HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: TEXAS TRUCKERS CRITICIZE NAFTA
Summary: who cares about prices, we're talking VOTES
Date: 22 Aug 92 08:53:03 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <9208212344.AA16164@poly.math.cornell.edu>, harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator) writes:
> 
>     "Rogers said U.S. trucking companies are at a disadvantage  
>     because Mexican carriers do not have to pay worker's nefits, nor
>     compensation and unemployment bemust they meet
>     the same safety requirements

	There are those pesky lower prices again!

> The Texas trucking industry has joined the growing list of  
> industry, environment, labor and health groups expressing  
> concern about the North American Free Trade Agreement.  "We,  
> like most Texans, were cautiously optimistic that the free trade  
> agreement was going to be a good deal," said Hampton Rogers,  
> Vice President of Government Relations for the Texas Motor  
> Transportation Association.  "However, it appears that trucking  
> issues haven't been addressed to the benefit of the American  
> and Texas trucking industry." 

	Once again, the crux of the matter: H*r*l doesn't care if prices are
going up or down, but whether the unions are hurt.
	So much for third-world empowerment.

	(He should have told you he meant as long as it didn't interfere with
their power base here in the USA.)

> Rogers said U.S. trucking companies are at a disadvantage  
> because Mexican carriers do not have to pay worker's  
> compensation and unemployment benefits, nor must they meet  
> the same safety requirements.  A recent Teamsters' study found  
> that U.S. truck drivers earn an average $140 a day in total  
> compensation, compared to $7 a day for their Mexican  
> counterparts. 

	Maybe that will help balance out the "MAYBE HIGHER FOOD PRICES".

> According to Houston transportation consultant Paul L.  
> Broussard, Mexican trucking companies will be able to operate  
> in Texas and other border states three years after NAFTA's  
> ratification. 

	But wait, that's it!  We can use lower priced trucking to cart higher
priced food!

:)

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: Ban Guns Now - Make life easier for us
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:12:34 GMT
 <6703@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk> <1992Aug14.205649.23773@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: rivero

In article <1992Aug14.205649.23773@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>, bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
> In article <6703@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk> martin@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk (Martin Gorman) writes:
>>rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>>>If guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have them.
>>>The regular citizens will be defenseless. That's an open invitation to
>>>military coup and the subordination of the democratic process to fascism.
>>>That's been the pattern, without exception, in all modern nations that
>>>had a standing army and an unarmed civil population.
>>>
>>Guess I must have been asleep when it happened here in the UK.
> 
> IS this guy (the >>) guy for real???? the vast majority of democratic countries
> have a standing army and an unarmed poulace. And if you think you and your
> neighbors can thwart a military coup with your handguns:
> 
> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA AH AH HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ALEX
> .
-- 

  Ever here of the Warsau ghetto uprising? The Jews held off Hitler's
death squads for quite some time with only 9 handguns. You see, there is
a difference in the fighting quality of some cloen in a uniform who gets paid,
versus a man who fights for the lives of his family and will do so to
his own death.

  And if it's such a farfetched idea, explain why the original United
States Constitution forbade the Federal government from keeping a standing army
while protecting the rights of free citizens to keep weapons? The
Founding Fathers didn't do these things just for laughs, you know.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|  "The first thing you have to do is disarm the people. A disarmed      |
|   public can't fight back" -Adolf Hitler                               |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Xref: sparky alt.activism:14872 talk.politics.misc:39978
From: ss9o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Stephen Sorensen)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,misc.headlines,sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Derailing the Reagan Revolution, part 2: Seven more years?
Date: 22 Aug 92 00:51:29 GMT
Organization: Masters student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.sci.econ: 20-Aug-92 Re: Derailing the Reagan Re..
by Gary Strand@colossus.cgd 
>   Nope. Since a tax cut results in more income being retained by the
>taxpayer,
>  
>   and since this additional wealth can still be taxed, it's entirely
>possible
>   (and has happened) that a tax cut can result in increased revenue, due to
>   increased economic activity. The Laffer curve is really just plain common
>   sense, and that's exactly what we're talking about.

I'm sorry but I missed a step somewhere: lower taxes but tax the wealth that
is retained. And what is the bridge between lower taxes and increased
economic activity that leads to increased tax revenues. I don't mean to
be
flippant, but is it that people buy more joghurt or something ? 

Also, isn't it true that the US experienced its greatest economic growth
when the highest marginal tax rates were up around 70% ? 

     
<><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
       Stephen Sorensen                    
  Heinz School of Public Policy  
   Carnegie-Mellon University                                           
             Pittsburgh, PA 
    Internet: ss9o@andrew.cmu.edu            

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: reagan
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:11:45 GMT
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Originator: glp@merlin


|> In article <1992Aug18.220719.8243@anomaly.sbs.risc.net>, kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan (KD1HZ)) writes:
|> |> cass8806@elan.glassboro.edu (KYLE CASSIDY) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> 
|> |> >pat buchannan, what a man -- i couldn't have said 
|> |> >anything any more damming about the republican party than what came out of 
|> |> >that mans mouth. whose side is he on anyway? i loved the homophobia bit, the 
|> |> >anti-feminisim bit, the anti black bit.
|> |> 
|> |> Hmmm... I guess you were watching a different convention. Why don't you
|> |> quote the relevent parts of Buchanan's speech which were "homophobic",
|> |> "anti-feminist", or "anti-black".

"....and we stand with him against the amoral idea that
gay and lesbian couples should have the same standing in
law as married men and women."

-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc
From: rogerl@Ingres.COM (Roger Leuthner)
Subject: Re: RESOURCE: voting records
Followup-To: rogerl@ingres.com
Keywords: Center for National Independence in Politics [?]
Reply-To: rogerl@Ingres.COM (Roger Leuthner)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Distribution: usa
Date: 12 Aug 92 16:50:31 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.113949.4649@clpd.kodak.com> fischer@li.serum.kodak.com (Chris Fischer (x39613)) writes:
>
>Check this out, a real activist resource in alt.activism.
>This is from the Christian Science Monitor 8/3/92.
>
>"Project Vote Smart run by the recently formed Center for National
>Independence in Politics whose aim is to give voters as much 
>FACTUAL information as possible about every candidate running
>
>The toll-free number gives:

I'm interested in who exactly is funding this.  'Factual' information
may be misleading due to editorial privledge.

Somebody is paying the phone bills, collecting information, etc.
What is the agenda of the people who are funding this?  Does it impact
the content of the information provided to users of the service?

>Editorial Note: Seems like a great idea.

I question the motive of anyone who volunteers to do work for me while
expecting nothing in return.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.discrimination,talk.abortion
From: dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: FOCA: And I quote.....
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 21:36:04 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.203431.19143@watson.ibm.com> 
margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:

>dsh@zeus.csc.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

>>>john@anasazi.com writes:

>>>> Hmmm... that's odd. I heard a PRO-CHOICE advocate state that 1% of
>>>> abortions in the US are in the 3rd trimester. These must be very
>>>> busy and rich doctors.

>>> That's *less* than 1%.

>> The annual number of abortions performed at 21 weeks and after tends
>> to number in the thousands.

> What does "21 weeks" have to do with "third trimester"?

Premature infants that have been born between 21 and 24 weeks have
been known to survive.  The reported "third trimester" figures that 
you cite do not represent all post-viability abortions, but only those 
performed after 24 weeks. 

>> And it's not clear what Ms. Garvin defines as "third trimester". The
>> definition of third trimester varies; some put it at 28 weeks, others
>> at 24 weeks.

> As has been posted previously in talk.abortion:
>    Statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute:

The Alan Guttmacher Institute is the research arm of Planned Parenthood,
which is one of the largest abortion providers in the United States.

>   LESS THEN 100 ABORTIONS ARE PERFORMED EVERY YEAR AFTER THE 24TH WEEK OF
>   PREGNANCY.

Thousands of abortions are performed every year past the 21st week of
pregnancy.  
 
>Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)


Doug Holtsinger

Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
From: maxwell@fnalb.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: Never again. How soon we forget.
Organization: What does *this* button do!?
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 19:40:09 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalb.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Aug14.144432.19429@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>, kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) writes:

> There is an alarming trend here to evaluate the horror and misery on some
> sort of Richter-like Scale of Universal Worth - it's not that you don't care
> about the folks being killed, you just don't think Americans should put
> themselves at risk for them, right?   That's clear enough, and cuts right to
> the core of western corruption.

Of COURSE we evaluate horror and misery on a scale.  Of course, the
Powers-that-be fold more than horror and misery into their calculations.

I don't think Americans should die for stupid reasons. Or Canadians either, for
that matter. 

Why is it corrupt to voice skepticism of a leadership that has has a
demonstrated track record of lying to it's people? 

I assert that blind obedience to a known liar is immeasurably more corrupt than 
an honest attempt to discern the truth.

regards.max

Xref: sparky alt.activism:14856 alt.politics.elections:10630
From: cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: THE OCTOBER SURPRISE -- "The Verdict is Treason (part 2)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.elections
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 15 Aug 92 16:02:39 GMT

misc.activism.progressive Auto-Poster writes
> Another defense witness, Israeli Col. William Northrup, testified
> that American-made weapons were shipped to Iran via Israel "within
> a fortnight" of the Paris meetings, implying that they were part
> of the deal not to release the hostages

Unless this is YAOST (yet another october surprise theory), this statement  
clearly demonstrates the confused state of mind of the Auto-Poster (at least  
H*r*l B*rz*l** has choosen an apropriate synonym for himself here). Those Paris  
meetings are alleged to have taken place months before the inauguration (after  
all, if they happend after the election the whole theory would break down once  
again). So if arms shipments started two weeks after that meeting, then  
_obviously_ it wasn't Regean or Bush or Casey or North or any republican who  
initiated them, but rather Jimmy Carter. Does the phrase 'shooting yourself in  
the foot' ring any bells ?

> As for Bush and Casey, prosecutor O'Rourke failed to demonstrate
> that they could NOT have been in Paris on the relevant days. 

So much for the standards of justice of the hard left. Unless you can prove  
that you could not _possibly_ have commited the crime, you are automatically  
assumed to be guilty. I like that. 

"Mr Barzilai, can you _prove_ that you were not the mastermind behind the  
labour union firebombings against the New York Post news stands ? The labour  
union shootings of Greyhound busses ? The labour union hand grenade attacks  
against the homes of drywallers ?"

"... No, you can't ? Well, in that case the

                   V E R D I C T   I S   M U R D E R

Lets go and execute you.".

	Carl Edman
Newsgroups: alt.activism,soc.culture.latin-america
From: Dorothy Morse <dmorse@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Date: 20 Aug 92 06:07 PDT
Subject: Re: SOMALIA:US delays aid again!
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1296500296:cdp:1296500298:000:1231
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmorse    Aug 20 06:07:00 1992


From: Dorothy Morse <dmorse>
Subject: SOMALIA:US delays aid again!

/* Written  5:40 am  Aug 20, 1992 by dmorse in cdp:soc.cult.afric */
/* ---------- "SOMALIA:US delays aid again!" ---------- */
There was no mention on the radio of whether the French relief flight
scheduled for yesterday had been delayed because of looting.

Let me again call attention to the fact that 500 airlifts a week are
going into Yugoslavia, that 11 UN peacekeeping personnel have been *killed*
in Yugoslavia, stepping on mines, etc., and that trucks carrying food aid
go over mined roads in Yugoslavia.  The news stories about this concentrate
on the "hungry faces streaming with tears of gratitude."  I don't
begrudge the hungry Yugoslavians a single bite.

What we need is an equal resolve to get food to Somalians.

I'm going to be calling all the media possible today, local and national.

I believe communication with Boutros-Ghali is in order too.  It may
be necessary just to completely forget the US and hope other countries
will solve this problem.

But Clinton should be called, and we should urge him to denounce this
foreign policy disaster carried on by the Bush administration.

that number again for the Clinton Campaign 1-800-995-2388.

Xref: sparky alt.activism:14996 misc.headlines:5693 alt.desert-storm:1711 talk.politics.misc:40348
From: JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism,misc.headlines,alt.desert-storm,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: U.S. "TO PROVOKE IRAQ" on MONDAY
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:35:33 GMT
Followup-To: alt.activism
Organization: GM Research Labs

In article <9208170423.AA00702@poly.math.cornell.edu>
harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (Harel Barzilai) writes:
>The plan could lead to renewed bombing in Baghdad in coming days and
>the evacuation of U.N. personnel in Iraq.  Some U.S. government
>officials said that the timing appeared calculated to give President
>Bush a boost during the Republican National Convention, which begins

Boy, how inaccurate can you get.  These unnamed source stories belong
in the National Enquirer or the Baghdad Times right next to "Elvis
Shaped Boil Lanced Off Saddam's Ass".  People who post on something
called Peacenet certainly have an agenda and I wouldn't say it is
to locate the TRUTH.
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: THE OCTOBER SURPRISE: "Where Was George?" (part 1)
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 22:48:43 GMT
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac, Vancouver Island, CANADA

In article <1992Aug17.133956.3530@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>	Not in Paris, like you said he was.
>
>	But H*r*l, where were you on that weekend?

He was probably in New York, dreaming up that bullshit story about the
"August Surprise" since he knew damned well his "October" flavour wouldn't
hold up to the clear light of legal examination.... you have to hand it to
those wacky, wishy-washy wierdos from the left, eh? (Have you heard the one
about Bush being too ill to run for office? I think the LaWooshies dreamed
that one up, but poor old George just refuses to fall over and play sick for
them...)

Sorry your war didn't happen today, Harel - better luck next time...
-- 
   ----------The Old Frog's Almanac, Vancouver Island, Canada---------
An anonymous Canadian official was asked, in early 1945, how many Jews
would be allowed into Canada after the war. "None," he said, "is too many."
(From the preface of NONE IS TOO MANY, Toronto, 1982. ISBN 0-919630-31-6)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.news-media
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican Convention
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:15:56 GMT

dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska) writes:

>In article <2A93CC3D.4681@orion.oac.uci.edu> cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:
>>
>>The point is to make people aware of the fact that if they open one of the  
>>better mainstream newspapers like the LA Times or the NY Times or the  
>>Washington Post or turn on PBS or CBS and read the 'factual' reports they are  
>>very likely reading someone whose allegiance is to the left and who is not  
>>afraid to let this influence his reporting and that hence all this information   
>>is to be taken cum grano salis.
>>
>>	Carl Edman

>I think this is true of all news.  Whether someone is to the left, right
>or similar in political views, I look for a bias.  The biggest warning
>flag goes up for _anyone_ who claims to be unbiased for reporting on
>any political or otherwise complex subjects.  I would imagine that the
>only unbiased reporting is for numerical things like sports scores or
>stock quotes, IMHO.  Those who state their bias up-front may be the
>most reliable sources available, since its easier to separate the fact
>from the opinion.
>-- 

Very true.  Reader beware.  If reporters can't separate facts from 
opinion, it's our job to do it for them.  

By the way, bias shows up in sports reporting too.  In much the same way
it shows up in other news, actually.  You very rarely hear anything
about Seattle teams for instance.  Sometimes they just leave out the
scores entirely!  Here in Dayton, the whole west coast is not important
enough to wait for any night scores.  My point being, it isn't
necessarily *how* the news is reported that constitutes bias, it's also
*what* is reported on in the first place.


Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Available: Software Engineer or MIS. MSCE, 1 year C++, Unix Experience
	   Highly motivated, keeps political opinions at home!
	             Seattle area, only.  513-233-4502
From: ddc1@jaguar.uofs.edu
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: bush and the republican convention
Date: 23 Aug 92 09:44:48 GMT
Organization: University of Scranton

> In article <1992Aug16.073535.6994@ac.dal.ca> ckna@ac.dal.ca writes:
>>News reports indicate US President George Bush intends to drop a bombshell
>>that will send the US economy back up. Granted. Did he have to wait for so
>>long to do the right thing? Now that NAFTA is meandering through the approval
>>processes what else can Bush/Quyale offer US voters?

	I don't know what info you were gettin gin the Great White North...but
down here they were still arguing over what to put in the speech *THAT*
morning...they even brought in Ed(?) Price to write it, he wrote the 1968 Nixon
Convention speech....

	Best line in the convention......*drum roll*


	"Our air is cleaner than it was 20 years ago!"

				-Ronald Reagan 8/17/92


	That Ronster!!!! What a card, I'm glad to see that retirement hasn't
taken the edge off his incredible mental powers...8-}


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave D. Cawley		   |	Where a social revolution is pending and,
University Of Scranton	   |	for whatever reason, is not accomplished,
ddc1@jaguar.uofs.edu	   |	reaction is the alternative.
ddc1@SCRANTON		   |				-Daniel De Leon
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
From: drm@esl.com (Don McGregor)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: RESOURCE: voting records
Date: 13 Aug 92 22:53:52 GMT
Reply-To: drm@esl.com
Organization: ESL, a TRW Subsidiary

In article 14747@pony.Ingres.COM, rogerl@Ingres.COM (Roger Leuthner) writes:
 >>
>>"Project Vote Smart run by the recently formed Center for National
>>Independence in Politics whose aim is to give voters as much 
>>FACTUAL information as possible about every candidate running
>>
>>The toll-free number gives:
>
>I'm interested in who exactly is funding this.  'Factual' information
>may be misleading due to editorial privledge.
>
No, they're actually on the up-and-up.  (They have their HQ in
Corvallis, where I lived for a time, and I've heard their head
guy speak a couple times.  He was a Democratic senate
candidate in AZ a few years back.)  It's relentlessly bipartisian; the 
basic rule is that if you join, you have to bring in someone you disagree
with violently.  It's been endorsed by both Ford and Carter, and
they get their funding from various foundations.  The combine
all sorts of information for congressional candidates and presidential
candidates.  For example, they were planning on reporting how
50 or so organizations from all over the political spectrum "rated" 
candidates over the last few years.

I'm not sure how they handle third-party candidates.  They'd
probably include the info if the candidates would give it to them.

They were recruiting students to answer phones and whatnot,
mostly for a few pennies and some course credit thorugh the
poly sci department.  I forget the foundations that were giving
them funding.  I think the Ford Foundation and a couple others.

I was trying to get them to put their stuff up for FTP for a while,
but they're a little behind the times technologically.   

----
Don McGregor | Life is like high school, only with money and guns. 
drm@esl.com  | 
Xref: sparky alt.activism:14898 talk.politics.drugs:5823 alt.society.civil-liberty:5556 seattle.general:2588