HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 12:51:00 EST
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: re:re: freedom of speech

On Wed, 23 Dec 1992 14:35:54 GMT james p mcbride <BRIDEC92@IRLEARN.UCD.IE> said:
> I'm in favour of freedom of spelling for all of those, plus people who
> spell color, favor, etc, with a 'u', ie, colour, favour, labour, etc.
I draw the line there.  When in America, favor, color, labor, neighbor,
honor, savior, etc. Are spelled SANS (that's right "sands") "u."
> james
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:40:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: it's a wonderful life

>a smaller percent of the tax burden and could be interpreted as a tax
>cut in a certain sense.

kinda like when you say you saved a ton of money because you bought something
on sale.....so where's the actual money??? i mean, did the guy at the register
actually give you money to put in your pocket when you bought this thing?
also like when some guy loses an election and says he really won because he
didn't lose by much. (think jimbo :))

oh dear, i guess we can interpret anything to make it mean what it doesn't.

>Robert has stated that he doesn't want his children to be "exposed"
>to homosexuals.

if he doesn't want them to be exposed, he should put some clothes on them. :)


>A new study has come out on the danger of second hand smoke. If we
>can remove children from a home for parental alcohol abuse during
>pregnancy, can we/should we do the same thing for exposure to second
>hand smoke?

fred? can we really remove children from the home because a parent drinks
while pregnant?

who is going to be in charge of investigating smokers? can we destroy families
on the basis of a scientific study? i mean, is it the job of the gov't. to
force a healthy lifestyle on its citizens? do we criminalize drinkers, smokers,
or those who's caloric intake of fat is more than the recommended 30% ??
after all, a high fat diet has been shown to contribute to obesity, heart
disease, increased risk of cancer, etc. etc.  should we remove children from
the home because their parents feed them too many greasy hamburgers?

IM o so HO, i would rather gov't stay out of our habits, out of our lifestyles
and out of our homes.

-linda (oh, btw, i missed you too!)

>fred
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 10 Jan 1993 23:16:00 AST
From:         Ramon <R_ALEMAN@UPR1.UPR.CLU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Privatizations and standard of living
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>>         By God, Tim! You are right! Maybe it's time to stop all that
>> nonsense and let a mixed economy work. Who knows? It might actually do some
>> good!

>Most of the African countries are already mixed economies and they do not
>seem to work.
>Caius.

        As has been my "theme song" here in the past, their economies do
not operate on a vacuum. They have internal problems, but they also have to
deal with a very unfair world market system and are saddled by centuries of
colonialism and destructive influences imported by "foreign investors" who
make a quick buck exploiting them.

 - Ramon
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:57:30 PST
From:         Jonathan Fisher <jfisher@NETXWEST.COM>
Subject:      Re: Packwood & Clinton - Compare
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>    Some on this list are advocating that Packwood stalled the discussion
> about his misconduct until the elections were over and that this was
> dishonest, bad and so on.  What about Clinton?  It seems as if every night
> on the news the past two weeks the stories have been "Clinton said this
> before, now after he is saying this" on issue after issue.  Is Clinton a
> bad boy too?  I'm waiting to hear the justifications.
>
> Carl---+
>

Gee Carl, you don't suppose that you are misrepresenting the day's events,
do you?  OK, I'll bite.
Specifically, what are you talking about?

Jonathan
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:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:23:13 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject: RE: Uncl: Re: Uncl: ActUp/RI joins Colorado Boycott
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>I know how she felt.  "That's a priceless Steinway!"  "Not any more."
>Thanks for sharing the memory.
>
>BTW, if you ever get a chance to hear The Goon Show (BBC radio, with
>the young Sellers at his craziest), do it.

        I had an English teacher who only knew of Sellers from the Pink Panther
movies.  I was incredulous that she had never seen Being There (then in
theaters) or Dr. Strangelove.

        Strange what prejudices do to you.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:04:53 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: school daze
              6 Jan 1993 17:43:20 -0400 from <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>

From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>

>        Clinton has been a supporter of public schools.  Sending his kid to a
> private one thus appears hypocritical.

The above statement MIGHT be correct under certain circumstances
but I don't think you are explaining those circumstances well
here.

For example, I am also a supporter of public education is
general however I am under no obligation to send my own
kid to it.  In fact, when I was in Los Angeles, I did send
her to a private schools, but now that we are in Lexington,
she goes to a public school.  And I was a supporter of public
education in both Los Angeles and Lexington.

I might be a supporter of gun ban but purchase one as long
as other people have guns.

However, I admit that what he did is bad POLITICS and will get
him flak from his opponents.

> Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:36:21 -0500
Comments:     Resent-From: SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
Subject:      RE: Uncl: Re: Uncl: Re: Addiction as Disease

From -T
Why does Robert place a "?" after the title "Dr." in Jack
Kevorkian's name?

From Robert
Because Robert has a hard time recognizing a murder as a doctor.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 23:48:09 CDT
Comments:     Resending note of Wed,
              6 Jan 1993 18:37:00 EDT from CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
              <POLITICS@OHSTVMA>
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
Subject:      Uncl: RE: Uncl: B/Hillary Clinton

From:
*** Resending note of 01/06/93 17:38

From -T
        If you were a veteran entitled to VA Hospital Benefits, but could
afford private health care, which would you choose in case you needed surgery:

        A. The abominable VA hospital system

        B. Private Hospital

If you chose B, would that be unpatriotic?  Would it be somehow wrong?  Or
ould it be the only logical solution until the VA could be reformed?

From Robert
Of course, I would choose private.  Although I have no first hand knowledge
of VA facilities, it seems that they generally get less than enthusiastic
response from their patients.  As an *official* Indian, I am entitled to
receive medical care at greatly reduced rates.  I would never use it, except
as a last resort.  I can't see where either of these cases would bring one's
patriotism into question.

From -T
BTW - VMS: I agree with you re: religion and this list.  Unfortunately, being
religious is often like being a smoker or alcoholic:

From Robert
I appreciate Val's position, however, humanity spends considerable time
needlessly chasing its tail.  The answers to life's little problems have
been provided, we just need the faith to use them.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 09:51:02 CDT
Comments:     Resending note of Thu,
              7 Jan 1993 09:57:30 EST from todd pukanecz <CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET>
From:         Robert Moss <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      Uncl: Re: Uncl: Re: Addiction as Disease
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

From:
*** Resending note of 01/07/93 09:02

From Todddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
Thanks, but your assessment is naive.  My *CHOICE* was a decision that
was made for me by lack of alternatives.  My *CHOICE* was between life and
death, so was based on my instinct for survival rather than some altru-
istic sense of personal or civic responsibility.......

From Robert
All choices, even yours, are the product of discrimination.  You had
options and *CHOSE* one over the others.  You disliked the alternatives
and therefore discriminated against them.  Now I don't know if you'll
need to come all the way out in support of the right of individuals to
discriminate, but that is exactly what you did.  You could have called
on Dr.(?) Kevorkian but instead you chose life, correctly I might add.
While we're here, since you chose life for yourself do you support the
same for the unborn?

From Toddddddddddddddddddddddd
The disease claim does not provide total innocence, nor does it imply
victimization.  Does a cold sufferer cry victimization?  Does a herpes
sufferer claim total innocence?......

From Robert
You absolutely cannot give yourself a cold.  You must be victimized by
someone/something else.  It doesn't matter if you scream from a rooftop
about the unfairness of your condition, the victimization is quietly
implied.  You also cannot give yourself herpes.  The solution to both
problems is prevention of exposure.  Now in these cases I grant that
could be a little difficult, but in addiction problems the prevention
is no more complicated than making a *CHOICE*.

From Toddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
And what message would that be?  I personally found great solace in the
notion that my disease, although not curable, was treatable.

From Robert
I am glad that your condition is treatable and that you have taken control
of the problem.  I'm not prepared to say that you needed the medical
profession's help, when family, faith and willpower could accomplish
the same results for free.
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:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:38:00 MET
From:         Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
Subject:      Re: russian right?
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              "BADERTINOVS%NEWS@ADMINB.RFERL.ORG" at Dec 23, 92 1:39 pm

BADERTINOVS%NEWS@ADMINB.RFERL.ORG pisze:
>>
>> "Fascism is a dictatorship of the extreme right"? This definition can not
>> be applied to modern Russia. In Russia HARD-LINE COMMUNISTS are
>> considered to be "the right".

In Russian all the dictionary has been redefined

Right, Fascist, Capitalistic, Private, and several other words have the same
meaning : BAD.
The same methods of indoctrination were used in oher East Eropean countries,
and they failed.

>>
>> Sam.
>>
Caius
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Jimmy -Jimbo- Wales)
Subject: Re: free-market
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:17:37 GMT

>...where in the
>late XVIII century liberals were espousing the rise of the bourgeoisie and
>a free market as REFORMIST policies, it is now the REACTIONARIES who want
>to go back to the laisez-faire ideal world? 

Including such noted reactionaries as Jimbo Wales, we may rest assured.

>Of course, from our leftist
>point of view, right-wing thinkers appear to have a deficient or distorted
>knowledge of history because they don't seem to remember the unrest and
>chaos that the huge inequalities brought about by an unrestricted free
>market. These blatant injustices were the cause of the movement of
>progressives toward the defense of an equalizing role for the State.

Of course, from my educated point of view, I simply wish to point
out that Ramon's reading of history is theory-laden, and that the
theory he (apparently) uses in reading history is, well, discredited.

--Jimbo


Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:22:27 -0500
Comments:     Resent-From: SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
Subject:      Re: the biBle

From Jonathan
And as a P.S. to Robert, I am relatively sure that the 1 Billion+ Buddhists
feel very similar to my viewpoints, (i.e. that the bible is a bunch of hooey).
This puts you in the minority.  But I don't, necessarily, think that you
should be discriminated against!  But, when you do go to meet that great
big buddha in the sky (or is it buddhas?, no it's buddha, this is the
re-incarnation religion.  Isn't it?), I hope that you have a good
explanation for your intransigence.

From Robert
Thank you Jonathan, for your concern.  I'll manage somehow.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 10:41:26 EST
From:         todd pukanecz <CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Addiction as Disease

>From Dan...
>Straw man alert!  Alternately, why are race, religion, ethnicity, and gender
>generally accepted bases for minority status?
>
>From Robert...
>The funny part is that the *straw man* is probably a minority too.  In answer
>to your question, I don't really know.  IMO tagging a particular group with
>the *minority* label is nothing more than a way to grant special rights.

Special rights?  Like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
Horrors!

>The entire concept is basically a load of bull.
>
>From Dan...
>Straw man alert on addiction!  Addiction is generally considered a disease.
>Homosexuality is not.  Further, I can tell you right now many of my friends
>will dispute whether sexual orientation is a choice.
>
>From Robert...
>Careful, if you get too many straw men they'll lose their minority status.
>I really love this *addiction is a disease* racket.  If there's ever been a
>more blatant attempt to shed personal responsibility for one's own actions,
>I've never seen it.
>
The realization that addiction is a disease is not an attempt by
addicts to shed responsibility.  This approach properly deals with
the problem in physiological and psychological terms, rather than
improperly dealing with it in moral or legal terms.  A person with
a genetic predisposition to alcoholism, even though she never drinks,
may still be referred to as an alcoholic or probable/potential alcoholic.
Even though it's been two years since I decided to deal with my
alcoholism, I'm still an alcoholic (or recovering alcoholic).  Neither
the law, nor my creditors, nor my jilted/jilting lovers have allowed
me to shed personal responsibility for my actions because of my disease.
As there is a provable genetic predisposition to alcoholism, there is
likely to be provable predispositions to other addictions.

>Let's see how this works.  OH NO! I'm a drug addict!  What did I ever do to
>deserve this horrible affliction?  (hint: you purchase and use drugs) How
>am I ever going to get well? (hint: stop purchasing and using drugs)  The

(Hint:  None of the above supports the previous allegation that
addiction-as-disease is a dodge for responsibility, nor does it
support the following assertion that addiction is not a disease.)

>farce of the *addiction disease* claim has got to be one of the biggest
>jokes in the history of mankind.  BTW, feel free to substitute alcohol in

Your talking through your hat, friend.  (Hint: Try getting some
*facts* about addiction and disease from a knowledgeable source,
say, a medical journal or text.)
    toddddddddddd

=========== Wake up John Doe.  You're the hope of the world! ===========
--------     /^^\    ---- Todd Pukanecz ----   ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
-----      /      >   --- Ag. Econ. DPL --- "LSD has been known to cause
---  /\_ / @       \   -- Virginia Tech --   psychotic reactions in those
-  /________________>   - Blacksburg VA -    who don't use it." - TL
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 11:39:47 PST
From:         Jonathan Fisher <jfisher@NETXWEST.COM>
Subject:      Re: Kevorkian Sets Sights on Ohio
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> On Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:13:11 EST K=A*T said:
> >Anyway, Evelyn's criticism should be against the state of
> >Ohio not Kevorkian.
>
> As for the state of Ohio, a number of leading lawmakers here (from the
> governor on down) have gone on record of opposing Kevorkian.  The
> Summit County prosecutor, Lynn Slaby, has said that he will charge
> Kevorkian with practicing without a license if Kevorkian holds
> consultations with people.
This is the Polically Correct thing to do.  The other prosecutor said
the same thing, even after it was proven to him that he couldn't win
the case.
>
> As for Kevorkian himself, if his patients are ONLY the terminally ill,
> then I have no quarrel with him.  But, I'm worried about the mentally ill,
> the alcoholic or drug addicted, or teenagers who have decided to kill
> themselves.  Shouldn't they be helped through their problems instead of
> helping them to kill themselves?
Well Evelyn, since Dr. Kevorkian isn't helping the above named people
kill themselves, then you don't have any worries. He ONLY helps the
terminally ill.
> >
> >--KAT
>
> Evelyn
>
Jonathan
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:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 00:14:13 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: War in Europe
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>>         Here's a likely scenario for the next six months:
>> [...interesting stuff deleted...]
>> Brett'
>>
>Brett',
>
>While I agree with the scenarios, I think that you should credit
>MacNeil/Lehrer which talked about all of this in great detail
>last night!
>
>Jonathan

        I don't usually watch M/L.  It interferes with reruns of Cheers :).

Brett'
(What did they say?)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 10:49:00 AST
From:         Ramon <R_ALEMAN@UPR1.UPR.CLU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: free-market
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

Caius still insists that :

>The economy can be either
>1 - free-market OR
>2 - strongly regulated by state (mixed economy) OR
>3 - totally controled by the state
>
>Both (1) and (2) is a nonsense. Fascism, from economic point of view,
>is moving from (2) to (3)

        You are using your NON-STANDARD definitions again. Let us use a
dictionary, (why didn't we started here in the first place?) :

  fas.cism (fash'iz`m) n. a system of government characterized by
dictatorship, belligerent nationalism and racism, militarism, etc.; first
instituted in Italy (1922-43)

  right (r!t) Politics. a conservative or reactionary position, party, etc.

  con.ser.va.tive (ken sur've tiv) adj. 2. tending to preserve established
institutions, etc.; opposed to change.

  left 2.[often L-] Politics. a radical or liberal position, party, etc.

  lib.er.al (lib'er el) 5. n. favoring reform or progress

                           -Webster's New World Dictionary of
                            the American Language (1980)

        Do you see, dear Caius, why according to THESE definitions (a) the
Nazis are considered both rightist and fascists; (b) Moscow hard-line
communists are frequently labeled as "conservatives"; and (c) where in the
late XVIII century liberals were espousing the rise of the bourgeoisie and
a free market as REFORMIST policies, it is now the REACTIONARIES who want
to go back to the laisez-faire ideal world? Of course, from our leftist
point of view, right-wing thinkers appear to have a deficient or distorted
knowledge of history because they don't seem to remember the unrest and
chaos that the huge inequalities brought about by an unrestricted free
market. These blatant injustices were the cause of the movement of
progressives toward the defense of an equalizing role for the State.

 - Ramon
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:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:13:46 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Pardon me. No, pardon me!
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>In article <POLITICS%92123117422940@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>,
> K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU> writes...
>>From:         "Daniel R. Reitman, Attorney to Be"
><dreitman@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU>
>>
>>. . . .
>>> Flaw in your logic:  Foley is next in line, not Baker.
>>. . .
>>No! President Quayle's vp would be next in line.
>
>But -- Quayle can't appoint a VP because Congress isn't in session to confirm.
>
>                                                        Dan, ad nauseum

        Yeah, but I'm sure President Quayle could call them back. :D

Brett'
(Doesn't the sound of that give you the creeps? :)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU