HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.news-media
Subject: Re: Bill Moyers: Listening to America
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:37:41 -0500

In article <1992Apr13.123537.26822@nic.unh.edu>, pas@anchor.unh.edu (Paul A Sand) writes:
> jm> Can you say "Tyrany of the Majority" ? The 'real' America is 
>     semi-literate, superstitious, mal-educated little redneck  scum
>     steeped in violence, prejudice and intolerance. It's not  so
>     different from other 'civilized' countries in these  sentiments
>     either. If you value freedom - don't evoke the  great silent
>     majority again. Democracy loses its utility as  soon as one group
>     learns to use it to screw another group.
> 
> I've reproduced Mr. Mason's misanthropic rant in all its glory so that
> readers can verify that he offers not one whit of non-anecdotal
> evidence for his dreadful assertions. Surely anyone with a nodding
> acquaintence of recent pop history will Andy Warhol was *not* burned at
> the stake by Mr. Mason's 'real' Americans; instead, he was made rich
> and famous instead. (He was also miserable, of course, but that seems
> to have been largely a self-inflicted problem.)

	Actually, my reference was not about Andy Warhol at all ... but
	instead about the type of newspaper article that was presented
	in said documentary. Do refined, open, literate, intelligent and
	fairminded people seriously call for "Government assistance 
	to monitor perverts" ??? If so, my dictionary must have misprinted
	the definitions of 'open', 'literate', 'intelligent', 'fairminded'
	and those other words - should I get my money back ? 

	Warhol is lucky he stuck with the avante-guarde crowd in NYC. If
	he had wandered into a blue-collar area they might have beat him
	to death for being a 'weirdo'. 

	"Sharp increases in Gay-Bashing reported", "Senator Helms proposes
	legislation to prohibit defaming religion", "Racial tensions erupt
	into riots", "Creationists push for creation-science to be taught
	alongside evolution" ... typical kinds of newspaper headlines seen
	these days. Do you have any conception of how many Americans are
	believers in horoscopes, channeling, mystic-crystals and UFO 
	abductions ? How about faith-healing ? Face it, America is 
	functionally illiterate, ignorant, violent, racist, bigoted,
	superstitious and paranoid to its core. I will skip the crap about
	"building our fortunes upon the broken backs of the oppressed"
	because that line is getting to be abused too much - but it's
	at least partially true. 

	Take off the rose-colored glasses. Unless we acknowledge Americas
	major faults, nothing will be done about them. Of course, some
	may find utility in an ignorant quasi-fascist population ...

-- Jim Mason : Standard Disclaimers
From: rh@smds.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: "Politically Correct" -- A Quote
Date: 10 Apr 92 05:21:32 GMT
Organization: SMDS Inc., Concord, MA

In article <4251@gold.gvg.tek.com>, conib@peri.gvg.tek.com (Coni Britten) writes:

> Could you please give some citations of the use of the term "Politically
> Correct" (*with* its current definition of referring to non-right-wing
> political views, please) by "leftist student activists" which occur PRIOR
> to George Will's first use of this term in this way? 

I don't know when George Will used the term, but it was certainly common
currency in the 60's in Cambridge in the, ah, politically correct circles.
However, if I'm not mistaken, the term actually goes back to the 30's and
the communist party and Marxist thought in general.  An odd thought occurs
to me as I write -- the political thought of the thirties and forties is
probably inacessable to the young of today.  In any case, it was normal
to view everything through the prism of its political implications and,
yes, to take positions on all sorts of things on the grounds of political
correctness.
-- 
Richard Harter: SMDS Inc.  Net address: rh@smds.com Phone: 508-369-7398 
US Mail: SMDS Inc., PO Box 555, Concord MA 01742.    Fax: 508-369-8272
In the fields of Hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17456 alt.individualism:2348 talk.politics.drugs:2790
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Vaccination (was: Libertarian)
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 19:04:45 GMT

lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed) writes:
>What in the world are you talking about?  The control of polio and
>hooping cough, the erradication of smallpox, the control of rabies
>in domesitic canines: these are in dispute?

>Vaccination and antibiotics have been the two greatest sucesses of
>modern medicine.

Then what makes you think there are still going to be all these people
who are going to willingly risk getting the disease, especially given
cheap or free innoculation, and especially that there are going to be
enough that the disease will still spread?  This is much like the
roads.  If something is so overwhelmingly and obviously desireable,
it's very strange to think that if the government didn't do it then it
wouldn't get done, especially with such a high demand item.
-- 
Alaska - Land of 2 seasons: Winter is coming, Winter is here.
From: mcgredo@bluto.ie.orst.edu (Don McGregor)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: "Politically Correct" -- A Quote
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:35:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: talon.1992Apr6.183501.13424
Reply-To: mcgredo@bluto.ie.orst.edu
Organization: Oregon State University - Univ. Computing Services

Lance Visser writes
>(Harel Barzilai) writes:
>
>+>--"[P]olitical correctness" does not exist, and has never existed...
>
>	It is not a set of beliefs so much as a methodology for the 
>suppression of ideas.  The ideas differ but the method remains.
>
>	People who believe and spread this methodology refuse to accept its
>existance because in their mind they "cannot" possibly be bigoted or
>in many cases wrong......and their ideas are NOT open to debate.  
>
It's amusing to track the PCers defense of PC.  At first they made no  
apologies for their goals or methods.  Then it was defense of "diversity."   
Now it doesn't exist.

What happened was that their argument got aired to a national audience, and  
they got laughed off the stage.  Nobody likes to get laughed at, so now they  
deny it ever existed, while still holding onto the same beliefs.  The  
"nobody in here but us chickens" defense.

--
Don McGregor             | "I like maxims that don't encourage behavior
mcgredo@bluto.ie.orst.edu|  modification"   --Calvin
From: ccpatton@vax.muskingum.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: What _IS_ Ross Perot's phone number?
Date: 7 Apr 92 23:53:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: vax.1992Apr7.175330.2893
Organization: Muskingum College

I've seen this question bouncing around this newsgroup, but I have
yet to see the answer:  What _is_ Ross Perot's phone number?  (And
if you're going to use this post as an opportunity to flame either
myself or someone else, then please, at least have the courtesy to
change the subject of the post so I know to ignore it.)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18143 alt.individualism:2442 alt.activism:7682
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism,alt.activism
Subject: Re: Class Warfare is STUPID...
Date: 14 Apr 92 05:47:36 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

In article <1992Apr10.194038.18462@uunet!tellab5!odgate> mike@uunet!tellab5!odgate (Mike J. Kelly) writes:
>emamid@athena.ecs.csus.edu (David Emami) asks why the rich should pay a
>greater marginal tax rate than the non-rich.  Despite a lot of abstract
>arguing, he doesn't realize the real reason.  It's because there are
>more of us than them.  If they don't like it, they can leave.

Thank you for at least admitting that the real reason we have
"progressive" taxation is that we think we have enough people in our
gang to beat them up and take their money.

However, they are leaving.  And taking our jobs and standard of living
with them.  Is this some new form of Keynsian economics where any
money the rich have just sits there and rots instead of doing anything
useful? 

-- 
Nice guys don't finish nice.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker)
Subject: Re: Perot for President
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 08:47:39 GMT

In article <22570@goofy.Apple.COM> casseres@apple.com (David Casseres) writes:
>In article <1992Mar30.082209.7631@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>,
>baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:
>> 
>> In article <1992Mar30.055147.11728@Princeton.EDU> roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
>(Roger Lustig) writes:
>> >A few years ago, Perot gave his prescription for solving crime problems:
>> >cordon off minority neighborhoods and search house-to-house for guns and
>> >drugs.
>> >
>> >There you have it, folks, a simultaneous urination on THREE
>> >Consitutional amendments:
>> 
>> I personally don't think that it
>> is necessary to amend the Constitution in order to fight crime, but if
>> it is necessary, so be it.  A cost-benefit analysis of some incremental
>> change like more gun control or more general search warrants would be more
>> useful than emotionalistic talk of "urination" and so forth.
>
>Well well well.  First we saw that Pat Buchanan, whatever his inner thoughts
>about Jews, has the wholehearted support of some unquestionable anti-Semites. 
>And now we see that Perot, whatever his attitude to the Constitution and to
>individual liberties, has the approval of at least one gen-you-wine Fascist.
>That's Fascist with an unabashed capital, F, folks.  I don't think I've ever
>seen such a forthright example on the Net.

By your definition, most of the countries in the world (including our
friends in Europe) are fascists.  You might try looking up "fascist"
in the dictionary some time.

(Incidentally, I didn't approve or disapprove of Perot or his (supposed)
suggestions; I merely disapproved of those who would reject his (supposed)
suggestions on ideological grounds rather that on logical or empirical
grounds.)
From: wouk@alumni.cs.colorado.edu (Arthur Wouk)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: B-CPU Mail Path
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:34:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: colorado.1992Apr9.003411.15395
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <9204081825.AA29373@hardy.u.washington.edu> dild@exmus.fabersham.com (Jonny Handsome) writes:
>>So, if you want to bounce Ralphie's articles back at him (not that I recommend>it, no, never! :-)), don't use the "Reply" feature of your news reader - it
>>won't work.  Instead, mail the words of wisdom to:
>
>'Twould be naughty to send him unsolicited 'opinions'.
>
>>       agora.rain.com!b-cpu!ralphw        or
>>       b-cpu!ralphw@agora.rain.com        or
>>       b-cpu!maynard@agora.rain.com
>
>But...but...
>
>        % ping agora.rain.com
>        ping: unknown host agora.rain.com
>
>Ralpharella, what is your internet number? You didn't pluck your name
>out of the server did you???
>*************


although the com server may not know, uunet sure does know.

agora!b-cpu!<id>@uunet.uu.net


will get you anyone at b-cpu.
-- 
arthur wouk 
internet: wouk@alumni.cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Ozone problem burns Politically Correct
Organization: Small Business Systems, Incorporated, Esmond, RI  02917
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:44:43 GMT

pac9897@zeus.tamu.edu (PHIL CARNEY) writes:

>In case you hadn't noticed, much of the fish stock is dissappearing from 
>the Great Lakes, though the so-called "acid rain" scare as you put it
>is more advanced in Western and Eastern Europe - where half of Germany's
>forests are dying or dead and the Scandinavian lakes are dying a slow but sure
>death.

Which, by golly, probably doesn't have *anything* to do with the massive
amount of localized industries in those areas which contribute to the
pollutants in those ecosystems.

I am specifically referring to the doom-n-gloom scenario that had all the
forests here in the Northeast destroyed by the mid-80's unless massive
steps were taken in the mid-west and Canada to prevent this "disaster" from
occuring.

Well, its the early 90's now, and I still see plenty of forests here in
RI, MA, and NH.

> Well, if you knew your ass from your elbow on this matter you would know that
> this last winter, an absolutely massive hole over the Artic region was 
> discovered, extending right down as far as Northern Europe 

Right. The mystical hole which appeared out of nowhere even though
atmospheric chemists have been studying the ozone layer for "40 years".
Can you say "convenient"? Good, I knew you could.

> Your crass "crisis, what crisis" type remarks may seem somewhat less funny
> when Americans begin to risk cancer as a result of this complacency.

Idiots in this country risk skin cancer every year in some stupid attempt
to get a bronzed-n-beautiful-bod. Shit, who am I to complain. Helps to 
clean out the gene pool, I say.
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /   I'm not a bigot,
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /    I hate everyone.
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              / 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17033 rec.sport.hockey:9094
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Greedy Athletes
Date: 5 Apr 92 18:15:41 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Apr5.143730.22889@oz.plymouth.edu> m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier) writes:
> I'm sick of greedy athletes.  Return to the ice and get the playoffs going.

You don't think greedy owners have anything to do with it?  An owner makes
a million dollars per playoff game, and each player gets under $800 to play
in a horrific playoff schedule.
-- 
Ted Frank          + "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in
U o' C Law Skool   +  color and content according to the circumstances and
Chi, IL 60637      +  the time in which it is used."  --  Holmes
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17222 alt.individualism:2315
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Tuesday, 7 Apr 1992 18:45:10 EDT
From: Nicholas C. Hester <IA80024@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Libertarians, slaves and company towns
 <121899@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <46160@dime.cs.umass.edu>
 <DRG.92Apr7131711@bubba.ma30.bull.com>

In article <DRG.92Apr7131711@bubba.ma30.bull.com>, drg@bubba.ma30.bull.com
(Daniel R Guilderson) says:
>
>In article <46160@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor
>yodaiken) writes:
>
>   "Too many cases of brie, obviously you weren't under duress, into the
>   libertopian, well we can't call it a "jail" 'cause only states have jails,
>   so we'll call it a "penal enterprise".
>
>This is a perfect example of why the Libertarian Party should consider
>changing its name to something else.  While libertarians might espouse
>ideas like the above,  Libertarians have explicitly stated that
>government would exist to take care of just these types of problems.
>
>Too many idiots are confusing Libertarians with libertarians.

I know that there are many libertarian Republicans, but is the
name Libertarian Republicans taken?  If the Party decided to change
this might make a better choice of names.
   ________________________________________________________________
 /                                                                  \
| "The hottest places in hell are      |    Nicholas C. Hester       |
|  reserved for those who, in times    +   ia80024@Maine.Bitnet      |
|  of great crisis, maintain their     |   ia80024@Maine.maine.edu   |
|  neutrality"  -Dante                 |                             |
 \ ________________________________________________________________ /
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,soc.women,soc.college
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: "Politically Correct" -- A Quote
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 16:59:02 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.202344.19413@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> trd54583@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (green spleen...) writes:
)bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
)>)Most of the complaints seem to come from people who feel free to use
)  ^^^^                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
)>)racist, sexist, or whatever language and then object to being publicly
)>)identified as ones who stoop to that level.
)
)>This looks like another good example of PC labelling all oponenets as
)>'racist/sexist' to me.                               ^^^^
)
)And you, sir, seem to be labelling somebody as PC for making a simple
)observation that he felt was true.

)Anyway, may I point out that the original poster used the word "most of the
)complaints...". You, sir, state that he is labelling ALL. 
)JUST WHEN DID "MOST" COME TO MEAN THE SAME THING AS "ALL"?    *AIIIGGHH!*GROWL*

Well, *EXCUUUUUUUUUSE ME*!

However, I still find many/most PC people do tend to label opponents as
racist/sexist, and I think the above post was a good example of a specific
instance of this sort of labelling.  And it was a comment on this issue
that started this whole discussion!

It went sort of like this

Non-PC: "You know, I notice that a lot of PC people tend to label their
opponents as sexist/racist"

PC:  "Most of the complaints about PC seem to come from racists and sexists"

Non-PC:  "See what I mean?"

)>)But if government steps in it is a different manner.  I support 100
)>)students coming to a professor to demand that he keep his sexist views
)>)out of a poly sci class, but would object to the state ruling that any
)>)professor who used certain language would be dismissed.
)
)>This may be a bit radical, but what if we let blacks complain when people
)>called them 'niggers' or bashed blacks, let women complain when people
)>bashed women, and let men complain when people bashed men.  In short,
)>let the direct victim do most of the protesting - and allow the direct
)>victim to protest, regardless of his race or gender, if he or she feels
)>that they are being wronged.
)
)Yeah, that's quite radical there, considering the original poster said much
)of the same. You just expounded on it.

No, another part of the PC'ness that I percive is the tendency for the PC
to fight for somebody else's rights, not their own.  This is where the part
about letting the direct victim do most of the protesting, rather than
having the PC person do most of the protesting 'on behalf of the victim'
in a rather paternalistic (IMO) way.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: quoctp@cs.toronto.edu (Quoc Tuan Pham)
Subject: single-shot pistol
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 11 Apr 92 05:11:51 GMT

I've read somewhere that single-shot pistol is not restricted in France.
Could someone confirm this?

Since it's fashionable nowadays for the antigun people to call for
the banning of certain types of guns I thought that we could fight
fire with fire by calling for less restriction on single-shot pistols
(e.g. Olympic free pistols with very light trigger) or rapid-fire
pistols which uses .22 short ammos (a "low power" gun). These are
custom fit (it could be tricky to hold one if you don't know how to
insert your hand into the grip) and it could be demonstrated they have 
never been used in any crime.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:16935 alt.society.civil-liberty:3244 talk.politics.drugs:2704 misc.legal:8865 alt.drugs:7197
From: doctor1@cbnewse.cb.att.com (patrick.b.hailey)
Subject: Re: What keeps me from being Lib. (was Re: FW: news release: abolish IRS)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 07:18:12 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.201827.3723@cs.ucla.edu> frazier@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Frazier) writes:
>Get off your high horse.
Sorry.

I wrote:
>>What is wrong with working from a set of principles?  The Libertarian
>>literature is full of phrases like "no one knows how far we can go towards
>>this ideal, but it is a goal worth striving for".  You have a problem with
>>*that*?
>Yes, I do.  The path to hell is paved with good intentions - I'm much more
>interested in pragmatism.  Yes, there are pragmatic reasons to be interested
>in libertarianism and the Libertarian Party, and that is why I'm listening.
Ignoring the Bill of Rights to fight the War on Drugs is pretty pragmatic.
Suspending civil rights and closing off "bad" neighborhoods, searching
from house to house for guns, drugs, and fugitives (and, with the "civil "
seizure "laws" what they are, looking for good stuff to steal) is a pretty
pragmatic idea, and one a lot of Americans would approve of, apparently.
Allowing illegally-obtained evidence, so long as "we know the suspect is
guilty", theirby telling the officials that violating civil rights is ok, is
pretty pragmatic.  Trying to get rid of poverty by giving people money sure
*seemed* pragmatic.

Taking central control of the banking system, the money supply, and creating
income taxes is certainly pragmatic thinking.  To many people, the idea of
a centrally-administered economy sure makes sense.  So much easier to
control, and if you have it run by "experts", it's gotta be good, right?

A small example of this "pragmatic" thinking is the farm economy.  $20
billion is spent annually on farm programs, centrally administered by
"experts", whose purpose is to cost Americans $10 billion more for food than
it's worth.  Predictably, "protecting" the farmer from market forces has
attracted a lot of people into the farming business.  The average full-time
farmer makes $168,000 a year, and the number of farmers is growing.  We pay
them to idle 60 million acres of good farm land.  But the *idea* sure
*sounded* good.

A big example of such pragmatic thinking is, oh, Eastern Germany or the
Soviet Union.

Purposely creating a central government with very limited powers is probably
not the most pragmatic sounding idea.  The Netherland's drug policies do NOT
sound pragmatic - to the average citizen, they sound suicidal.

We have *too much* pragmatism (is that a word?).  We are simply fighting
fires, apllying quick-fixes that sound good, and that leave everyone worse
off than before government got involved.  

It's time for analysis, direction, and goal setting.  From where I stand, the 
phrase "the path to hell is paved with good intentions" supports *my* view.
In my humble opionion, of course.

   From high atop my horse ;-)
      Thanks awfully,
                 Patrick
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Union Dues or Taxes -- King George is Exactly Right!
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:25:36 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <01GIT211QGWG00023N@utarlg.uta.edu>, B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (Stephen Tice) writes:
> Amazing. Chairman Bush is moving to enforce the restriction that
> union dues not be used to support political action against an 
> individual worker's wishes. (This is an '88 supreme court ruling.)
> 
> Doesn't this set a precedent that an individual's *taxes* should not be
> used for political actions against an individual citizen's wishes??
> 
> Correct me if I'm mistaken -- perhaps this only very specifically applies
> to campaign money. Which of course means Bush's move is nothing more than 
> dirty politics (no matter how principled the issue is).
> 
> No mistake, the principle is more important -- equality of representation. 
> On this, I agree 100% ... "Atta boy, George." ;^)
> 

	You left out the fact that it was *non* union members forced to pay
dues to unions who can now prevent the unions from using that money for
political purposes.

	Changes the scenery a bit, eh?

Brett
===============================================================================
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                            CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc