HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:13:38 EST
From:         Doctor Pizz <jdt10@CUNIXB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: On "libertarianism" ...
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

VMS

I agree that government should stay out of all the things you mentioned
except abortion.  However, the penalties for crimes committed under the
influence of drugs, etc.  must be treated with double penalties to
ensure that people treat these freedoms with the required personal
responsibility.

Pizz
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:29:04 MET
From:         Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
Subject:      Re: progressive tax?
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              at Dec 15, 92 3:22 pm

Andrew Allen pisze:
>>
>> >Progressive tax prevents the wealthy from paying their bills to the poor,
>> >saving in the banks, and producing more jobs.
>>
>> Huh? Are you saying that a) the wealthy have an obligation to the poor,
>> b) that they are prevented from fulfilling it due to the relative
>> size of their tax burden?

I am saying that:

progressive tax is harmful to the economy. That's all. That means that
everybody loses, noone wins.(maybe beaurocrats)


>> -other Andy

Caius
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 12:44:16 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      It was criminal, just like we said
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

        The federal investigator is confirming what many of us knew all along:
the House banking scandal is a result of criminal conduct.

        "Just like free overdraft protection" my derriere.

        Oh, and why hasn't the press attacked Inouye like they have Packwood?

Brett'
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster)
Subject: Supreme Court?
Organization: The Tickle Palace - Moonyvale, CA
Distribution: aus
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 10:08:49 GMT


     What do you think will happen to the Supreme Court?

-- 
                                         +---------------------------------+
  +-----------------------------------+ /      Not a net.personality      /
 /   // Mr. Tickle Monster   // Amiga ++---------------------------------+
|  \X/   W. David Rohwer   \X/  3000  /  Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM  /
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 12:00:38 MET
From:         Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              Dec 14, 92 2:18 pm

>> >is asked "Should people be fired from their jobs, or thrown out of
>> >their apartments, solely because they're gay?" the proper answer
>> >is "No, no more than if they were black, or Jewish, or single," then
>> >we're even closer than I think we are.

If you talk about private apartments and jobs and private businesses,
I think it is up to the OWNERS how they do with their property.

If you asked for a suggestion what to do in YOUR factory, my answer is :
I don't know. Is is your money invested. It has to be your decision.

If you asked what would I do in MY factory...
All others being equal (abilities to do the job) I would choose the NORMAL
person.

If I had an apartment to let, I would demand a higher price from an UNNORMAL
person.



--
Caius
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: UVa PCMail 1.7.1
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:09:36 EST
From:         "Scott W. Fischer" <swf7q@UVA.PCMAIL.VIRGINIA.EDU>
Subject:      help
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics
          <POLITICS%ohstvma.BITNET@Virginia.EDU>

Can anyone help me?  I just tried to send a NOMAIL message to listserv and
got back a message that I am not a member of the list?  If I am not a member
than how am I getting messages?

Thanks for any help in advance!

  Scott W. Fischer
Mr. Jefferson's Resort                  Mary Washington College
University of Virginia                  Fredericksburg, Virginia

                             Home address:
                         717E Mountainwood Road
                    Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
              (804) 296-4752
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:12:04 EST
From:         Tim Johnson <ST402711@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: 70% Human

-T. says:
>It is, of course, relevant to note that the news broadcast make it clear
>that the report about women and earnings concerned equal work!

but -T. said:
>Just heard on ABC World News Now that women make $.70 for every $1.00
>men make in the US; that's _down_ from last year (I think they said it had
>been $.72).

  These two statements are not the same.  I wonder which ABC World News
reported, and which -T. thinks they reported.

                                   -Tim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 10:01:00 MST
From:         Roger <CARROLL@SCC.BITNET>
Subject:      Rush

>He (RUSH) backs up what he says with articles.
>-Rich

Interesting.  I was under the impression that the Republican Right did not
trust NOR BELIEVE the "liberal" media.

                                                ---roger

                               "Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder."
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:27:13 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Hate Speech is back
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>The Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments on a Wisconsin case in
>which a man convicted of aggravated battery had his sentence increased
>(doubled, actually) because he yelled racist remarks during the attack.
>Wisconsin has statutory increases in penalties for hate-motivated
>crimes.
>
>The Court seemed extremely disinclined to allow this sort of law
>in its opinions in a recent Minnesota case. My prediction is that
>the members will show at least a moderate change of heart.

        For good reason (they should frown upon it).  "Hate motivated" means
the court would have to delve into the thoughts of the perpetrator.  As far as
I'm concerned thought crimes are double-plus ungood.

        In addition, how would the court(s) decide whether the crime was
initiated by "hate" or the person only yelled politically incorrect things
after the incident started?

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 13:37:51 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Marrou
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>The Integral Differential pisze:
>>> >Who did you vote for?
>>> >Caius
>>>
>>>         I voted for Marrou, despite the reservations I had about his conduct
>>> and handling of his personal affairs.  Mainly because
>
>What is the political and economical program of Marrou? I've heard he had taken
>part in all 50 states elections and had been ignored by the media.
>Caius

        The Libertarian platform and party docs are available via anonymous FTP
from think.com
        Basically, less government.  True free markets.  Sell government
holdings (land, etc.).  No first use of force.  No victimless crime
(prostitution, drug use, ...).  Abolish the income tax (and IRS :).

        I'm in that grey area between Libertarianism and Republicanism.  There
are die-hards in both parties that turn me off. :).

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:52:45 -0500
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Discrimination of various kinds

>hey o'andy, maybe the words are anormal and unmoral?
>somebody should make a list.
>who's in charge of listmaking?

This time of year Santa is...B)

>-linda

-other Andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 14:00:00 CST
From:         TI0PSR1@NIU.BITNET
Subject:      rush spike racism

You must have institutionalized power to be a racist ?

So, Hitler was not a racist in 1932 eh ?

Hmmm ............. don't think I can go with that.

Seems being a racist and having the power to enforce your racist be-
liefs on society might be two different things.
From: speednut@werple.apana.org.au (Mark Jose)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: in ri, drunk drivers get court (ha!)
Date: 20 Dec 1992 14:36:00 +1100
Organization: werple public-access unix, Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: werple.apana.org.au

Original Message From: jc-s <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
 
>anyway. in this semesters EAP Update (i know the E stands for Employee,
>but i don't know what the AP stands for maybe Are Psychotic?) there is
>a list of countries with much stricter drunk driving laws than
>ours. thought i would list them:
>
>Australia..........Drivers name is sent to the local newspaper and printed
>                   under the heading "He is drunk and in Jail"
 
They forget to mention that you lose your licence for a minimum of 3
months and if your blood alcohol is high enough, off to gaol you go.
If you are a first timer, you must complete an education course on
drinking before being able to re-sit a driver's examination and get your
licence back.
 
>Malaysia...........Driver is jailed, and if he's a married man, so is his
>                   wife.
 
Bit of a "bum-wrap" (I believe that's the US term) if the poor old
wife is a tee-totaller. Talk about guilt by association! :-)
Mind you it wouldn't be half bad if it was changed from wife to
mother-in-law. <BIG GRIN THERE>


Regards.

cc me - infrequent reader.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1992 09:51:50 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: the way dull tv ought to be

Hi, y'all:
I'm stoned out on cold medicine, so this may not be as rational as I'd like
:)  Ellen has already ably answered some of these questions, but I'm going
to add my own take.

Dr. Pizz wrote:
>  All society's problems are being blamed on
>Whitey, and this is unfair.  Equality must begin by affording equal
>opportunity to all to advance from their current condition.  This
>exists.

Some may, indeed, blame society's problems on Whitey.  Others, however,
take a broader view, and try to recognize how the priviledged (white, male,
heterosexual) have created societal structures that guarantee the
maintenance of those priviledges -- usually at a cost to other groups.

I'm curious about how you've arrived at the conclusion that equality of
opportunity exists now.  It sure doesn't look that way from where I sit.

>     Racism, you seem to believe, has to involve people in power.  I
>contest this allusion.  Does the word not imply making judgments and
>evaluations of people based on their race?  If so, then Affirmative
>Action Quota programs are racist, minority scholarship rograms are
>racist, and the like.  Further, all of these situations involve power
>being used to enforce racist policy....  Hmmmm

I'm not much of a semanticist.  But I recognize the usefulness of
distinguishing among (1) bigotry -- a personal characteristic that involves
making judgements on the basis of a few characteristics (skin color,
religion, sexual preference, etc.); (2) discrimination -- actions taken by
an individual against individuals/groups on the basis of (1); and (3)
racism -- institutional policies/procedures/power structures that result in
widespread instances of (2).

So, when *I* say that racism is institutionalized discrimination -- and can
therefore only be practiced by the group in power -- I'm not saying that
blacks (women, homosexuals, etc.) can't be bigoted, or that they can't
discriminate against members of other groups.  I *am* recognizing that,
although bigotry, discrimination, and racism may have some common causes,
they have very different outcomes.

Hope that helps.

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 10:31:41 -0500
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Home ownership among the poor es

>>Can you provide some meaningful stats that will show that a significant
>>amount of money appropriated by congress to be paid as income support
>>is being diverted by agencies to other purposes? (By this I mean are
>>agencies using targetted funds for things in-house other than for which
>>they were intended, salaries, supplies, office redecoration, etc.)

>        Of course not, no one keeps stats like that, or issues reports on how
>much they diverted :).

And of course nobody ever investigates these things, like say the OMB or
assorted congressional oversight committees or outside interest/"watchdog"
organizations.

Gee, why does the name "Robin Hud" come to mind..., could it be because
maybe somebody catches up with these massive frauds eventually, particularly
when they are concentrated in one agency?


>        But getting back to my main point: such things indicate that what we
>need is a more efficient system, and not more money.

Gosh, won't your face be red if it turns out that we need both more
efficiency and more money? B)

Brett'

-other Andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:11:29 EST
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Re: Uncl: Fetal Logic

I shall probably leave this argument to someone else, or no one else,
shortly. I'd thought it raised a separate point from the ones
endlessly discussed on the list. But maybe not.

>From:         Robert Moss <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>

>>No problem.  Let's perform a partial abortion.  In other words, let's just
>>rip off the arms and legs but stop short of crushing the head.  Now when
>>the baby is born and it just happens to be missing arms and legs, there
>>must be a connection.
>
>|>I don't know what the point is supposed to be here.
>
>|>A "partial abortion" like that would result in a person who does
>|>have claims against whomever it was that performed it.
>|>Jamie

>The point is that we're apparently making progress.  The damaged
>fetus is undeniably the same person before and after birth.  The *only*
>difference is the location of residence.

Why is that "undeniable"? I deny it.

It cannot possibly be the "same person" if the fetus is not a person
at all. And I think it is NOT a person at all.
So what's your argument?

[Utterly irrelevant description of National Review article deleted.]

>Now, you tell me, did the doctor perform an abortion or commit a
>homicide?  I can't imagine that anyone would consider this practice
>acceptable.  What is the difference between this abortion and one that
>might have been performed 30 minutes sooner?  Just where are you going
>to draw the line?

I consider it acceptable.

>If a damaged fetus results in a damaged baby, they are the same.  If
>killing a baby is murder, then so is killing the fetus.
>---Robert

WHAT???

If a damaged fetus results in a damaged baby, they are the same.

I would try to state the new Robert's Rule that licenses this
inference, but I can't imagine what it is. For example, I cannot
attribute even to Robert the acceptance of this principle:

   If a damaged X results in a damaged Y, they are the same.

I'm willing to do either (or even both) of two things. I am willing
to explain why this principle is completely absurd. (Maybe I could
hold a Logic Contest to see who can give the cleverest explanation?
Everyone start thinking of counterexamples as ludicrous as possible.)
Or, I am willing to discuss whatever principle Robert wants to offer
in its place as an interpretation of his mysterious statement.

Jamie

Note to oldtimers:
Hey, guess what. I found Ramon! I'll try to convince him to make
a glorious return to the list....
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:21:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Recent List History for Ramon

>ticket of Johnson/Olson who were victorious, NOT the ticket of Jimbo/liese.
>However, I quibble, it mattereth little - the best ticket was DuNcaN/ValeNtiN,
>you guys just weren't reasonable enough!@@%%**&&##@@ VMS

oh come on val,
you know, first you guys tried to get the dead guy elected, *then* you tried to
be reasonable....the dead guy is what did you, dear.

anyway, if everybody wants to be honest, the tall guys won cause no one could
see over the top....the e-ticket lost because they wouldn't count all my dead
relatives (plus we were just too damned cute to believe), jimbo and liese lost
cause liese voted for tim .....

anyway, the ones that should have won were the groucho marxists, but this just
proves its not a perfect world and the list is lacking in laudable laughs.

love & kisses anyway,

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:57:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: NORNAL

So if I tell Dr Pizz about my sexual preference (certainly MUCH different than
gender; but that's not for you, Pizz) that's when the trouble will start?

I can be X, but I can't let on that I _am_ X....

So maybe you mean that employers can discriminate against gays, but only if
employees inform them they're gay?  You wouldn't allow employers to ask
about sexual preference?

The point is becoming confused, so let me ask directly:

By "normal", do you mean "average", "majority", etc?
Or do you mean "somehow defective"?

The difference _could_ shed some light on this thread.

If you mean "somehow defective", then you are wrong that homosexuality is
not normal.

If you mean that the majority of humans are not homose
                                                      xual (exclusively), then
you are correct; why is this such a big deal?

If you mean "somehow defective", care to elaborate on what a "normal" human is?

And is "normal human" the same as "human"?

For example, when we describe what a human is, we can't use terms like "2 arms,
two legs", etc.  We must look deeper to discover things we all share in common;
therefore, we leave sexual preference out of it.  Why not leave it out of
job considerations?  It's quite irrelevant.


-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:13:30 EST
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Uncl ad infinitum

I agree with Ellen.  If anyone thinks that Akron U. is an "ivory tower,"
he's got another think coming.  This is basically a commuter university;
most of the people on this campus live in "the real world," a lot have
jobs in "the real world," and this place has been hit hard by budget cuts,
so a lot more will have jobs in "the real world" just to pay tuition, fees,
and money for food, shelter, and books.  This is not a "Golden Fairyland"
in which we're all pampered darlings.

Evelyn Duncan
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Disavowal of affinity
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 20:29:13 GMT

I hereby officially disavow any affinity between myself and
Caius.  While I think that he and I happen to hold _some_ of
the same conclusions, and while he probably THINKS that he is
arguing in favor of free markets and capitalism, I am quite
convinced that (for the most part) he has no idea what he is
doing.

It is really kind of sad to me.  I think that there are good reasons
why we ought to pursue certain policies.  And I think that what is
perhaps most damaging to my efforts to educate people about the
wisdom of various policies are the activities of those who give
really wrong and contemptible arguments for those same policies.

Let me just take up one example: pay differences between men and
women.  It is a simple fact that women tend to earn less money than
men while engaged in the same kind of job.  This raises some interesting
policy questions: should the government do anything about it?  Why
or why not?

Caius responded to some evidence on the matter by sneering at
the person who posted it.  He then said something about 70 years
of Soviet Russia, and how that should have been enough to
convince anyone.  Anyone casually reading could easily get the
impression from such a lame showing that the only arguments
against government intervention in the situation are based on
sneering and bad logic.

But to the contrary, I think that there are several reasons
(fairly good ones!) why women earn less than men for the same
job, and that there are several related reasons why the government
ought not to try to do anything about it.

But it will be difficult for me to lay out my case, when people
are already seriously prejudice by what they reasonably perceive
to be a kind of anger-based approach.

--Jimbo



Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 00:21:26 EST
From:         Doctor Pizz <jdt10@CUNIXB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: NORNAL
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

Normal - "conforming to the typical or standard pattern 2) average in
intelligence and personality 3) free from mental disorder"

definition 1 - Clearly homosexuals do not conform to the typical or
standard pattern.

definition 2 - not a relevant definition

definition 3 - gays are saying it is innate.  Many would consider it to
be a disorder

Pizz
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU