HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Reply-To: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 07:16:02 GMT

In article <lcnsptINNrcv@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
     falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes:

>In article <lefty-290992185354@lefty.apple.com>
>     lefty@apple.com (Lefty) writes:
>>In article <Bv9K8H.J03@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu
>>(Bruce Varney) wrote:

>>> Have you ever seen a film of a child being killed in his/her mother's womb?? >

>>No, and neither have you.
>>Look up the word "credulous" and see what it means.

>Try looking it up yourself; it's not *in* the dictionary.

From: The Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th Ed.,
      Copyright 1991 Oxford Univ. Press

/credulous/ <<"kredjUl@s>> adj. 
1. too ready to believe; gullible.
2. (of behaviour) showing such gullibility.

/credulity/ <<krI"dju:lItI>> n. /credulously/ adv. /credulousness/ n. 
L credulus f. credere believe

      Elf !!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.activism.d
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Choice for life (was Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: LLNL
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 08:00:32 GMT

In article <lcspklINNd18@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh) writes:
>In article <1992Oct3.031102.1065@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
@ But when I talk to a pro-choice advocate, abortion seems to be the only
@ choice they want to discuss.  Here's a good choice for couples: abstinence
@ until they are fully ready for children.  I mean, in all the arguements that
@ concept always gets lost.  And some folks think you just beamed down from a UFO
@ when you bring it up.

>I don't intend to have any children. I'm not willing to go without
>sex for my entire life.

	I agree.

	I don't think I'm willing to live like a eunuch, even like a
eunuch who has made himself a eunuch for the sake of the "Kingdom of
Heaven" (Matthew 19:12).

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: "Skull and Bones"
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 08:26:47 GMT

If it is really true that Bush was a member of Skull and Bones at Yale,
and if it is also true that S&B members are supposed to leave when S&B
is mentioned, why haven't Bush hecklers taken to shouting "Skull and
Bones" at Bush appearances?

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe)
Subject: Re: Cable Regulation [Was BUSH LOSES VETO FIGHT!!]
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 92 15:14:15 EDT
Organization: IFS Project, University of Michigan
Reply-To: jwh@citi.umich.edu

In article <MATT.92Oct6110354@physics.berkeley.edu>, matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) writes:
|> In article <70165@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt7994a@prism.gatech.EDU (ORMOND,SEAN PATRICK) writes:
|> 
|> > PROGRESSIVE RESULT?  This has got to be one of the most disgusting examples
|> > of government interference.  The way congress pandered to the public (and
|> > especially the networks), embarrassed the President, and infringed on the
|> > rights of the cable companies
|> 
|> I'm afraid the rights of the cable companies, before this bill passed,
|> included the right to be an unregulated monopoly---to set any rates
|> they wanted, and any level of service, without fear of competition.
|> 

The unregulated monopoly aspect was courtesy of the government.  If
the government would let alternative technologies enter the market, such 
as those that could be provided by the phone companies, competition
would improve.  In addition, even with monopoly power, the price
per channel of most cable systems has remained fairly constant.
Also, cable is hardly an indispensible commodity.  The monopoly
would be unable to set any rate it wanted because at some price
point people would simply revert to watching broadcast TV and
renting video tapes.  At some price level, it would be worthwhile
to simply install a satellite dish.  Remember, government may
be able to 'control' prices but they can't control quality.  They
can't require stations to carry particular channels, they can't
require that companies expand their channel capacity in order
to add new channels.  Cable needs more competition, it didn't
need this bill.


James W. Howe                  internet: jwh@citi.umich.edu
University of Michigan             uucp: uunet!mailrus!citi.umich.edu!jwh
Ann Arbor, MI   48103-4943         
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: harelb@math.cornell.edu (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator)
Subject: The Decline of America: "Strong Family Values"
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 04:00:11 GMT

The Decline of America: "Strong Family Values"

Duration of nationally provided paid maternity leave in weeks,1988:

          ======================
          COUNTRY          WEEKS  
          ======================

          United Kingdom      40  
          Finland             38  
          Denmark             28  
          France           16-28  
          Italy               22  

          Norway              20  
          Canada           17-18  
          Austria             16  
          Belgium             14
          Germany             14

          Ireland             14
          Japan               14
          Spain               14
          Netherlands         12
          Sweden              12

          Switzerland       8-12
          United States        0

Source: International Labor Organization, "Work and Family: The Child Care
Challenge," Conditions of Work Digest, vol. 7, February 1988.

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From page 11 of:


 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  
_We're Number One, Where America Stands -- and Falls -- in the New    
World Order_ by Andrew L Shapiro.   

New York, May 1992, Vintage Books, a division of Random House.   
$10 paperback. ISBN 0-679-73893-2  
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -   

    "America is becoming a land of private greed and public squalor.   
    This book is an indispensable road map through the wreckage. The   
    facts it reveals will startle you. They may depress you. But   
    ideally they'll fire you up to help rebuild this nation."   

                        -Robert B. Reich, author of The Work of Nations   



Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: VOTE GRITZ: Solutions and Hope
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:24:25 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <BERG.92Sep28130122@malice.cass.usu.edu> berg@malice.cass.usu.edu (Glenn Berg) writes:
>			  THE MANIPULATION OF AMERICA
>				       
>				  written by
>				 ANITA MORROW
>				   Candidate
>			     United States Senate
>			     Populist Party - Utah
>
>                                         America is no ordinary country.  It
>was consecrated as a land of promise to the people of the Americas, to whom God
>gave these great promises:
>
>  1.  It will be a land of liberty to its people.
>  2.  They shall never be brought down into captivity.
>  3.  And there shall be none to molest them.
>  4.  It is a land of promise.
>  5.  It shall be free from all nations under Heaven.
>  6.  There shall be no enemies come into this land.
>  7.  It shall be free from bondage.
>  8.  There shall be no kings upon this land.
>  9.  I will fortify this land against all other nations.
>  10. He that fighteth against Zion shall perish.

   
  Really?  Would Mr. Berg, or Ms. Morrow care to identify the document
  in which He made these promises?      BTW, where do you get this
  part about "Zion"?   Are you Zionists?



>                                          Is this just coincidence, or
>could it be part of the overall CAREFULLY ORCHESTRATED, PRE-PLANNED NATIONAL
>CRISIS TO INDUCE A NATIONAL STATE OF EMERGENCY!

   Wait, you forgot the UFO's, what about the UFO's?   And Elvis!


---peter





Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Subject: Re: Ah, the truth is out!  (was Re: rights and responsibilities)
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 14:34:31 GMT

i dont thing sex need a detergent. if God had wanted sex to
be clean he would have made us with brillo pads rather
than pubic hair.


Rosanne, that's  deterrent, not detergent. 

Oh, never mind.

-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
-- love that Circle K
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.activism.d
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: Re: Choice for life (was Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 20:18:06 GMT

sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) wrote (in article <1992Oct3.031102.1065@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>):
>But when I talk to a pro-choice advocate, abortion seems to be the only
>choice they want to discuss.  Here's a good choice for couples: abstinence
>until they are fully ready for children.  I mean, in all the arguements that
>concept always gets lost.  And some folks think you just beamed down from a UFO
>when you bring it up.

So, what planet did you come from?  ;)

But seriously. folks: Simon, Simon... you're even more naive about the
issues than Mr. Gorr is.  If every pro-choice advocate you've spoken
to is in _favor_ of abortion (and hence a pro-abortion advocate), then
I honestly think you haven't spoken to more than one or two pro-choicers.

So you're against abortion.  So am I, but I want it to remain an
option.  You're in favor of abstinence.  So am I -- it's the only
safe, reliable way to avoid pregnancy and STD's -- but I don't want
the government to pass a law requiring it.

You seem to have come from the same "perfect world" that Suzanne is
from, with her belief that every baby will be loved, and every mother
will realize after birth that she really did want and can handle the
baby after all, and that we should force women to have babies for
their own good.

Some reasons that abstinance isn't taken seriously as a solution to
the abortion issue are that (a) sometimes a couple is ready to have a
child, and the woman will get pregnant, then somewhere along the line
something very bad will happen to make her decide to abort; or (b)
sometimes a woman will abstain from sex, then be raped.

-- 
_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
 _/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
  _/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
                             Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
                                                                 -- Rousseau
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48263 alt.rush-limbaugh:6034 alt.politics.bush:6947 alt.politics.clinton:7526 alt.politics.elections:14457 talk.abortion:38925 alt.sex:31078
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 28 Sep 92 16:22:22 GMT
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works

varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:
> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>> varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:

>>> No - it is an irresponsible and cowardly acy. Killing a defenseless
>>> child for convenience's sake is deplorable.

>> You know, I am curious about that word 'convenience.'  Do you regard
>> pregnancy to be a mere 'inconvenience?'
         
>       To some women, pregnancy is a wonderful thing - the creation of
> life - something sacred. To others it is an inconvenience.

I can't help but remember asking you if you thought morning sickness,
gestational diabetes, etc. were merely inconvenient.  Why couldn't you
respond to those questions?

Furthermore, you still haven't given us any idea of what you consider to be
'convenience.'  

>> Seriously, I am wondering how women who have had abortions would respond
>> to your charge that they were cowardly and irresponsible.

>       Dunno - haven't gotten any yet.

Well, I'll tell you what I think of your charge: you are being extremely
judgemental and condemning about situations that you are in no position to
evaluate.  Tell you what: you get in a woman's face as she enters a clinic
that provides abortions and make that statement; we'll start a pool over
how far you'll land from the place you were standing.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
           "Remember! Arguments should be FUN!" -- Jessica McGeary
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48522 alt.activism:16902 sci.econ:7854
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,sci.econ
Subject: Re: The Decline of America: PRIORITIES: Human Greed over Human Need
Summary: The same old lies
Date: 29 Sep 92 04:19:39 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <9209271600.AA24871@tba.msi.cornell.edu>, harelb@math.cornell.edu (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator) writes:
> The Decline of America: PRIORITIES: Human Greed over Human Need
> 
>         At the large end of the scale, Bush again proposes a capital
> gains cut--a budgetary luxury that could cost up to $70 billion over
> ten years in order to give those with incomes of more than $200,000 a

	Once again we see the same lies being repeated.  Capital gains tax cuts
have resulted in *increased* revenues.  The 1986 capital gains tax *hike*
caused a drop in revenues, which have not yet recovered to 1986 levels.  So the
next time some statist tells you "all we need are a little more taxes on the
rich", tell them to get the facts.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: harry@netnews.alf.dec.com (Harry Katz)
Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
Organization: DEC - Customer Support Center, Alpharetta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:06:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.023319.2619@cs.brown.edu>,
dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

	Even if MLK *did* "sleep around", that doesn't make him a
	"bigot" and a "dirty old man" as Jack Schmidling (ARF)
	called him. 



In article <BvGDJr.6xn@ddsw1.mcs.com>,
(arf@ddsw1.mcs.com) Jack Schmidling responds:

	I am not sure why you keep avoinding the point that he
	[Dr. Martin Luther King] is supposed to be a "man of god".
	Most of the street signs with his name on it use the title
	"rev".  What do you need to see the hypocracy of saying
	the "rev"
	d
	Dr King slept around?

Nor is anyone sure why Mr. Schmidling is avoiding the point that he has
no evidence linking Dr. King to adultery and neither does the FBI.

What does Mr. Schmidling need to see that what he wrote is totally the
opposite of what he meant to say?  Let's take a second look:

	What do you need to see the hypocracy of saying the "rev"
	d
	Dr King slept around?

It sounds like Mr. Schmidling is chastising himself!  Apparently, he
cannot be bothered to read his own messages!  He has yet to correct his
mistaken usage of the word "bigot".  How can we be sure we really
understand what he is trying to say when he mangles the English
language beyond all recognition?


Mr. Keren continues:

	Hell, we have seen Arfie lead a crusade for David Duke,
	who did far worse things than "sleep around".

Mr. Schmidling responds:

	Perhaps you would like to point out the "far worse things"
	Duke has done.

How about having cosmetic facial surgery?
From: ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot to be on CNN 9/28 Larry King 9pm, live from Dallas
Date: 28 Sep 1992 13:26:11 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


   Peter, Consumer Reports *IS* owned by a Japanese company. This is a well
known fact. Ask somebody in rec.autos for the name.
-- 
George Bush? He doesn't have a clue anymore. Bill Clinton? A slick smile and
a pandering style. Neither one is being realistic about what it is going to
take. The answer..........? ROSS FOR BOSS! VOTE FOR ROSS PEROT FOR PRESIDENT!
The Cryptozoology Information Network. Want on our Email mailing list? Amiga!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Re: And Hence Abortion is NOT Murder
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 01:53:27 GMT

jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
# Needless to say, the few hundred abortions a year that would result from 
# rape or incest would be far preferable to the 1.5 million that occur as 
# a form of birth control.

Allow me to extend a great big `Watch Your Damned Newsgroups Line,
Ya Galoot' *HUG* to you along with this observation that complaining
about abortion being used for birth control is like complaining about
guns being used to impart momentum to projectiles.

What's yer point?


[Followups to the appropriate newsgroup.]

-- 
J H Woodyatt (a.k.a. Dr. Strychnine)
Space Systems/Loral

``Men who have no time to read should devote their time to reading
books of quotations.''
                                              -- Winston Churchill
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48724 alt.politics.bush:7268 alt.politics.clinton:7906
From: jdooley@maemaster.eng.uci.edu (John R. Dooley)
Subject: Re: An informed voter picks Bush
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:26:33 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.175617.3075@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.94729.24996@ms.uky.edu> fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis) writes:
>>Brad Green writes:
>
>>>Did you catch CNN today?  Seems Wall Street is finally looking at the
>>>possibility of Clinton winning, and stocks are dropping?  How can that
>>>be, if all these CEO's and Wall Street folks support him?
>
>>Stocks are dropping for technical reasons: can you say "poor P/E ratios"?
>>can you say overvalued stock price to asset ratios? can you say "low dividends"?
>>I knew that you could.
>
>In that case why is it dropping now instead of six months ago?  Maybe
>because the market is lowering the expected future value of those
>stocks becasue they anticipate Clinton screwing up the economy?
>

Actually, I thought stocks started dropping and the deutsch-mark started
falling the day after George Bush's acceptance speech.  Although not
the only reason, it seems that market analysists looked at Bush's call
for an across-the-board tax cut as exactly the wrong fix for the
economy.

(Note at the time ... polls should a surge or bounce for Bush that he
lost once the lustre of the convention dimmed from people's minds.)



John D.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Subject: Re: Term Limits are Constitutional, Study Shows
Organization: TECHNET, Singapore
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:38:29 GMT

In article <1asrkdINNh9f@agate.berkeley.edu> tyersome@toxic (Randall Tyers) writes:
>were the "Framers" really omnipotent? :)

I think you meant omnicient. The were certainly not omnipotent given the
ease with which the socialists have perverted the US Constitution but when you
consider the consequences of those perversions, it does make the founding
fathers look omnicient.

Not to mention comparisons with the calibre of politicians  we have today.
From: 76330.3412@CompuServe.COM ("John M. Sulak")
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: RE: UNSELFISH
Date: 1 Oct 92 00:50:52 GMT

An elected official who prohbits you from reading anything other than
material that the official's office approves. Is the official selfish or
unselfish?

An elected official who confiscates your heard earned money for pet
projects contracted to the official's biggest campaign donators. Is the
official selfish or unselfish?

An elected official who believes in a particular God and says that anyone
who does not should not be allowed to life in the US. Is that official
selfish or unselfish?

An elected official has problems and ultimately suffers physically from
the long term abuse of alcohol and tobacco, yet wants to jail kids who
experiment with marijuana. Is the official selfish or unselfish?

...An elected official says you have to do it the official's way or else.
Is that official selfish of unselfish?

I maintain that the oficial is selfish and acting only in the offical's
perceived best interest despite any rhetoric to the contary. In contrast,
a libertarian official will not force society to adapt to the officials
views and is hence for the good of "the people".





Distribution:
  Libernet internet:libernet@dartmouth.edu
  talk-politics-misc internet:talk-politics-misc@ucbvax.berkeley.edu

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: harry@netnews.alf.dec.com (Harry Katz)
Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
Organization: DEC - Customer Support Center, Alpharetta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:41:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.232325.22775@panther.mot.com>,
ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen) writes:

	We know you [Jack Schmidling aka ARF] think the KKK,White
	Aryans,White Supremists and Neo-nazis are really an enlighten
	bunch of guys, who are way ahead of their time.  But most of
	us find them revolting. 

In article <bdm.718010822@cs.anu.edu.au>,
Brendan McKay (bdm@cs.anu.edu.au) agrees:

	Including me.


ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen) continues:

	The activities and beliefs that they promote are either
	ILLEGAL or unconstitutional (or both).  

Brendan McKay (bdm@cs.anu.edu.au) asks:

	I wasn't aware that any beliefs are illegal or
	unconstitutional.  Am I wrong?

Perhaps Mr. Feigen is referring to the belief common among "superior"
types that they are, or ought to be, above the law and allowed to break
the law at will.  Of course, such a belief is not in itself illegal,
but any activities based on it are likely to be.


ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen) continues:

	In AZ this week a 16 year old high-school student was given
	a 5 day suspension for passing out KKK literature/membership
	cards.  The KKK asked THE ACLU!!!!! for assistance.  They felt
	the boys civil rights where violated.  Don't you love it when
	the KKK asks the ACLU to make sure they have the civil right
	to promote the denial of the civil rights of non- whites!

Brendan McKay (bdm@cs.anu.edu.au) asks:

	What law was the boy charged under? 

The boy was not arrested or charged with a crime.  The principal of a
high school has the authority to suspend students for infraction of
school rules.  The issue for the ACLU is: Are those rules reasonable or
arbitrary?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48947 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6166 alt.politics.elections:14848 talk.abortion:39799 alt.sex:31548 alt.politics.clinton:8057 alt.politics.bush:7399 soc.singles:26871 alt.politics.homosexuality:6306 talk.bizarre:32413