HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.somalia,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.british,alt.president.clinton
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 14 Dec 92 13:47:26 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1g5lm4INN5h@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:

> Onno.Meyer@arbi.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de (Onno Meyer) writes:

>> Well, first they called for our troops (Iraq), then they thougth 
>> we'd all turn nazi, and now they do _both_.

> Well, don't worry: they do it to the UK as well.   While
> the Gulf war was on, the British were allies and heroes,
> and the week after it was finished my local SF paper published
> one of their periodic "Kick Britain out of Ireland" pieces.

Jon, since you maintain such a keen interest in the goings-on back in
merry olde England, you are hereby invited to return there.
-- 
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
From: aewright@unix.amherst.edu (Anthony E. Wright)
Subject: Request: Jerry Brown Position Paper
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 20:13:55 GMT

I remember seeing on the Net during the primaries a series of Jerry Brown
position papers, including a fairly well-reasoned one on Space Policy. If
anybody out there still has a copy of it, I would apprecaite it if you could
E-Mail it to me. Thanks.

One sentence request: Jerry Brown Position Paper on Space Policy

					Peace,
					Anthony

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Bush WANTED to Lose
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:48:08 GMT

nbh@netcom.com (N.B. Hedd) writes:
>
>Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that Bush was, in fact, the
>moderate Republican his longtime friends all claimed.  Suppose that
>this moderate Republican, out of blind ambition, made a Faustian
>bargain with Reagan and the neo-fascist far-right loon wing of the
>Republican party in order to become Vice President and then President.

Since George Bush was from the Gerry Ford wing of practical politics
all his life and fought Reagan tooth and nail until given the Veep
spot on the ticket, that wasn't hard to see.  The time lapse between
his last utterance of the term "voodoo economics" and his acceptance
of the ticket was roughly overnight ...

>Suppose, having made this deal with the devil, Bush suddenly woke up
>sometime in the middle of this year's Republican Convention to find
>that a large group of small-minded compassionless bigoted fascists
>were throwing a Nuremburg rally in his honor--EXCEPT HE WASN'T, IN 
>THE END, WILLING TO PLAY FUEHRER? What could he do to save himself 
>and the country?
>
>Lose the election.

This was the George Bush whose personal beliefs on abortion (along
with those of his Veep, Dan Quayle) ran counter to those of the GOP
1996 party platform.  Whose mother was a founder of New England's
Planned Parenthood.

>Did you notice how, in his acceptance speech, Bush actually seemed
>RELIEVED?

Actually, I've noticed that Bush has not seemed happier since the old
news clips of his declaration of candidacy in late 1978.  Right now,
it's showtime with Somalia and Yugoslavia and he's having a whale of
a month.  It's a damn shame, 'cos it's showing what an excellent Prez
George Herbert Walker Bush could have been as his own man ...

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Support NAFTA
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			 Eat Mexican  (El Teddy's ad)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:20:13 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.172417.9705@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
}In article <1992Dec18.162102.4872@linus.mitre.org> m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
}>In article <1992Dec17.161645.3316@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
}>}The reference was to the Somalis who got killed or wounded at the
}>}weapon-confiscation checkpoint. Their truck (or bus) failed to stop
}>}and the French soldiers fired on them. The original story (disinformation)
}>}was that there was a weapon mounted on the truck. Later it was admitted
}>}that their was no mounted gun, but the men were armed and were trying
}>}to run the roadblock to keep their weapons. Finally, the disinformation
}>}gave way to truth: the passengers were not armed and their junker truck 
}>}had bad brakes. Why did the truth come out? Because the press was there.
}>
}>Out of curiosity, do you think there was a gun mounted on top of the
}>bomb with wheels that took out the barracks in Beruit?
}
}Er, the thread so far seems to be one in which we're discussion
}Pentagon weaseling about the truth ("disinformation" and "later
}admitted" are clues to this), NOT whether the troops should have
}fired.

That's nice.  And?


Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:63926 soc.motss:52021 ca.politics:10293 ba.politics:7685
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: "HIV-infected molest suspect outrages town"
Date: 11 Dec 92 22:43:34 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Dec9.210000.7785@udel.edu>, carroll@oin.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes:
# For example, in your supposed proofs, you claim that anyone who ever
# has any sexual contact with a member of their own sex is homosexual.
# Then, you use this assertion to create a supposed number of homosexual
# child abusers. Then, you compare this number of a lower-bound estimate
# of the number of fully homosexual men, and come up with a very large
# percentage.
# 
# But there are two different definition of homosexuality in that "proof":
# 
#   Definition 1: A homosexual is anyone who has any sexual contact with
#      with his/her own sex. (Used to generate the supposed number of
#      homosexual molesters)
# 
#   Definition 2: A homosexual is anyone who has sexual contact 
#      *exclusively* with members of his/her own sex. (Used to generate
#      the supposed percentage of homosexual molesters.)

No, a homosexual is anyone who has sexual contact with members of
his/her own sex.  No requirement for exclusivity.

# || Mark Craig Carroll: <MC#     ||"If love remains

You obviously don't read very carefully.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Hillary picks secretary of HHS
From: ostrer@icbr.ufl.edu
Date: 12 Dec 92 16:09:58 -0500
Organization: ICBR




It comes as disapointment to many of us in the health care community that
Donna Shalala was named secretary of Health and Human Services in the
Clintons' Adminastration.  She is a member of Hillary Clinton's inner
circle of Baby Boomer activitist, known as one of the original founders
of the "POLITICAL CORCTNESS" movement.  She is a "rights" liberal who
believes in a pervasive securing OUTCOME for special interest groups.
The appointment of the assistant secretary of HHS, who oversees NIH, FDA,
and CDC, is now very precarious.

This reflect a strong role of Hillary Clinton in the White House.
Hillary appearently is also going to pick the Attorney General.

After Sen Mitchell picked Bentson, and DICK Gephart pick Penatta, we
are left wondering if Slick Willie will show any leadership.

Harry
From: pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: I WAS RIGHT!!! YOU ARE CLUELESS!!!!
Date: 16 Dec 92 06:46:19 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Dec15.214519.9900@nntpserver.chevron.com>, jviv@usmi01.midland.c
hevron.com (John Viveiros) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.094044.94512@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (P
AUL N. RITTER) writes:
>>Well people, you have all proven to me that I WAS RIGHT!!! From the last two
>>postings I've made, NONE OF YOU could come up with ANY recourse except for the
>>fact that my grammmmmmmmer isn't by best feature. If all you can do is rip me
>>for some technical misconfiguration of words, don't bother me. After all,
>>LIBERALS use this type of tactic when they are proven WRONG (as opposed to
>>admitting that you were WRONG)! THANK YOU, LEFTISTS! You prove ONCE AGAIN that
>>Rush is the current leader in the mad race of providing POLITICALLY
>>CORRECTNESS and defining people to their actions.
>>
>>He is a god.....
>>______________________________________________________________________________
>>RUSH LIMBAUGH FOR PRESIDENT '96
>>Ideas and comments expressed here are not neccessarily those of this
>>station....BUT THEY SHOULD BE!!!---R. Limbaugh
>>______________________________________________________________________________
_
>>Paul N. Ritter III
>
>What?!?  Did this get posted here by mistake instead of in talk.bizarre?
>Or maybe
>talk.I'm.so.stupid.that.I.can't.think.for.myself.and.need.Rush.to.tell.
>me.how.to.think.and.which.facts.to.conveniently.ignore
>
   No John. Rush tells it the way it is and should be. This is the perfect
   example of what idiocy runs rampant in this country. Rush EXPLAINS what the
   liberals and Demonazis want to "do for me". They want to provide me with
   health care, car insurance, health insurance, etc, etc, etc. Why can't I
   keep the plans I have now? Am I incapable of retaining my OWN plan?
   Certainly not. Are you? Well.... Makes me think that I'm icapable of it.
     What facts does he ignore? The fact that H. Ross Perot wanted to tax the
   shit out of you and me? The fact that B. Clinton is liar and cheats
   (allegedly, but NOT denied) on his wife, Hillary von Hitlerhousen? The fact
   that he has absolutely NO CLUE as to what he's doing in the terms of foreign
   affairs (except demonstrations) and the military? The fact that B.C. said
   that if he can't get the revenue for his programs, he'll either postpone
   their entry or nix them all together. If he can't do it, (and he won't),
   WHY VOTE FOR HIM???


 Viveiros     (jviv@chevron.com)
>Chevron USA        Standard disclaimer applies
>Midland TX
>
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:63903 soc.motss:51970 ca.politics:10287 ba.politics:7679
From: rhayden@oracle.com (Ronald Hayden)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: "HIV-infected molest suspect outrages town"
Date: 10 Dec 92 23:22:38 GMT
	<13561@optilink.COM> <1992Dec9.190126.5984@netcom.com>
	<rizzoe.539.723939662@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU>
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Belmont, Ca.
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <rizzoe.539.723939662@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU> rizzoe@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU (Emily Rizzo) writes:

   >In any case, I would heavily recommend that anyone with dependents
   >look into insuring their family externally. It is often cheaper
   >than what a company provides.

   I'm going to leave it to others more eloquent than I to respond to the main 
   part of your posting but I would like to point out that individual insurance 
   policies are not cheaper, at least in New York City.  A female friend who 
   lives in Greenwich Village was paying $6,000 per year for Blue Cross/Blue 
   Shield and is due for a major premium increase this year; in the same 
   geographic region, Blue Cross will not even insure a single man.  And this 
   is for minimal coverage, far less than is offered by most employer packages.

And I am currently working for domestic partners coverage because we
can no longer afford individual coverage for my partner, who is a
contractor.  They quadrupled the rates on us.
--

  - Ronald Hayden

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
   | Documentation Manager, Oracle Toolkit Group                    |
   | Co-chair of Oracle Lambda, Oracle's Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual group |
   | Writer, magician, and various other things                     |
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
From: gtao@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Greg )
Subject:  ANTI RADIATION MISSILES 
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 21:28:56 GMT

Thanks to all who answered my question.

I still think it's a goofy name, and I've always heard it referred to
as the HARM missile.


*******************************************************************************
* Gregory Tao                      | E-mail to:  gt38091@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu     * 
* Univ. of IL at Urbana-Champaign  |        OR      gtao@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu     *
* Department of Computer Science   |        OR      gtao@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu     *
* --------------------------------------------------------------------------- *
*                                                                             *
*  	``Change, suddenly, is everywhere we look, sweeping empires and       *
*    ideologies before it, shaping a new era even as we watch. Such moments   *
*    are rare. Today we stand at such a moment.''                             * 
*                                                                             *
* --------------------------------------------------------------------------- *
* DISCLAIMER:  My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of CCSO or the    *
*              University of Illinois.					      *
*******************************************************************************

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo)
Subject: Re: GE: "We bring good things to death!"
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:37:34 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <12061@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>In <1992Dec04.163844.163757@watson.ibm.com> yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo) writes:
>
>|In article <11596@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>
>|Let me say that I benefit in no financial way by publicizing this 
>|information.  (I hope you can say the same by refuting it.)
>|The only benefit that I derive is clean river water.
>
>Boy, your paranoia knows no bounds.  Do you honestly believe that anybody
>who disagrees with you does it for financial gains?
>
>-- 
>Mob rule doesn't become any prettier, just because the mob start to call itself
>a government.
>It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
>Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com

This is typical.  When you can't argue on the substance of
the debate, you change the subject.

I believe that you should view the show "Deadly Deception" and
then give your opinion.  Also, I recommend that you read 
"Who's Poisoning America".  It contains a who chapter on PCBs in
the Hudson River.

-- 
 Ralph Yozzo (yozzo@watson.ibm.com)  
 From the beautiful and historic Mid-Hudson Valley area of NY state
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:64382 bit.listserv.politics:19934 alt.politics.equality:1 alt.politics.usa.misc:653 soc.history:10168
From: dagnallr@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (robert a dagnall )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,bit.listserv.politics,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.usa.misc,soc.history
Subject: Need reference for RFK quote taken from speech
Date: 15 Dec 92 19:23:34 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson

I need the reference for the following excerpt from a 1968 speech
by Robert Kennedy:

"...there is another kind of violence in America, slower but just as deadly,
destructive as the shot or bomb in the night...this is the violence of
institutions; indifference and inaction and slow decay.  This is the 
violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men
and women because their skin is different colors.  This is slow destruction
of a child by hunger, and schools without books and homes without heat
in the winter."

Any help would be appreciated.  Please respond via email to 
"dagnallr@gas.uug.arizona.edu".

Thanks in advance,

Robert Dagnall
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: WAR IN BOSNIA!!!!
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:04:52 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <BzF3Ju.K69@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
(Lost Boy) wrote:
> 
> According to the Thursday December 17, 1992 _Chicago Tribune_, George
> Bush and company has authorized United States involvement in Bosnia.
> 
> This is probably the biggest foreign-policy mistake we could make. Bosnia
> is an extremely dangerous region and sending US troops can only result in
> a great deal of American bloodshed. 
> 
> I and others are organizing resistance to this action on George Bush's part,
> on the following grounds:
> 
> 1) The millitary has legitimate uses, such as self defense (as in WWII) and
> the protection of peaceful initiatives (such as in Somalia). To send the 
> millitary into Bosnia in order to stop two well-armed and well-entrenched
> factions from fighting each other is NOT an act of self defense or the 
> protection of peaceful initiatives.

Please explain how Germany was a threat to the United States during WWII. 
Please also explain why we alloted more resources to fighting Germany than
we did fighting the country that actually attacked us (Japan).

******************************************************************************
Rick Eames                               My Opinions Are My Own (not
Apple's)
athos@apple.com
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for Boxer.
******************************************************************************
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:64029 alt.rush-limbaugh:11509
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Boycotts, Boycotts, Boycotts....
Date: 10 Dec 92 20:43:41 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec9.010534.3600@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.113020.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>
>>4.  Boycott the opening day of Major League Baseball -  Marge Schott,
>>owner (and "designated hater") of the Cincinnati Reds, allegedly said 
>>the "N" word and the "J" word in a derogatory manner.  The Rev. Jesse 
>>Jackson, in town (Louisville) to protest at the winter baseball 
>>meetings, recommends a boycott of opening day to protest both Schott
>>and the lack of minority administrative hirings in baseball.  (The 
>>irony is that Schott recently hired Tony Perez to be the Reds manager.)
>
>	She had used words like "nigger" and "Jap" and she had spoken
>of "money-grubbing Jews".
>
>	Isn't that offensive enough?

Problem:  There is no law against racism and bigotry.

>	"Tolerance" and "diversity" are nice slogans, but what does
>one do about intolerance?

I take it that you want to be intolerant toward Marge as a result of 
her intolerance?  This is the calling card of the politically correct.  
Intolerance is an evil, wicked thing, unless it is done for acceptable 
reasons, like getting revenge on someone who has been intolerant.

>	Or gratuitous insults like these?
>
>	I wonder if Marge Schott would enjoy having the tables turned;
>would she enjoy being called a "redneck bitch"? Even her most severe
>critics don't do that.

But would you be calling for their jobs if they did?  Did you call for 
Skinhead O'Connor's job?  Somehow I doubt it.

Ted


-- 
So the Maples formed a union, and demanded equal rights, "The Oaks are just 
too greedy.  We will make them give us light!"  Now there's no more Oak 
oppression, for they passed a noble law.  And the trees are all kept equal, 
by hatchet, axe and saw.     -  Rush, The Trees
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:64470 soc.motss:52587 ca.politics:10373 ba.politics:7755
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: "HIV-infected molest suspect outrages town"
Date: 15 Dec 92 17:44:31 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Dec14.175201.21504@udel.edu>, carroll@gloin.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes:
> In article <13596@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> ]In article <1992Dec9.210000.7785@udel.edu>, carroll@oin.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes:
# ]] For example, in your supposed proofs, you claim that anyone who ever
# ]] has any sexual contact with a member of their own sex is homosexual.
# ]] Then, you use this assertion to create a supposed number of homosexual
# ]] child abusers. Then, you compare this number of a lower-bound estimate
# ]] of the number of fully homosexual men, and come up with a very large
# ]] percentage.
# ]] 
# ]] But there are two different definition of homosexuality in that "proof":
# ]] 
# ]]   Definition 1: A homosexual is anyone who has any sexual contact with
# ]]      with his/her own sex. (Used to generate the supposed number of
# ]]      homosexual molesters)
# ]] 
# ]]   Definition 2: A homosexual is anyone who has sexual contact 
# ]]      *exclusively* with members of his/her own sex. (Used to generate
# ]]      the supposed percentage of homosexual molesters.)
# ]
# ]No, a homosexual is anyone who has sexual contact with members of
# ]his/her own sex.  No requirement for exclusivity.
# ]
# 
# But - in your figure for the number of homosexuals in the general
# population, that's *not* the definition you use - you only use that
# definition when you're talking about which molesters are gay.  The
# 3-10% figure in all of the studies about the number of homosexuals is
# *exclusive* homosexuals. If you include anyone who has ever had
# homosexual contact as a homosexual, then the number is closer to 35%!
# 
# [ Mark Craig Carroll <MC# ] You say you know no tricks, have no talents -

Nope.  As the recent surveys done in France and Britain demonstate,
the percentage of males who have had ANY homosexual contacts during
a lifetime is <10%.

-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs