HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 00:03:00 EDT
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject: Re: Abortion in Washington DC

In article <tfilt200731@drew.edu>, "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.BITNET> writ
   es:
>> the SC's Webster decision decreased the protection of the right of
>> abortion by saying public hospitals, even if the staff wants to, can't
>> perform abortions.  So, 79% of the area of the country doesn't have a
>> place to have an abortion.  The upcoming case of Casey (which Bush
>
> To nitpick:  I don't think they prohibited abortions in public hospitals
> but instead allowed states to do so.  I say that because there is a
> public hospital in this town that does perform abortions.

you're right, and it's a very important distinction.  It also is a
very important reducing of the right: Roe is best for the poor esp.
those in rural areas and the young.  Roe actually was all these
things: if she was rich or lived in a city that allowed abortions, she
wouldn't of had to sue for her right to choice.  The court aimed much of its
abridging of Roe to these very same groups.

           -JOE

P.S. nitpicking is one of my hobbies, so I have no problem with it,
unless the whole argument is ignored for a small error
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Tuesday, 14 Apr 1992 21:22:51 EDT
From: Nicholas C. Hester <IA80024@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: More guns 'n bull...

In article <01GIUAVYDAWG935J8P@TOE.TOWSON.EDU>, ANDREW ALLEN
<E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET> says:
>
>I just got a copy of the new "Weird Al Yankovic" CD (I work in a
>radio station among other places) and these lyrics spurted out of
>the speakers, just thought I'd share since the topic's been booted
>around again (note the sly reference to shoes) B).
>
>-other Andy

                        <lyrics deleted>

Whats it sung to?

-Nick
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 08:15:16 EDT
From:         Phillip J VanFossen <pvanfoss@MAGNUS.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Brown, Reagan, Laffer, Napkins???
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              "Robert T. Weverka" at Apr 13, 92 2:43 pm

Obviously the issue is where Tcritical lies.  As I noted, the work done here
indicates that Tc=a marginal rate of about 70%, which skews Laffer's
symmetrical rendering to the right significantly (ironic?), thus implying that
no one in the current system would have the necessary incentive to forego work
due to the demands of taxation.   Thus, revenues will continue to rise up to
Tc=70%.  Current marginal tax rates are between 15% and 34%, with those making
over $192,931 actually realizing a cut in marginal tax rate due to changes in
deductions and withholding that occurs after this income level.  Along way to
go before Mssr. Laffer's predicted decline in revenue kicks in.

PVF
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 17:48:24 EDT
From:         Angela E Taylor <EL406013@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Response on Homosexuality - LONG POST

>From:         Jay Steven Sultan <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
>
>LONG POST WARNING !!!
>
>I would like to welcome Derrick and Angela to the list.
>
>I assume that you are friends of amycat (that is the nickname
>that I know her as) who have joined the list to lend her moral support,

Thanks for the welcome, but contrary to popular opinionm "WE" don't
all know each other. I come lending no moral support just proffering
my opinion to the melee.  But perhaps there is a brotherhood of
contradictory homophobes?

--aet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 04:42:33 CDT
From:         Jay Steven Sultan <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
Subject:      Response to Homosexuality Posts

I am 400 lines into the response and it is not done.  I apologise again for
the delay and promise to make that my next post.  Thanks again for your
patience.

Jay Steven Sultan                 Internet: sult@quads.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago

"Sherman slept in this home.  Major renovation since."
    - Add about house for sale in Atlanta
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 20:42:52 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: more on that guns thing

>From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>

>I'm a computer architect.  (I'm thesis-procrastinating at this very
>moment.)  Computers manipulate electrons using circuits.

Well, yeah, but their PURPOSE is to run software. If someone
could find a better way to run software than electronic
circuits, they could build a better computer.

>Most of the deaths in WWI were due to artillery,

I think MOST of the deaths were due to disease.

Jamie
From: mad-2@kub.nl (C. Wekx)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: The perfect Solution to Congress
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:31:42 GMT
Organization: Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands

todddddddddd writes:

>>Then that person disbands and arrests the congress, citing their corruption
>>and unwillingness to implement the president's economic reform plans.
>>
>>Why does this sound like a GOOD idea?
>>
>Because it is only a partial truth.  You left out suspending the consitution
>and initiating martial law.  Military juntas are a GOOD idea?

Military juntas are a BAD idea,
BUT...

I can think of situations in which a strong leadership to implement 
the president's (or more in general: the executive power's) economic
reform plan is not only tollerable but also desired.

I don't have a problem with a strong leadership, if

a) there's still some kind of division of power (trias politica); and
b) the executive power gets only 7-10 years to reform the economy.

'Democracy' and a strong leadership are not mutually exclusive.

Constantijn

P.S. What happened in Peru is of course wrong. Nobody likes
dictators. Not even Jay... although?! ;-)

-- 
"Uta'lom az ege'sz huszadik sza'zadot" La'szlo' Lugosi/Fero' Nagy

Constantijn Wekx
email should be addressed to: mad-2@kub.nl
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 14:27:09 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Term Limits

>   I've been observing this debate and it seems to get nowhere fast, along
>  with the parallel debate on banning tv political ads.  I have an idea
>  that may be interesting to the parties of both debates -- how about
>  government financing of all campaigns?

What a novel idea!  Unfortunately, it can't help unless you also
forbid independent political speech.  (Oh, and the parties are going
to insist on getting their cut.)

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 09:42:44 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: hunting

> 1) Hunting is an excellent way to develop child/adult relationships

This seems like a good activity for Men/Boys Love Association.

Sorry, I know it was crude, but I could not resist.

--KAT :-)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 09:35:01 EST
From:         Bill Orme <ITHQ100@INDYCMS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Abortion in Washington DC
              6 Apr 1992 03:37:31 CDT from <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO .EDU>

"Welllll, there you go again!"

1.  No concern about the constitution?  Who was posting criticisms of the
    Electoral College?  Don't you have any faith in the vision of our
    Founding Fathers?

2.  Yes, the pro-life members probably DO vote AS THEY ARE TOLD!  That's one
    part of a mindset that a true `educational system' could help eradicate.
    QUESTION AUTHORITY!

3.  Do I detect just a hint of Rush Limbaugh in your posting?  C'mon man,
    think for yourself!  (At least think up your own derogatory labels!)

Bill Orme
ithq100@indycms
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Tuesday, 14 Apr 1992 18:03:56 EDT
From: Nicholas C. Hester <IA80024@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Talk about a vague amendment!!!

In article <CMM.0.90.2.703275505.sult@quads.uchicago.edu>, Jay Steven Sultan
<sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU> says:
>
>The anaology between cars and guns is bad, but...
>
>There is no "right" to own a car, even though they kill lots of people, and
>are sometimes abused by dangerous people.  Yet we still have the (regulkated)
>option to own a car.
>
>Why should guns be different?

Because you have the analogy wrong.  The government does regulate the
ownership of cars but the operation of them.  The big difference is that
ownership of firearms  is specifically mentioned in the Constitution
as a right to own and bear.

-Nicholas C. Hester

ia80024@maine              :Bitnet
ia80024@maine.maine.edu    :Internet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 01:01:42 CDT
From:         Jay Steven Sultan <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>

It would seem Mr Evans is leaving us.

I understand fully how he feels.  Fortunately, I also know that the members
of this list are firmly in the minority, without the political savy, economic
resources, or interest to run or affect policy.

Consider the 750K people who went to the abortion rally last month.  When the
general election comes around, less that that number will say that they voted
the way they did primarily because they are pro-choice.  Feminism, like most
other liberals extremes, have a loud bark but no bite at election time.

If Mr Evans is still listenbing, I hope that he remembers our duty to turn
the other cheek in the face of such people.  They have the right and
privildge to be wrong, and most of them are 1) harmless, 2) disaffected, or
3) imature, wiating to grow into republicanhood.

To the other members, I'll just pint out that this is why conservatives don't
hang around.  That, plus the time it takes to rule the world.

(as I grin thinking of 5 more years of torry rule and the precident it sets
for 4 years of bush and 8 years of kemp).

Jay Steven Sultan                 Internet: sult@quads.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago

"Entitlement does not lead to Empowerment."   Jay Steven Sultan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 21:18:00 EDT
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Talk about a vague amendment!!!

In article <tfilt200654@drew.edu>, TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET writes:
> The Second Amendment goes to show you that puncuation *IS*
> important.  Exactly what does the second amendment say, and
> what does it mean???

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed"

[suggestion: get the World Almanac, great reference source for only
6.95 and it has the constitution in it to boot]

problems: - what is a militia?
          - what about well regulated? seems to limit the militia some
          - the "being...State" phrase seems redundant, like saying
          speech is needed for an informed populance
          - how broad is "keep" and "bear", i.e. a license like a
          driving license for guns or waiting periods may arguably not effect
          this, or like in speech cases infringe it
          - how broad is "shall not be infringed" esp. with regulated
          in there
          - how outdated is this in today's society?
          - why did the court so rarely discuss this case? somewhat
          an unclear case allowed a federal law limiting the right somewhat

definitely one of our most problematic amendments.

          -JOE
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 07:24:50 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Tax Policy
              15 Apr 1992 02:34:15 CDT from <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>

From:         Jay Steven Sultan <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>

> KAT, not that you have the money to back up your boast, but what evidence do
> you need.  Want me to fax my forms to you?

This belief that I don't have the money is as well founded as
your beleif that I am a Democrat.

> AGI over some number (say $35,000 for agrument) pays 28% income tax.  Do you
> beileve this?  There is another 33% bracket I think?  Do you believe this?

This is your lucky day!  Today is April 15th and I just happen to
have my tax forms with me.  Let's see.  We start with $35,000.
Assuming that you don't have any kids, you get to deduct at least
for yourself therefore your taxable income reduces to
$35,000 - $2,150 = $32,850.  Next is the standard deduction
which is at least $2,850 (married filing separately) which
brings your taxable income down to exactly $30,000.  The tax tables
list your taxes at $6,197.  Now, the percent of your paycheck that
you pay as income tax is $6,197/$35,000=.177.  That is 17.7%.

Need I continue or are you embarrassed enough.

I put my money where my mouth is.  The least you could do
is to use your mind before you open your mouth.

> Jay Steven Sultan

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:17:41 EDT
From:         Tim Johnson <PH408014@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Jay's Taxes

As long as we are on the subject of taxes,
I decided to total up mine.  All the various
taxes - medicaid, social security, RI disability,
state and federal income tax....

It came to about 12.34 %  (Sufficient precision,
Jamie?)  That's about 4 out of 5 for you, Jay;
and about 1/8th for the rest of you.

Of course, I'm below the poverty line and my
standard deduction cut my taxable income in half,
but there ya have it.

(I'd like to say I was working for the feds until
Feb 15th, but they (or, actually, y'all) are paying
me all of it anyhow....)

To any of the federal agencies which may be monitoring
this list - notice I have no bad words to say about
the I.R.S. in this message.  Please be kind to me in
the future.

[NSA, nuclear, terrorist, Bush, Libya, stingers, CIA]

(That's just to make sure you feds noticed.)

                   -Tim"happy camper I always will be"J
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN::"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 12:30:33 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      primary elections

Mike:  Hi from up the road :)

I believe the Perot petition signers in Texas could not have voted in the
Texas primaries (the petition came after the fact), so that would be
consistent with WV.  I'd guess the rationale has to do with the role of
primaries (to select party candidates) -- signing a petition for Perot
would be analogous to voting in the republican or democratic primary.  But
I'm just guessing -- I would actually be surprised to find *any* rational
explanation for anything connected to elections these days :)

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 01:27:00 EST
From:         I am the sacrificial butter <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Tax Policy

KAT, feel free to apologise.

Since I am self employed, I pay 15.5% SE self employment tax.  This is in
addition to my regular income tax rate of 28% (which is the braket I am in
because I am sucessful, don't cheat on my taxes, and am married to a
professional).

Perhaps this little dose of reality can affect your 'tax em more' plans.

Jay Steven Sultan                 Internet: sult@quads.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago

"Entitlement does not lead to Empowerment."   Jay Steven Sultan


        its true, folks.  small businesses don't fare nearly
        as well as big corporations.  if you ever want to open
        a business in philadelphia, be prepared to pay the Philadelphia
        Wage Tax, the Philadelphia Business Privilege Tax, and
        another tax whose name currently eludes me, which will
        account for another 20-30% of your income.

        brni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.2 (R4b).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 08:20:19 EDT
From:         "John D. Hopkins" <JHOPKINS@CBACC.CBA.UGA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: silence means authority, silence means approval...
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> Subject:    silence means authority, silence means approval...

Actually, it's "Silence means security, silence means approval..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| John D. Hopkins, Operational Support    |                               |
| Terry College of Business Computer Ctr. |  jhopkins@cbacc.cba.uga.edu   |
| University of Georgia, ph.(404)542-3829 |                               |
| Athens, Georgia  30602-6270, USA        |                               |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "Con is the opposite of Pro.  That means Congress must be the opposite  |
|  of Progress."                                                          |
|                           -- Gallagher                                  |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 00:52:53 CDT
From:         Jay Steven Sultan <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
Subject:      Re: more environmental extremism

If we are sure that it is the uncapped wells causing the problem, they should
be regulated.  Wilderness or farmland, if the drilling has this effect on the
land of others, then they are responsibile.

This seems straightforward to me.

What other environment post?

Jay Steven Sultan                 Internet: sult@quads.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago

"Entitlement does not lead to Empowerment."   Jay Steven Sultan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:55:00 EST
From:         I am the sacrificial butter <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      re: Banning Political Ads

one thing that andy keeps pointing out is that there are two ways
a candidate can get her/his message out: 1) paid political ads and
2) news coverage of said candidate.

andy is concerned that if we remove the one of these forms, we would
have to rely solely on the news for our understanding of a candidates
position.  since it is obvious that we are then at the mercy of the
newscritters, (i will even extend this past the chief editor, the journalists
themselves, and the network to potentially include the companies that advertise
during this time) we will be given a skewed and less whole view of the
candidates than we would with both news coverage and paid political ads.
he is right.

(i'm really tired, so i hope i'm addressing this to the right person...)

however, andy has continually ignored the suggestions of both myself and
andrew mcrae that _equal and free_ broadcast time be given to all candidates
instead of paid ads.  this would decrease campaign expenditures and
increase the candidates ability to include substance in their debates
and speaches.

until andy addresses this aspect of the proposition, there is no point in
further debate, since he is not arguing against the position that has
been offered.

brni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 00:49:58 CDT
From:         Jay Steven Sultan <sult@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Thoughts?

I agree with Kerry about

1) the enforcement of the SC ruling keeping unions from spending the money
they
force from non-members trying to elect democrats

and

2) Incumbant presidents should be charged what the other candidate spends on
travel.  Clinton gets secret service men for free, and its costs some to ship
them around, but if Clinton spends $500,000 for air travel, then CREP should
pay the same to the treasury.  There are some costs, like the security
officer carrying the football, that simply go along with being president.

Jay Steven Sultan                 Internet: sult@quads.uchicago.edu
University of Chicago

"Entitlement does not lead to Empowerment."   Jay Steven Sultan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Poor Jay, society's victim
Date: 6 Apr 1992 22:19:46 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Anne Diffily <ADBAM@BROWNVM.BITNET> writes:

>>Hi.  Just a quick question for Jay:  you're kidding about blaming your lack
>>of spelling skills on your (presumably K-12) schooling, right?

>Kerry:  I'm afraid Jay wasn't kidding.  He's simply borrowing a
>page from the book of those wimpy liberals whom he so loves
>to vilify on this list -- blaming society (in the form of the
>public education system) for his own shortcomings.

Well, you're full of chunky stew.  Society basically teaches people
things all the time.  Why do people steal?  Because they are brought up
to believe that a person's worth is measured by their posessions.
Society teaches us that human life is unimportant.  How many Arabs
would YOU kill to ensure that the price of gas will stay below
$1.50/gal.  for the forseeable future?  All of them?  How many
inner-city youths would YOU sacrifice to protect yourself from the
scurge of DRUUUUUUUGS?

Stratocaster

-- 
  Steve Davis  |    Contact me at ...            | The Boarding House BBS!
               | Internet:  strat@cis.ksu.edu    | 9600 baud (v.32/v.42)
               | FidoNet:    Steve @ 1:295/3     | America: 913-827-0744
 ** Operation Rescue's hidden agenda is to make ALL birth control illegal! **
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU