HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Term Limits are Constitutional, Study Shows
Date: 6 Oct 92 08:18:40 GMT
Organization: TECHNET, Singapore

>(BTW, on another posting on this thread.  The claim that 'time, place, 
>and manner' includes term limits is ridiculous.  Term limits go to
>*qualifications of the candidates*, not logistics for an election.)

Funny how opponents of term limitations like to brand the opposing position
as "rediculous" or "meritless" or "absurd" as if it were politically
incorrect to even consider support for any limitation on the greed of Congress.

In fact, all of the term limitation proposals on the ballot in the respective
states (representing some 35% of the US population) have one feature in common:
thy limit the ACCESS of a candidate whose term has expired to the ballot. If
the candidate insists on running, he can...as a write-in.

These limitations will be upheld as constitutional.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48483 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6034 alt.politics.elections:14583 talk.abortion:39228 alt.sex:31255 alt.politics.clinton:7691 alt.politics.bush:7087
From: cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:50:36 GMT
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Followup-To: misc.test
Organization: SGI TechPubs
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.26.79.24

---
Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
|She is only the victim of her own choice to irresponsibly have sex when
|she was not willing to bear the potential consequences.  

Remember, people-- if you don't WANT to take responsibility for
an orgasm, don't have sex.  Orgasms are far & away the #1 most 
likely consequence of sex-- so if you can't handle it, don't
do it!

|If she really didn't want a pregnancy, she shouldn't have risked getting it. 

If you really didn't want to get hit by that car, you shouldn't
have risked crossing the street.

---
cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com	C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"I am going tomorrow where I shall find a man who has not one agreeable
quality, who has neither manner nor sense to recommend him.  Stupid men
are the only ones worth knowing, after all."   Jane Austen
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi)
Subject: Another freshman on the net (Was:Re: New anti-abortion tactic)
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:50:07 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.223800.20932@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>In article <sykz3!b@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>>
>>Ok...who volunteers to run for federal office so we can show pictures
>>of the women who died from illegal abortion and tell their stories?
>>(Tagline: "Illegal Abortion Kills Women!"?)
>>
>Geez! Catch up.  Both kinds of abortion kill kids!
	This statement is not correct.  Try adding a biology course to your
schedule next semester.
>
>Ted
>
>
>-- 
>"Vote Democrat.  It's easier than getting a job."
"Vote Republican.  It's easier than using your brain."
Tit for tat, sonny.
>
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
Chuck
No .sig, no frills, no foolin'


--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Subject: Re: Media coverage for Marrou/Lord (call these #'s!)
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:15:22 GMT

In article <Bvn0yE.Fqz@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mrl28033@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael R Linksvayer) writes:
>From: Steve Givot <Steve.Givot@f418.n104.z1.fidonet.org>
>Date: 02 Oct 92  11:13:17
>
>To:    All Libertarians and anyone else who wants to see the media
>       cover the Marrou/Lord Campaign.
>
>Re:    What to do to make this happen
(a call to action for libertarians to hound television stations
is deleted)

Well, the newspapers, magazines, and electronic media are
(mostly) private businesses.  They exist to make money.
If their coverage of the elction is primarily geared toward
two candidates, while giving limited play to other candidates,
it might be because their customers (viewers, readers) prefer it
this way.  No doubt the managers of the media figure that
a dramatic change of election coverage to include all candidates
would alienate viewers/readers and cause a drop in ratings and
sales.

That's the way the market works (*snicker*).  If you don't
like it (*hee hee*) then you can start your own newspaper
(*yuk yuk*) or your own television network (*ho ho ho*).

BTW, the best coverage I've seen so far of the Marrou
candidacy has been on PBS, the only tv network
which receives any federal funding (BWAAHAAHAAHAA!).



-- 
| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: New anti-abortion tactic
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:11:39 GMT

I was reading McPaper (USA Today) yesterday, and I saw where this
congressional candidate somewhere in the eastern U.S. has been running
anti-abortion shock advertisements as part of his congressional
campaign.

The guy's name is Bailey (Mike Bailey if I recall correctly), and the
article said he's an advertising exec who `decided to run for congress
after learning that political ads for candidates cannot be censored
unless they contain explicit sexual or excretory imagery.'

My S.O. got all bent about the story, so I tried to reassure her that
tactics like that are very likely to backfire, and as soon as he loses
the election by a wide, wide margin, candidates will stop running
shock ads.

She responded by voicing her speculation that this Bailey guy doesn't
care whether he wins or loses -- his whole reason for running is so he
can run the ads.

Further inspection of the article revealed quotes from the candidate
and his spokesmen that imply that this is precisely the case with at
least Bailey, and the article further implies that there are 17 other
`candidates' around the country doing precisely the same thing.

Naturally, USA Today -- being a lighthouse on the rocky coastline of
American journalism -- declined to print any material derived from
interviews with anyone who might explicitly make the charge that these
people are simply anti-abortion activists exploiting a loophole in the
law to get their gory pictures on the air through subversion of the
electoral process.


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

Help keep Las Vegas clean.  Eat your kill.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton
From: amorgan@csd-d-3.Stanford.EDU (Crunchy Frog)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Originator: amorgan@csd-d-3.Stanford.EDU
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 20:07:34 GMT

In article <1992Oct4.192023.1578@newshost.unh.edu> 
  ss1@kepler.unh.edu (The Rink) writes:
>>Simple questions to shut up a right to lifer
>>
>>"How many hungry kids have you fed today?"
>>"How many homeless kids have you taken into your home?"
>
>You ask those kids if they'd rather be where they are now or dead, and guess
>what they will answer.

Can we *please* take this out of alt.sex?

(To the folks who say that getting pregnant is a possible consequence
of sex and thus this belongs here, I point out that getting married and 
buying a house is too. Nevertheless I don't advocate crossposting 
misc.forsale to this newsgroup)

C Frog

ObSex: Go fuck yourselves.
From: B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: I'm in Remote 8 -- till about 11:30, lemme know if you wanna do lunch.
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:05:00 GMT

see subj.

-- Stephen
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49065 misc.legal:17955
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Quayle and Lawyers
Date: 2 Oct 92 10:40:37 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Oct1.225433.11076@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:

> Theodore A. Kaldis:

>> Would a lawyer who is engaged in trial work ever attempt to discredit
>> testimony by questioning the integrity of the one who gave it?  Naw
>> ... wouldn't happen.  Pshaw!

>> It is not necessary to always appeal only to logic when trying to
>> convince a jury.

> It is good of you to admit to your deliberate decision to be
> illogical.

Sir, I make no such admission.  If you believe otherwise, then please
demonstrate -- with strict adherence to the rules of logic -- where I
make this admission.  (Or else, are we to conclude that even Mike
Godwin argues logically when it suits his purposes?)
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 03:12:52 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL

In article <1992Oct2.184122.27607@panther.mot.com> ronf@panther3.panther.mot.com (Ron Feigen) writes:
>In article <BvI0J1.225@ocsmd.ocs.com> spencer@ocsmd.ocs.com (Spencer Hines) writes:
>>
>Very nice post, really very nice.

Be very nice if you would learn how to edit.  One wouldn't have to wade 
throug so much stuff to get to your rubbish but I guess you are incapable
of posting anything with any information content by yourself.

>What ARF would like is the freedom for the KKK and neo-nazis to segragate, kill,
>torture, deport, ...  Blacks, Jews, and any other minority that they wish.

>I guess one mans pleasure is anothers poison.


Yes, I find killing, torturing and deporting Arabs pretty heavy poison
but that seems to be your pleasure.

js
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48521 sci.environment:11647 talk.environment:3972
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Subsidies for Roads and Cars in the USA
Summary: Strawman
Date: 29 Sep 92 04:10:59 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Sep25.200132.12018@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> 
> 	It is sometimes maintained that American's roads are
> completely supported by user fees such as fuel taxes, registration
> fees, and tolls, and not by any funds from other sources, such income,
> sales, and property taxes, bond issue proceeds, and other
> miscellaneous fees. In fact, that is demonstrably false. According to
> the Federal Highway Administration, $71.2 billion were spent on roads
> in 1989. Of this, $44.3 billion comes from the aforementioned user
> fees. The other $26.9 billion comes from the miscellaneous sources
> mentioned above, and is effectively a subsidy. Thus, America's roads
> are effectively 38% subsidized.

	Talk about setting up a strawman!  It is also sometimes said that there
is intelligent life on Mars...thus we can conclude that Mars is devoid of all 
life since that claim is false.

	The "other" sources do *not* equate to a subsidy.  How else do you
propose that a city maintain it's roads other than by a property tax mechanism? 
Set up toll booths at each driveway? :)  How should townships and
municipalities pay for roads other than through bond issues?  Attributing a
claim to the "opposition", then knocking down that claim in an effort to
support yet another method is a time honored tactic.  But it is still faulty
logic.
	A "subsidy" is not a property tax, or a bond issue, it is a direct
payment from the government that allows construction/use at a cost *below* the
real cost.  Does anyone believe that road construction is done *below* real
cost?

	Nice bit of the Noamster in that post.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48442 alt.rush-limbaugh:6125 alt.politics.bush:7071 alt.politics.clinton:7672 alt.politics.elections:14564 talk.abortion:39148 alt.sex:31239
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
Subject: Re: That Legal right over Gambit...
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:02:24 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:

>In <mlbruce.717738296@husc8> mlbruce@husc8.harvard.edu (Matthew Bruce) writes:
>
>>	Do you truly see no difference between joining a National Guard unit
>>in which positions were open (contrary to dominant-media-culture
>>misinformation, the Indiana Guard was not at 100% capacity when Quayle joined)
>>, and using obsequious letters, relatives' clout and illegal activity to avoid
>>military service entirely, EVEN THOUGH ONE ALREADY WAS TO BE SERVED A DRAFT
>>NOTICE? What Quayle did may not have been Patriotic enough for you, but what
>>Bill Clinton did was illegal and flat out WRONG. There is but one Draft Dodger
>>in this Presidential race, and who it is should be manifestly clear.
>
>It may have been "wrong" to avoid getting drafted, but it wasn't
>illegal.  The draft is unconstitutional, and thus it cannot be illegal
>to avoid it.

Case citations, please?

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot's committtee investigates volunteers
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 3 Oct 92 01:27:24 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.
Summary: Fly by night away from here...

In article <farenebt.718037663@craft.camp.clarkson.edu>, farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell ("Droopy")) writes:
> "If you choose not to decide, you have still made a choice."   --Rush Limbaugh
> 
> 	(I know it's HIM, but it's still a great quote)		

	Rush must be a Rush fan.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot treating us like idiots
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:40:45 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

David Scharfe) writes:
|> Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
|> >
|> >Nonsense.  On Larry King Live he gave out an 800 number to call if you
|> >want him to get back in the race.  When I called to express my opinion
|> >that he should _NOT_, instead of a live operator (or even a mechanized
|> >choice), all I got was a taped message saying my call had been
|> >recorded.  It looks to me like we're dealing with a stacked deck here.
|> >(And the scary part is that, presumably, this is how he had intended
|> >to run his computerized "National Town Hall".)
|> >-- 
|> 
|> Of course, Ted, the fact that the stated purpose of the line was to
|> "call if you want him back in the race" might have had something to
|> do with it.
|> 
|> I suggest that you call your local/state UWSA number and register 
|> your opinion with them.  It is my understanding that you will be 
|> received by a "live operator".
|> 
This will really give Perot useful information.  All he will find out
is how many him back in.  It is not limited to his supporters, and in
fact may be persons who feel if he gets back in it will hurt the opposition
candidate.  More likely it will include a heavy call-in from reporters
who benefit from a 3-way race.  By calling in they are "making" the news
rather than "reporting" it, but I'm a cynic.

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier)
Subject: Re: You're NO John Kennedy
Keywords: Kennedy, JFK, Lloyd Bentsen
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:32:33 GMT

In article <4136@novavax.UUCP> vaccaro@novavax.UUCP (N. Trafford Vaccaro) writes:
>Hello, everyone,
>
>
>Who said "I knew John Kennedy. You're no John Kennedy", and to
>whom was it said? Could you phrase it exactly, more or less?

It was said by Senator Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas) during a Vice-Presidential
Candidate Debate with Dan Quayle.

It went somewhat like this after J. Danforth compared himself to John Kennedy.

"I knew Jack Kennedy.  He was a friend of mine.  And Senator, you're no Jack
Kennedy."

Followed, of course, by uproarious applause.


-- 
Douglas C. Meier		|  Remember to vote this election year,       
Northwestern University, ACNS 	|  you probably won't get another one. 
I don't claim them, they don't	|  
claim me.......			|  dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:47947 alt.politics.bush:6718
From: falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Perot:  If He Runs, I Will Support Him... and hope for the best
Date: 24 Sep 92 19:57:58 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <1992Sep24.122720.2024@news.DKRZ-Hamburg.DE>, k206027@smog.DKRZ-Hamburg.DE (ce) writes:
> In article <1992Sep23.123457.1348@cnsvax.uwec.edu> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>>    First, I agree with many posters that neither Bush nor Clinton have a clue
>>on how to attack $400,000,000,000,000 (that's 400 TRILLION) of the national
>>debt.  I can't wait around another four years for this country to turn around,
>>
> Sorry, but you've got 2 extra zeroes on that figure. Should be '4' trillion.
> If it was 400 i'd be down in the cellar printin' up bills :)
> 

  Thanks.  But give the Republocrats a few more years and call me back...  :)

  The message itself still stands.

							Mike
From: B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: There is NO DEFENSE for a $1.5 Trillion Dollar Federal Budget.
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:48:00 GMT

The new fiscal year is coming this Thursday, Oct 1st.

The Democrats and the Republicans both authored it.
The Republican president will sign it into law.

The republican scam is that all that money spent for
arms in the last 12 years busted the Soviets, but now
that the Soviets are gone -- they still want our money.

The democratic scam is that all that extra money spent 
for entitlements has taken helped people, but we look 
around and find a society run ragged trying to keep up
with the bills.

Do you really believe that the political-class knows how
to spend money better than you do? How many S&L scams,
HUD scams, Defense Spending Scams, Drug Wars, Oil Wars,
and other confidence games will it take before your see
that what your getting back ain't worth it.

Putting more Pork-Party-Politicians in congress or the 
executive is just begging for more of the same.

The evidence is that $1.5 Trillion budget.
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton doesn't understand business (was: A SAD JOKE!)
Date: 30 Sep 92 00:09:12 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

In article <1992Sep29.204836.16140@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep29.115932.15876@njitgw.njit.edu> lxf8351@hertz.njit.edu (lawrence finkel cis stnt) writes:
|> >
|> >Having ran a business myself (an Air conditioning contracting firm, 
|> >for 8 years ) I know what its like to lose sleep, worrying about wether I 
|> >could get enough work to keep my employees busy and keep food on their tables. 
|> >Neither Clinton nor Gore have ever had the need to meet a payroll, pay
|> >for office space, provide workers compensation insurance, etc. I believe
|> >that, before anyone attempts to meddle with the business structure of America,
|> >they should at very least have some real world experiance.
|> 
|> 
|> Has Bush done what you've done, build a business more or less from
|> scratch?  Sure, he's dabbled in the private economy, but he was staked
|> with $300,000 from his father (around $1.5M in today's dollars).  Bush
|> has spent, oh, around 25 years in public service since then.
|> 
|> 
|> --
|> "I was trying to figure out which of my friends were hedgehogs, and which
|> were foxes...."
|> "Shakespeare wrote _King Lear_, NOT _King Leo_...."

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.politics.clinton
From: stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Organization: Network Equipment Technologies, Redwood City
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:55:19 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.133221.20020@meaddata.com> johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend) writes:
>   Democrats believe that Clinton has always been pro-choice, but
>   this is not true.

And Reps. beleive that George has always been pro-life. Can you say "He used
to have a seat on the Bd. of Directors of Planned Parenthood?" Don't forget
George's old nickname--given to him by fellow members of the Rep. party---
George "Rubbers" Bush! Let's face it boys and girls, EVERYONE involved in this 
election has changed their minds on the aboration issue. Everyone around here
already knows(or should)that. With the exception Danny boy. He wanted to but 
Marylin wouldn't let him.

Stan Knight
|Oh there was that other thing too--to change ones mind 1st you need one.|
From: gt4925b@prism.gatech.EDU (Jason Woodward)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Clinton's Socialist advisor?
Date: 6 Oct 92 13:43:02 GMT
Organization: Politically Incorrect and Proud of It

This is a quote from Derek Shearer:

  "Socialism has a bad name in America, and no amount of wishful
thinking on the part of the left is going to change that in our
lifetimes...The words Economic Democracy are an adequate and 
effective replacement." 

  I have seen this quote several places, and Shearer is always
referred to as a Clinton advisor.

I have 3 questions:

1)  Is Shearer really an advisor to Clinton?

2)  Did he really say this stuff about "Economic Democracy"?

3)  If 1 and 2 are true, when will the press ever report this?


-- 
Jason Woodward | EE Graduate Student | Georgia Tech | Go Braves!
"many signs point to the possibility that the Earth may be heading
 for another ice age", NY Times, 8-14-75; "we must prepare for the
 next ice age", Science Digest, 2-73 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc