, 212 Alaskan Way South, Seattle (under the Alaskan
Way Viaduct)

For more info, call:
	Alison Slow Loris (206)725-1125
-- 
kurt@grogatch.celestial.com (Kurt Cockrum)
Subvert the Anti-Gands!		F-IW	MYOB
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: bobk@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Bob)
Subject: Re: Term Limits Initiative
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 11:04:41 GMT

Robert J. Hall asks:
| With the (presumed) passage of the Washington Term Limits initiative, I was
| wondering about the prospects of this law being overturned in the courts?
|
| Anybody have a clue?

Paul Kemp (pkemp@byron.u.washington.edu) responds:
| Without a doubt it will go to the courts and be overturned.
| I think Bush himself said it would take an admendment.

  As a long time supporter of Common Cause and other "good government"
  groups and causes, I was happy to see the term-limits initiatives pass 
  in all 14 states that voted on them yesterday.  Now that the ice has
  been broken, expect many more states to follow. 

  The Washington term limits initiative, along with most of the other
  term-limits proposals, stands on firm legal ground.

  It was carefully written to withstand a constitutional test.  Notice
  the wording in the title of Initiative 573:

          Shall candidates for certain offices, who have already
          served for a specified time periods in those offices,
          BE DENIED BALLOT ACCESS.

  This is not an outright ban on an entrenched incumbent being able to run 
  for office.  It simply denies them access to the printed ballot for a 
  short period of time.  They can still run as write-in candidates and
  retain their seats.

  The Constitution, in Article 1, Section 4, clearly gives the States 
  the power to regulate congressional elections:

          1. The times, places and *manner* of holding elections
          for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in
          each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress
          may at any time by law make or alter such regulations,
          except as to the place of choosing Senators.
          
  The Supreme Court has continually confirmed the rights of states to
  limit ballot access in cases much more questionable than this one.      
  
  However, the last line also empowers Congress to override any such
  election regulation by a simple majority.  So Tom Foley has another
  weapon to defeat it -- but this requires Congress to expressly
  override the will of the people and suffer the consequences.
  ==

  Bob
From: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Term Limits and Abortion
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:16:23 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mime-Version: 1.0

I find it bizarre and not a little bit disgusting that we have people howling
for the courts to overturn the Term Limits Initiative on the grounds that
somehow, with some suspension of disbelief, it can be `unconstitutional.'

Don't these people realize that they are, in effect, in bed with the people
who are howling for the courts to overturn last year's Abortion Rights
Initiative on the grounds that somehow, with some suspension of disbelief, it
can be `unconstitutional.'

In both cases, we are dealing with sore losers who are unwilling to accept the
verdict of the people.  They are seeking to use the courts as a way to impose
their own political viewpoint.  There is a word for this.  That word is
dictatorship.

The courts should not be in the business of making law, or of breaking it.  A
law is overturned only if it is made by a lessor body in defiance of a higher
law.  The highest law is ultimately the US Constitution itself, and its
amendment process.

Roe vs. Wade was not upheld by liberal appointees.  It was a new majority of
moderate conservatives, appointed by Reagan/Bush, that preserved Roe vs. Wade;
judges that believed that the courts are not in the business of making law.
From: allyn@sleepy.UUCP (Mark Allyn)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Gasoline Rip-Off
Summary: All this whining
Keywords: gasoline,gasohol,ethanol,tax
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:47:08 GMT
Distribution: seattle
Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle


Okey, I've heard all of this whining of the gasohol stuff and the costs
associated with it.

So, what can you do about it?

Do what I did! Reduce your driving to the **barest** minimum. Those three
to six mile trips to work, theater, church, whatever; do those on a bicycle
or bus. I regularly take a six mile trek on my bicycle (rain or shine) twice
a week to church for choir practice and service. That is a minimum. Also I
do a 17 mile commute (that's each way) two or three days a week. The 
other days I take the bus. 

I know that some of you need autos for business reasons (such as integrators
and vars and so fourth) but there are many trips you take in your cars that can
be done on a bicycle.

To give an example, I go the opera, the ballet, and other functions at the
opera house in Seattle Center. I ride my bike. I also note that mine is often
the **ONLY** bicycle that is parked in the lobby of the opera house during
a function. I live six miles away from the opera house. Dont tell me that I
am the only person who lives within six miles from the opera house of of the
3,000 patrons at a typical function. I should expect to see hundreds of bicycles
in that lobby any given night. Likewise with church. Mine is the only bicycle
I see in or around the building during service.

You get the picture? There are **MANY** trips you can use a bicycle or bus
and leave the darn car at home.

Happy Riding!!

Mark Allyn
From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik,snake)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Hi.
Date: 4 Nov 92 18:00:49 GMT
Reply-To: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com
Organization: Research & Technology

In article 13304@ssc.com, markz@ssc.com (Mark Zenier) writes:
>Tracy E. Finifter (finifter@gandalf.rutgers.edu) wrote:
>: Anyway, I don't want to trash your city, I want to enjoy it for what it is.
>
>I suspect you want to enjoy it for what you think it is.  But remember
>that you should try to match your mental image with the actual city.
>
>The city is (in my opinion) working less and less, in large part because
>there are so many people living in their image of the city that only exists
>inside their heads, and not in the real city.

That's what I find so appealing about people like Tracy.  They come to Seattle
with a positive image in their minds about what this city should be like.  I
enjoy some of the tongue-in-cheek attempts to portray our region as undesirable,
but it is obvious that the people who say these things enjoy living here.  It
is a great place to live.  Warning people like Tracy off is not the way to improve
life here.  If she wants to move here and live a good life, then let her bring
a little sunshine with her.  

BTW, New Jersey gets a bum rap from everyone.  It is really a very beautiful
state.

-----
Disclaimer:  Opinions expressed above are not those of my employer.

    Rick Wojcik   (rwojcik@boeing.com)   Seattle, WA
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: il@bambam.u.washington.edu (Il Hwan Oh)
Subject: Re: Panama Deception showing, Nov 15
Keywords: video
Reply-To: iho@cac.washington.edu
Organization: University of Washington, Tacoma
Distribution: seattle
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:27:26 GMT

green@fylz.wa.com (Washington Green) writes:
> On Sunday, November 15 I will be showing _The Panama Deception_, a
> video by The Empowerment Project (Coverup) on the invasion of Panama.
> This was showing in the Seattle area theatres up until a month ago.
> It does an excellent job of showing what  "official sources" were
> saying and what people who were there had witnessed and lets you draw
> your own conclusions.

Let's talk about this movie a bit.  I'll buy most of what the movie was
saying.  I just had a problem with the uniformly negative tone toward
the U.S. government and Bush.  I mean, there must have been something
they did that wasn't reprehensible.  Even the press couldn't do anything
right, as far as this movie was concerned.

-- 
Il Hwan Oh                              | "You live and learn.
Computer Facilities Manager             |   At any rate, you live."
University of Washington, Tacoma        |            -- Douglas Adams
iho@cac.washington.edu                  |
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Term Limits and Abortion
Date: 7 Nov 92 00:20:41 GMT
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <MS-C.721091783.377401575.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> Mark Crispin <mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
>I find it bizarre and not a little bit disgusting that we have people howling
>for the courts to overturn the Term Limits Initiative on the grounds that
>somehow, with some suspension of disbelief, it can be `unconstitutional.'
>
>Don't these people realize that they are, in effect, in bed with the people
>who are howling for the courts to overturn last year's Abortion Rights
>Initiative on the grounds that somehow, with some suspension of disbelief, it
>can be `unconstitutional.'

No, I don't think so. My understanding of the Consitution leads me to believe
that an amendment is required to limit the number of terms a Congressman
can serve. Individual states have no power over federal offices.

Perhaps you might explain what mistake I've made in reading the consitution.
-- 
Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu	 uw-beaver!june!graham
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: pkemp@byron.u.washington.edu (Paul Kemp)
Subject: Re: Term Limits Initiative
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: seattle
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 04:39:17 GMT

In article <4095@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall) writes:
>With the (presumed) passage of the Washington Term Limits initiative, I was
>wondering about the prospects of this law being overturned in the courts?
>
>Anybody have a clue?
>
Without a doubt it will go to the courts and be overturned.
I think Bush himself said it would take an admendment.
pk


>-- 
> Bob Hall                   |
> Boeing Computer Services   |  Behind every dark cloud,
> root@chicken.ca.boeing.com |  there's a Seattle Skyline.


Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: hhll@stein.u.washington.edu (Steven Hodas)
Subject: Re: Travel agent rec. requested
Organization: University of Washington
Distribution: seattle
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:48:41 GMT

bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:

>In <3297@voodoo.UUCP> jdt@voodoo.boeing.com (Jim Tomlinson) writes:


>>We're trying to plan a spring break trip to Hawaii (the Big Island),
>>and are a little daunted by the choices.  Does anyone have a travel
>>agent in the Ballard/N. Seattle area they could recommend to help us
>>out?  Also, are there any places you'd recommend we visit/stay at while
>>there?  Please post or email; much thanks in advance.

Travel Agents International has been very helpful and hard-working for me,
and have saved me a lot of money, but their office is downtown. Still, you
never really need to go into the office per se, as everything can be
handled by phone. The agent I've used most recently is Bretta (yes,
Bretta); if you call please use my name. They're at 513 Olive Way, 343-0809.

Steven
Newsgroups: seattle.general