HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Sexist Incidents
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 03:26:37 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug25.212641.24944@sfu.ca> probst@fraser.sfu.ca (Scott Probst) writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.183639.16010@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> mackenzi@McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Paul Mackenzie) writes:
>>
>>Has anyone had any experience with blatant sexism?  By this I mean some
>>decision making that was OBVIOUSLY based on sex where sex had no logical
>>part in the decision.  I am trying to find out what this is, because all
>>through school, university, and now graduate school I have never really
>>witnessed what I thought was sexist (other than on TV, books, etc).  I
>>am particularly interested in sexism in universities.
>>
>>I guess I'm either blind or lucky.  If the former, please open my eyes.
>>
>how about the fact that most grad schools make no allowance for providing
>or subsidising childcare? 

Curiously, here we have a case of equal treatment being given as a case
of blatant sexism. Would not this be -required- by the ERA.

In fact, is not one of the tenants of communism that each shall receive
according to their needs?

I am not making a value judgment here. And if the male student had a
child to care for, he would receive no extra funds or considerations.
 
>Scott Probst: Brain and Behaviour Laboratory, Psychology dept, SFU
>              Graduate Issues Officer, Simon Fraser Student Society.
>e-mail: probst@fraser.sfu.ca - ph: (604) 291 3354/3181 - fax: (604) 291 5843
>              "yes, well, and here we go again..." - Dr H. S. Thompson

Rich

payner@netcom.com


Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger. NOT!
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:21:47 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: na
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Sep1.012551.18170@seq.uncwil.edu> session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions) writes:
>He wasn't talking to you. He was talking to the American Legion. Besides,
>he wasn't implying that any voter requires his respect in order to make
>a decision on who to vote for.

 You mean he was ONLY talking to the american legion. He has a different story
to tell every group now doubt. I loved the "sooouuiiee" call they gave at the
Grand Ole Opera in Nashville.
 Perhaps you need to study brain washing techniques. Clinton used a classic.
It was actually a threat.

 Steve Tyree- These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3978 alt.news-media:1018 alt.activism.d:2909
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.news-media,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: A journalist speaks on media bias
From: dsvoss@isr.harvard.edu (Steve Voss)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 18:34:36 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

I checked the reference on that study regarding journalistic ideology.  The
cite is as follows:

Lichter, S. Robert, Stanlet Rothman and Linda S. Lichter.  1986.  "The
Media Elite."  Bethesda, MD: Adler & Adler.

It has been updated as well.  New York: Hastings House.  1990

This study is special because, in addition to the simple poll questions
asked of journalists to see how their views were different from business
people, the study also did a number of psychological tests that would
help them sort of get at what journalists "really thought" rather than
what they reported.

Every study found that journalists tended to be suspicious of authority,
"liberal" on social issues, somewhat reformist on other issues but
generally suspicious of government intervention in the economic sphere.

The authors conclude that journalists have strong Progressive,
establishment liberal reform inclinations that slip into their
writings through story selection and news emphasis (although seldom
through direct misuse of facts).

I tried to check the book out of our library downstairs to give
you "actual data," but it's checked out.  The surveys and
phsychological tests were only applied to "elite journalists."
That is, journalists who work for the national news media, either
a network or one of the main papers (NY Times, WA Post).

Steve
From: rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton & Taxes: 7% f
Date: 27 Aug 92 04:07:11 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

The best way to "transfer" federal Medicare/MedicAid money to the states
for them to use as they see fit (in health care) is for the federal 
government to stop collecting that money and let the state do that part
of the job too.

The less money that passes through Washington, DC, the better we'll all be.

-- 
Josh Rovero   (rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil) | or Internet 5346p@cc.nps.navy.mil 
Department of Oceanography, Code OC/Rv |      Bitnet 5346p@NAVPGS 
Naval Postgraduate School              |              
Monterey, CA  93943   (408) 646-2084   |
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.news-media
From: "Dan Gillmor" <p00107@mail.psi.net>
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Organization: Detroit Free Press
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 23:30:04 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink (3.11)

It would be interesting if this group were actually to discuss media 
questions one of these days. I've just read several dozen messages about 
writers' views on abortion terminology and creationism -- all 
worth reading, but only to a point. Perhaps the writers should move to 
another group that talks issues and not the media's handling of them
From: fhausman@wet.UUCP (Frank Hausman)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: What is Rush's Compuserve address?
Summary: No, really.  What is it?
Date: 25 Aug 92 19:41:01 GMT
Organization: Just Me


   Perhaps we need a rush-limbaugh FAQ.  >:-)
   Reply via email is fine, if you don't want to waste net bandwidth.
   PLEASE, no flames, I really do just want his Compu$erve address. 
   Thanks,
       Frank
   fhausman@wet!well.sf.ca.us
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3952 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4815
From: barnejd@wkuvx1.bitnet
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Info on Dan Quayle's camera coverage during Buchanan's speech
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:32:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY

In article <BtGI03.Dwu@wpi.WPI.EDU>, nyh@wpi.WPI.EDU (Nevo Y Hed) writes:
>  In article <1738fsINNjpe@agate.berkeley.edu> schubert@united.berkeley.edu (John Schubert) writes:
> [...
>>	As the Astrodome crowd erupted in cheers, Mr. Quayle sat
>>	stiff and expressionless, his eyes shifting self-consciously
>>	to the left and then to the right.  The camera lingered.
>>	Mr. Qualye, whose own candidacy was bombarded by questions
>>	about the draft four years earlier, did not smile.
>>
> I was more astonished when Mrs. Quayle gave her speech and mentioned
> Clinton's dodging the draft - forgetting to mention her own husband in
> the proccess.

    Is there some law against not mentioning Danny Boy?  I think it's
safe to assume she is in favor of him; after all, she married him. 
Why waste peoples' time when you can deal with issues - like the 
incompetency of the Democratic candidate, especially as commander-in-
chief of our nation's armed forces.
 
> 	I know, all you devoued [sp.] Republicans are going to tell me that
> Q is just running for VP while Willie runs for President - but
> remember - a VP _HAS_ to be good enough to be a president - cause he
> might become one.

    Agreed.  However, examine Quayle's record (the real record, not
the one the media makes up ) next to that of Slick Willie; Quayle wins,
hands down.  Plus, he has a lot more international experience.

>  I, for example, would have been happier to see the
> democratic ticket reversed - Gore would probably make the best
> president out of the 4

    Take it from a Tennessean, not the press - Gore would be worse
than even Clinton.  He's from the old "tax-and-spend" school.  Don't
believe me?  Look at the records; he's the biggest spender in Con-
gress!  Bad enough he won his seat through three things - the Tenn.
political machine, his father (a well-known politician around here)'s
name, and his good, clean-cut looks.  The media loves him - he's as
liberal as they are. The best choice?  Quayle.  See an upcoming
article in the Quayle fan forum for more on that.
    That's my opinion; it ought to be yours.

                                          Fred

P.S. - Just to make this crystal clear, my last statement is purely
facetious.  God gave you the ability to choose; use it wisely.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.clinton
From: machman@milton.u.washington.edu (The Machman)
Subject: Re: Bush reactive?
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:01:18 GMT

cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:

>I'm surprised Gore is not blaming the Bush administration for their
>lack of action regarding global warming--  if Gore were president,
>there would be no global warming, thus giving us cooler oceans,
>which would have resulted in Hurricane Andrew being "a gentle
>late summer shower."

ridiculous.  either you're scientifically illiterate, or a republican,
or both.  i believe if Gore were vice-president, we'd be trying to do 
something about reducing the risk of global warming, at least not 
ignoring it like the Bush administration has been.

						-- dave

-- 
 /'''   The Machman     machman@milton.u.washington.edu    david c carroll
 c-OO                                                                      
    \                     "Big Science.  Hallelujah"
   -                                                                       
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: PA113718@utkvm1.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Remarks by William Bennett (text)
Organization: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:50:44 GMT

In article <5061@news.duke.edu>
eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:

><< Acknowledgments to the Republican National Committee for supplying me
>the transcriptions upon request. >>
>
>Republican National Convention
>Remarks by William Bennett, former Secretary of Education
>
>Nomination of Dan Quayle for US Vice President
>
>Houston Astrodome, Houston, TX
>August 19, 1992
>
>WILLIAM BENNETT:
>Thank you. Let me start from departing from my text. << It's in here, so
>he's not departing from THIS text! >> As a trained philosopher and as a
>sometimes objective commentator for the news media, I'd like to say I think
>this is a whole lot more interesting than New York.
>
>child's life than his values, his internal process, his beliefs, his sense
>of right and wrong. It is the child's values, more than his race, his class,
>Let me be clear about one thing. When we talk about traditional family values,
>we are not using code words. We are not seeking a political wedge issue and
>we are not speaking to demean or belittle others. Rather, we're seeking to
>honor and to affirm what is best in us, what Lincoln has called "the better
>angles of our nation." [Quotes mine.]
>

The Lincoln quote, it pains me somewhat to say, should be "the better angels
of our nature."  Is that really what the Republican National Committee's
own transcript said, "better angles of our nation"?  Geez, they might
have a point about this Cultural Elite business, after all.

          Tom G.
From: detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush's TV show & the FAQ
Date: 27 Aug 92 03:44:20 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Rush's show will be on superstation WWOR-TV Channel Nine out of
Secaucus, New Jersey.

I believe it will be weeknights at midnight, I will post when I
know the time for sure.

Dittos


-- 
David De Trolio - (detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu)
__________________________________________________

"We're sailing on the wind of better days"
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Gardner on Evolution
Date: 28 Aug 92 01:18:57 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug27.141846.623@dbsun.uucp> hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey) writes:
->For example, a computer program.  Random bytes of data will not do
->anything useful.  However, the programmer orders the data until it
->does what it is supposed to (hopefully).  The entropy of the program
->has decreased.  But the program is not a closed system.  The programmer
->expended energy ordering the program.  The amount of entropy increase
->by this expended energy more than offsets the decrease due to the now
->ordered program.

 What about the programmer who works all day on the program and actually
makes it run worse. Are you saying he increased the disorder of the program
by increasing his surrounding entropy due to his programming efforts.
 
 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
  Neat quote - Thomas Sowell  Conservative Chronicles August 12,1992
                "Voters are never blamed for the economy."
               copyright 1992 Creators Syndicate Inc.
              "The Real difference between radicals and conservatives is that
               radicals think things are bad, while conservatives think they
               are worse. Radicals seem to feel that evil is localized in some
               group called "oppressors", while conservatives believe that get-
               ting rid of all oppressors will barely scratch the surface."
From: rnlee@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Profess'nal Agitator)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Hillary
Keywords: Hillary marriage slavery
Date: 28 Aug 92 10:17:54 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: MAWL - Mudd Alums Without Lives

All these accusations and counter-accusations, but no text.
Until now:

The basic rationale for depriving people of rights in a dependency
relationship is that certain individuals are incapable or undeserving
of the right to take care of themselves and consequently need social
institutions specifically designed to safeguard their position.  Along
with the family, past and present examples of such arrangements
include marriage, slavery and the Indian reservation system.

from "Children Under the Law," 1974, reprinted in Harvard Educational
Review, 1982, as quoted in The American Spectator, August 1992, p. 29

Your mileage may vary...

Agitator
  #->

"A political deadend."                  Bruce Herschensohn for U.S. Senate!!!
    --Gore on the Vice Presidency when    Not the ten-year       //  The REAL
      asked about a Dukakis-Gore ticket   Congress insider      //   outsider
--------------- R E M E M B E R   B E I J I N G ------------\\ //------------
IBM PC - Who wants a politically correct computer?           \X/  Only AMIGA!
========================================== Bring Back the Caltech Cannon!! ==
Roderick Lee, HMC '91      "The Professional Agitator"      agitator@ucsd.edu
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4072 talk.politics.misc:42656
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Subject: Inslaw still smells!
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:59:08 GMT

If you need proof about the moral bankruptcy of the Reagan/Bush
administration, look no further than the Inslaw case.  I hope
you all read James Kilpatrick's column on Monday (8/31).

When the Justice Department pirates software, drives the software
manufacturer out of business, and stonewalls Congressional
investigators, you have to wonder if anyone gets justice.  And
the mysterious death of free-lance reporter Danny Casolaro (sp?)
who was investigating Inslaw makes you wonder even more.

Why not rename it the Ministry of Love?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hulsey%dbsun.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Jim Hulsey)   TBDBITL '84 ('85 Rose Bowl)
An Ohioan living in Misery (Missouri, same difference)

Watch what you say!                Won't you sign up your name
They'll be calling you a radical   So you can be their dependable
A liberal, fanatical criminal      Respectable, presentable vegetable
--  Supertramp "The Logical Song"

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.news-media,alt.activism.d
From: aaiken@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Andrew C. Aiken)
Subject: Re: A journalist speaks on media bias
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:38:25 GMT

In <1992Aug26.034622.4291@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:

>This is difficult for me to believe, although without some kind of 
>evidence to the contrary, I will assume you're not lying about it.
>I have seen very few newspapers endorse the Republican ticket.  I've
>been all across this country and without exception (no matter how
>objective the news stories) the OpEd page has been flaming liberal.
>Would you please elaborate?  How do you reconcile this with the fact
>that the press is predominantly liberal?

 	I'll agree that most papers are liberal, but have you ever read the
Indianapolis Star?  I doubt that it has ever endorsed a Democratic pres.
candidate.


Andrew Aiken
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3979 alt.rush-limbaugh:3980
From: attebery@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Rush's TV show & the FAQ
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:12:30 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services



>As Rush branches out into the television market on September 14th it seems 
>inevitible that the FAQ will need to keep a list of all the stations and
>times that Rush's show airs.  Since several markets have already begun
>advertising the show I thought it might be a good idea to get a head start
>on that portion of the FAQ.  If you have information on the airing of Rush's
>show in your area please let me know.  I am considering the following one line
>format for each entry:
>
>ST  MARKET           CALL    TV/CABLE   AFF   DAY    TIME    DAY    TIME
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>NC  Raleigh          WRDC    28/12      NBC   M-F    12-1a    Sat   9-10p
>
>(Note:  the days and times here not correct - this is just an example)
>
>Thanks to all of you who've helped keep the FAQ current!

Since my last request for this information I have received nada (a little
spanish lingo there).  I know there will lots of requests for this information
after the show begins on Sept. 14th so please help reduce the coming bandwidth
buldge by getting at least the major market channels into the FAQ early.

Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tracy Atteberry              |  The heart of the wise inclines to the
attebery@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu  |  right, but the heart of the fool to the
D-D-D-Dittos!                |  left.  -Ecclesiastes 10:2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4264 alt.politics.bush:4033 alt.politics.clinton:3996 alt.politics.elections:12384 talk.politics.misc:43674 alt.sex:28326
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: <None>
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 03:19:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.220350.1@cstp.umkc.edu> rdale@cstp.umkc.edu writes:
> > stated opinions of influential christian leaders". I'm certainly not
> > prepared to abandon morality, but it must be a morality founded in the
> > social contract, not myths and legends.

> 	Granted.  But who makes these "social contracts"?

The people. They're made by looking at what works, long term, and formalizing
it as law.

> Seems to me that
> much of our law is based on old religious myths, old Persian leaders, and so
> on.

Some of them.

> "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not steal" are pretty basic
> fundamentals of most societies, religious or not.

That's right, because allowing murder and theft is socially destabilizing. A
society that allows killing and stealing without some sort of restrictions
will die.

> If a society is to maintain
> itself, it must have moral boundaries which don't change with the breeze or
> because someone feels a rule is too "fundamentalist" or too "liberal".

Yes, you need to have a mechanism to delay the formalization of a new rule
until it's been determined whether or not it works. That's why the US has a
constitution and representative democracy rather than common law and
participatory democracy. The other side of this equation is the need to
provide negative feedback: to force laws to be reaffirmed periodically lest
they block the growth of society. There's some of that: the budget, for
example, must be passed periodically and you can simply not fund the enforcement
of bad laws. I think more needs to be done here. I also think there's too
few checks and balances... it's too easy to pass new laws in the heat of the
moment. Look at prohibition, for example.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
  'U`  
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Correction -- Remarks by William Bennett (text)
Keywords: Bill Bennett, Dan Quayle, George Bush, Houston, RNC
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:53:56 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

All misspellings are mine: including ... 
 Rather, we're seeking to
honor and to affirm what is best in us, what Lincoln has called "the better
angels of our nation." [Quotes mine.]
   ^^

Sorry about the incovienience.
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck (Duke BME '93)		eyc@acpub.duke.edu
I'm too busy for my class, too busy for my clubs, too busy for my work.
I'm too busy for my mail, too busy for my news, too busy for my life.
I'm too busy for this .sig. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.news-media,alt.activism.d
From: crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp)
Subject: Re: The Real Reagan Record
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 06:44:12 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Sep2.155008.14345@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>Have any of you read the  August 31 issue of NATIONAL REVIEW.  I found 
>this quite amazing.  On pages 25-62 is found the cover story, THE REAL 
>REGAN RECORD.  Many (a dozen or so) authors have each taken one plank 
>of the conventional liberal tale of how Ronny ruined America, and 
>smashed it to pieces.
>
>Some of the subjects covered are:
>
>	Liberal claim		This article says
>
>Household income went down	NOT
>Rich got richer			not much
>Poor got poorer			NOT
>Poor are normal families	NOT
>Jobs created were McJobs	NOT
>US national debt is terrible	NOT
>negative trade surplus is bad	not as simple as that
>foreigners are taking over	not really        
>deficits caused by tax cuts	NOT
>entitlements went down		NOT
>Rich paid less taxes		NOT
>Rich got a tax break		NOT
>Junk bonds were bad for bus.	NOT
>policies were especially 
>	hard on blacks		NOT
>Reagan caused S&L crisis	NOT
>policies made it harder 
>	for poor to advance	NOT
>Reagan created homelessness	NOT
>Reagan made homelessness worse	NOT
>more difficult to own a home	NOT
>HUD spending went down		NOT
>Decade of Greed			NOT
>bad for the environment		NOT
>
>
>I'm sure you liberals will hate to hear this, and you conservatives will 
>love it.  Either way, it is a good read.
>
>Ted
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>"I got my brain on hype-tonight'll be your night.  Die, die, die, pig, die.  
>F--k the police!  I know your family's grievin'.  F--k 'em!" -- Ice-T
>"Aw, that's just black street talk." -- Ice-T (about the above line)
>         -----krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu-----


-- 
Richard Crisp                 Cupertino, Ca.                crisp@netcom.com
(415) 903-3832 wk  "Time for a clean sweep of Congress"   (408) 253 4541 fax

A government that is afraid of an armed populace is a government
the populace should be afraid of.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh