HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:04:00 CST
From:         TI0PSR1@NIU.BITNET
Subject:      Rush,-T, a Theory

-T (who I have learned from and usually enjoy reading) has written a
strong diatribe against Rush Limbaugh.  It is funny how Limbaugh gets
so much space on this list.  It is also funny how he brings out odd
layers of inconsistancy.

-T states Limbaugh creates "hurt and hate" by tearing down people he
personally doesn't like and then procedes to say things like :

      "he (Rush) throws racist and sexist and homophobic epithets
       like they're going out of style"

      "conservatives eschew intellectual introspection"

      "conservatives seem to be unable to pilot those complex neural
       pathways"

and infers that Rush is :

      "another money grubbing, intellectually inferior, loser tight-
    assed white bread pasty-faced self righteous demagogue ... try-
    ing to defraud and harm %fellow% human beings."

Even more notable, -T says Rush is "self-righteous" and then follows
with :

    "I (referring to himself) have friends from most every corner of
     the world ... from most every major (and some minor) religious,
     belief systems, cultures ... really ... quite a diverse group
     of people."

    "I have no need for personal rubber stamps"

    "No ideology, created and strictly guarded and maintained by
     others, blindly governs my thoughts and deeds."

    "As long as Rush, yourself, and people like you are telling me
     to lighten up, I'm doing something right."

-T, are you doing a parody of Rush when you praise yourself (at the
expense of others) like that ???

Kerry's point seems too right to fight.  Limbaugh discusses important
issues with a sense of humor.  If you disagree with his viewpoints,
his humorous presentation is certainly there to attack.  Help your-
self, but show your open minded and highly intellectual status in the
community by tolerating his personal life style and diversity of view
point.  This is, after all, what we want, isn't it ?

My theory is that there are a lot of macro liberals walking around
who are micro fascists.

Also (but certainly of less importance):

   Clinton is not widely popular on the Kerry scale because the
   country only had three major "choices."  A radio audience has
   plenty of other choices in the 3 hours Rush is on the air

Ditto Dude : Lighten Up !

And try to be alittle more kind and understanding in your presenta-
tion of what you perceive to be faults in other individuals.  After
all, the tone of your post was as dogmatic (if not more) than any
"message" I have heard from Tilton or Robertson.  You have a pretty
absolutist tone for a non-absolutist !!!


P.S.Ruckman,Jr.

     "Truth is a passionate approximation of an objective
         uncertainty"
                      - Kierkegaard
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 11:36:00 CST
From:         TI0PSR1@NIU.BITNET
Subject:      tacky message inc.

Dom,

What a great class-act message !
I knew if I waited around long enough another pro-wrestling fan would
show up.
                    so impressed,   P.S.Ruckman,Jr.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 07:49:55 CST
From:         "rufus t. firefly" <U9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: 12:01 PM
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> >    I would like to say farewell to President Bush.  He will be missed.
> > He was not perfect, but he was a good president.
>
> Very well said.
>
>
> > After twelve years of
> > Reagan and Bush it is going to take some time to get use to  President
> > Clinton.  I only hope that the nation prospers under his leadership.
>
> As NBC's John Chancellor said, "We wish him well, even if most of us
> didn't vote for him..."
>
>
> -stan

   most of us didn't vote for clinton, either . . . :)

   i think that one of these first months, the nation is gonna look at
clinton and wish that george was back in the white house. it should be
about 6 months before everybody realizes that bill is not up to the
job, and then we have another 3 1/2 years before we can put someone
competent in the white house. ethics. haitians. living with saddam.
maybe we *should* just let hillary run things . . .

   which reminds me. supposedly hillary will be "in charge of domestic
policy", or so i heard on the radio. does this refer to the servants
at the white house or something else?

empower america - kemp '96

rtf
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.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, 25 Jan 1993 17:27:43 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Business Optimism
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>Brett' wrote:
>
>>        It's too bad no one pinned Bill down to a specific unemployment
 number.
>>
>>        Let's do a list poll:  what's your prediction for unemployment at the
>>end of January, 1994?
>>
>>        I think it will be 8.3%
>
>Can I use a random number generator?  I don't know nothin' 'bout economics
>:)

        Actually that may be better than most economists :).

>Seriously -- whichever way the numbers go, what kinds of evidence can
>we legitimately use to decide who's to blame (or who's to cheer)?  Honest
>question -- I suspect Clinton didn't have a whole lot to do with Sears
>stores closing (didn't they just get hit with a price-fixing bust?).  On
>the other hand, if unemployment goes down, I wouldn't know where to begin
>to look for evidence that he was responsible for that.

        The actual number isn't as important as the trend.  If unemployment
stays in the 7% range for a year, then Bill gets some econnomic packages in
place, and the rate starts to decline, the decline is more indicative than the
actual 7.n% rate.

        So it will depend on what Bill does (or doesn't) do between now and
then.  Inaction is just as bad as actions that result in more unemployment as
far as "blame" goes.
        Mr. Bush made a science out of waiting until only one option was left.
:)

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:20:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: honest question seeks honest answer

"This...is....Jeapordy!


Now entering the studio, a student from UCLA, STAN JACOBS."

"Hi, Alex, I'll take 'Proving My Ignorance' for $ 100.00"

"And the answer is: This statement proves you know nothing about
the witch-hunt for gays and lesbians currently going on in the
military right now."

        <<BING!>>

"Um, what is:

>Not all of the gays that are in the military right now aren't being
>asked to leave.  Basically, it is those that want special
>classification as being gay that are coming under criticism.    ?"

"That's right!"

No, those who are suspected of being gay, those whom the military has
spent millions of dollars "tracking down" - the people who basically
want to serve their country and who are scared to death of revealing
their sexual orientation (not because of the ban, but because of the
incredible amount of gay bashing going on - even as far as outright
murder - in the Armed Forces) who are being _forced_, not "asked",
to leave.

BTW - heard that in the Army, the ratio of females to males being forced
out because of the ban is 4:1....and in the Corps, it's 8:1...pretty
significant, even ignoring the actual ratio of men to women in the
Armed Services.


-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:30:20 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Hillary & Health Care

Um, todddd:

I don't know what other scales "their" are to rank states,
but I bet Arkansas "fairs" real good in them.

Couldn't resist.

--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:34:28 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: fun with statistics
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> >What was Alaska prior to Hillary's appointment? They couldn't have
> >been any worse than 50th or better than 45th. That means they either
> >a)improved B)stayed the same or c)got slightly worse.

>         50th (or maybe it was 49th...)

Nope. South Dakota has the honor to be at the bottom of THAT list.
"No where to go but up?" How about new lows?

BTW, I never attended primary or secondary school in SD. Neither
has rufus, if I remember right.

> Brett'

From the Desk of Dave,
Apparatchik of Dictionaries
  (and conspiracy theorist)
(aka Larva, Trip Buster, Dave Zero, Didactic Dave)
t9aa@sdsumus.sdstate.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:24:00 EST
From:         "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.OIT.UNC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: The good old days
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM.CC.UCF.EDU>

>   if clinton wants people to do things for themselves and get involved
> in things, then he should get the government out of the way and let
> them do it. we don't need more government, we need less. free the
> american worker and the results will astound you. and then we'll hear
> the liberals bitching about the immorality of a society that makes
> people rich instead of making them poor.

The American worker doesn't need to be freed from government.  Freed
from his boss is another matter.  There's a company in California that
docks its workers if they show up with a hickey.  They claim it's
because it distracts the customers.  There's another one here that fired
someone because he wouldn't falsify interstate trucking logs.  There's
nothing wrong with American workers, all right, but American management
needs a kick in the ass.

Best,
Peter

> rtf
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.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:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:39:48 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: That hat
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>So, Brett:
>
>About this hat thing.  Are you trying to say that Hillary is no Jackie
>Kennedy?
>
>--The New, Improved, and Not at All Rehabilitated Kerry

        Damn, wish I'd thought of that :).

        My hat's off to you.
:D

Brett'
(looking for the next combination: stove-pipe and ten-gallon.)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:54:58 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Bray v. Alexandria [abortion case]

Jamie:
>I don't remember seeing that post of yours.
I haven't mastered the trick of searching through the archives :(  The
summary came from a TNR article; the only name I remember (as in name of
case) was Smith.

(stuff deleted)

>I don't know of later cases restricting the test to purpose only,
>but I'd be quite interested to hear of any.

If my teaching-impaired brain remembers correctly, it had something to do
with peyote etc.  The case that prompted the summary involved a statute
prohibiting car showrooms from being open on Sunday; some guy was letting
his showroom serve as a temporary church, and was forced to stop doing so.
I wish I remembered more :(

>Again, keep in mind that the Bray case was not a constitutional
>case at all (well, it did perhaps involve some constitutional
>questions tangentially). It was a case about an old federal statute.

I knew that . . . but thanks for reminding me :)

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:36:34 EST
From:         Daniel David Benson <bensonda@STUDENT.MSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Rush Limbaugh & Politics
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              Jan 23, 93 8:23 pm

>
>    pcs$1703@ALTAIR.SELU.EDU from Southeastern Louisiana University writes:
>
> > For a informative view on politics listen to Rush Limbaugh on the
> > AM dial.
>
>     Golly, what an informative opinion from an anonymous-chicken-shit-brain-
> dead-non-thinking-zombie-like-drooling-over-another-radio-broadcasting-droolin
g-
> slob.   Pretty typical of the audience, I believe.
>     Anything else you like to inform us of, oh, holy of holies, oh master
> of anonymousness?
>
>     Dom Maddalone, dmaddalone@uh01.colorado.edu
>

Little harsh now, don't ya think? Maybe Rush and his audience are slightly
maladjusted/brain dead  but golly Goob, let's not get carried away (you might
just be flaming a bit here.....sounds like fighting words.....the 1st won't
protect this sort speech.

-Dan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 22:46:22 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Gennifer says: [who cares]!
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> >I'll go further.  The Washington Times is owned by the Rev. Moon. It
> >is a blatantly biased paper that most people (except Brett') totally
> >disregard.  And the Post and the Times didn't run the transcripts
> >_because_ the tapes were doctored.  The doctoring was authenticated
> >by CNN's audioligist and ABC's.

>         Better hold your horses there.  I merely forwarded the article from
> Usenet.

Just thought I'd mention: Sometime in the summer, Senator Jesse Helms
dropped his offices (and if I recall, his home) subscriptions to the
Washington Times, as he found it unredeemable in its lack of news-
worthiness. If the Times violates standards *THAT* low B), I don't
know if I'd trust it.

> Brett'

From the Desk of Dave,
Apparatchik of Dictionaries
  (and conspiracy theorist)
(aka Larva, Trip Buster, Dave Zero, Didactic Dave)
t9aa@sdsumus.sdstate.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu"
X-VMS-Cc: BADERTINOVS
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:26:28 +0100
From:         BADERTINOVS@NEWS.RFERL.ORG
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

NO MAIL
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:39:18 PST
From:         Jonathan Fisher <jfisher@NETXWEST.COM>
Subject:      Re: Hillary & Health Care
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> >The "AK was 48th in education" is a useless statistic, so sticking
>
>         How so?
As was pointed out many times in the campaign, what does "48th" mean?  Where
was Arkansas when Clinton took over?  What was the real increase in
learning?
>
> >...
> >Is it possible that all the fuss over Hillary's appointment is because
> >she is <gasp> a woman?
> >    toddddddddddd
>
>         Is it possible that you're only saying that because (gasp) we're men?
> :)
It is possible that there are a lot of people who are against HC heading
a task force because she is a women.
>
> Brett'
>
Jonathan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:25:53 CST
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.SDSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Fear and loathing of the USSR
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> Um, guys?

> If you make it past the page after page after page of inauguration-
> related fluff in this week's Newsweek, you come upon an interesting
> 2-pager about biological research in the Soviet Union.

> Seems they've been working on creating a "superplague" since the
> early 80s.

(Explainatory paragraph deleted)

> Um, is it me, or is this just a bit more important than the style
> of Hillary's hat?

You are right. As ugly as Ms. Rodham's hat might have been, this
sort of genetic warfare is important.

However, it is not something only the Russians did. The mutation
of pathogens into "megaplagues" has been an R&D goal of the
Pentagon for years. Look in any decent book on contemporary
warfare and the ABC suit is standard, and the "B" means Biological.

While the standard "assumed" bug seems to be a very deadly, very
short-lived virus with little transferrence (important - malaria
is carried by mosquitos and rabies infects most animals, including
humans), there is some evidence (most of mine is anecdotal*) that
AIDS was a test-tube made virus.

* Dr. Gallo is now the lord high muck-muck of American Aids
research. He used to work as a disease designer for the Military.
Great way to keep yourself in a job, ain't it?

> Just wondering,
> --NINAR Kerry

From the Desk of Dave,
Apparatchik of Dictionaries
  (and conspiracy theorist)
(aka Larva, Trip Buster, Dave Zero, Didactic Dave)
t9aa@sdsumus.sdstate.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:07:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: smoke smoke smoke that cigarette

On Fri, 22 Jan 1993 18:44:48 -0800 Andy Freeman said:

>>The article said that the Environmental Protection Agency estimates
>>that second hand smoke kills about 3,000 non-smokers annually.
>
>So?  (Suppose that 90% choose to live with a smoker.  Does that
>matter?)
>
>-andy notes that 3,000 is still at least an order of magnitude
>      less than MD's kill through "misadventure"
>

-andy's note makes it clear that he's talking about physician
malpractice deaths...not just deaths while under the care of a
physician.

Still waiting for the numbers that prove such a ludicrous claim,
-andy....


Also waiting for the explanation as to why that is relevant to
the discussion about passive smoking (about as relevant as
Kerry's injecttion of the A_______ Debate into the same argument).


-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:02:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      RE: 12:01 PM

Bush will be missed like you miss a canker sore; you've grown used to the pain,
eyesore and annoyance - but you're damn glad it heals.

If you like the pain, the illness it represents, etc - then surely you will
miss the canker sore/Bush.

You don't want to hear the medical analogy for Reagan...


-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:50:06 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Gennifer says: [who cares]!
              28 Jan 1993 10:00:50 EST from <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>

Hi all:

KAT refers to the Clintons' 60 Minutes interview as being aired
after "a major sporting event."

THE SUPER BOWL, REMEMBER?

Didn't you figure it out then that Clinton would be the ultimate
media manipulator?

The Clintons *asked* for the interview, and they determined its
timing.  They were not "hounded"; CBS was duped.

As for Baba Wawa, yes she did interview the Clintons, and she
also interviewed Hillary separately, at some point.  But nothing
was *explicitly* admitted to--though it was more evident than
during the SuperBill interview that whatever the *something* was
that he had done, it *did* involve Gennifer (for whom they felt
very sorry) and it had something to do with infidelity (the
questions left unanswered were the specifics of how long it went
on, where, when, and so forth.)  Of course, no one watched it,
since it didn't follow the most watched event of the year for
the network.

And none of them ever bothered to ask about Charlotte Perry.

What a vicious pack of jackals the media can be; they should leave
people alone.   NOT.


--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Priority: normal
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:52:35 PDT
From:         Stan Jacobs <JACOBS@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Reagan's legacy and the politics of the SC
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>
> >The War Powers Act has been argued by every President since it was
> >written to be an unconstitutional infringement on the President's
> >authority as Commander in Chief.
>
> The President is Commander in Chief. That means he gets to
> make strategic decisions, and lots of other decisions. Of course.
> But he does NOT get to declare war! That is as explicit as
> anything in the Constitution.
> The War Powers Act is about who has the authority to decide
> with which countries the United States will be at war.

The Constitution grants specifically grants Congress the right to
declare war, and the President the right to wage war.  Unless the
Congress is willing to give some of its "war-declaring rights" to the
President, they should not assume any of his "war-making rights"...

For this reason, the WPA IS, indeed, unConstitutional.  The Congress
is specifically prohibited from assuming more rights than the
Constitution assigns to them when it infringes on the rights
specifically assigned by the Constitution to someone else!

--Stan

P.S.  I'm going to be even more argumentative after I've actually
taken a Supreme Court class or two...<smile>...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Priority: normal
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:28:50 PDT
From:         Stan Jacobs <JACOBS@125LAW1.LAW.UCLA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: where liese is; or, i once was lost, but now am found
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

>
> Actually, from what I know of Hitler (and it's a lot), he would probably
> have spent his time boring everyone to tears with his loony theories,
> if he'd had the chance to jump in on the net (after all, that's
> what he spent all night doing, much to the chagrin of those who
> were required to have dinner with him.)
>
> --NINAR Kerry

Interesting.  However, from being logged onto this forum, I've
already learned that one can learn a lot from "loony theories"...
<grin>...  Although I'm sure we would have found it boring, we might
actually have learned something from him.


Also, I was thinking more in terms of:

TO:  Adolf Eichmann <eichmann@reich.mobile.org>
FROM:  Adolf Hitler <hitler@reich.berlin.org>
SUBJ: Kill them all.

If they could have linked everyone up to e-mail systems (with
Eichmann sporting the notebook computer with wireless e-mail, of
course), who knows?  We might all be speaking German now...

Und dann wirden Sie alles viel Spass haben!
(Trans: And then you'd all be having fun.)

Mit freundlich Gruessen,
Stan Jacobs
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU