HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 22:22:23 EST
From:         MacPhil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Abortion Documentary to air on TBS
Comments: To: politics <politics@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

Chicago Tribune; Thursday, July 22, 1992
Tempo Section, p. 2
by Barbara Brotman
(c) 1992 Chicago Tribune Company.

              "TBS to broadcast video on abortion pill"

A documentary produced by a group of prominent Chicago women supporting
the controversial abortion pill RU 486 has found a national outlet in
the Turner Broadcasting System. \ The video, "Science Held Hostage: RU
486 and the Politics of Abortion," will be part of a two-hour block of
programming on TBS supporting abortion rights and contraceptive
research.  It will air at 8:05 p.m. Sept. 21 on TBS in Chicago. \ The
half-hour documentary was the brainchild of the WOmen's Issues Network,
a group that seeks to affect public politics affecting women.  It was
shown at a benefit for WIN in May, and will be screen Tuesday for
lawmakers on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. \ The group was eager to
give it a wider audience.  Rebecca Sive, a Win founder, said Christie
Hefner, chairman of Playboy Enterprises inc. and another member of WIN,
wrote to Ted Turner, an outspoken supporter of abortion rights, and
asked if he would air it. \ Scott Sassa, president of Turner
Entertainment Network, said Turner had already decided to air two
related programs and thought the RU 486 documentary would complement
them. \ The RU 486 video is no dispassionate examination of the issue
from both sides.  Narrator Cybill Shepherd accuses the anti-abortion
movement of robbing the American people of a drug that could mprovide a
safe and early alternative to surgical abortion and that shows promise
in treating some illnesses. \ Jeannie Morris, the former WBBM-Ch. 2
sports reporter, was the executive producer of the RU 486 program.  In
the documentary, Morris gives an emotional and moving account of her own
illegal abortion in Tijuana, Mexico.  She was a suburban mother of four
children with a troubled marriage when she accidentally became pregnant.
\ The video will be shown with another program hosted by Sarah
Weddington, who argued the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that
legalized abortion, and one on the contraceptives written and hosted by
Linda Ellerbee.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
When ambidextrous people can't do it right, we do it left.

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 15:56:03 EST
From:         MacPhil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: A response to "Another Gulf War"
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>
              24 Jul 1992 15:11:18 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WV NET.EDU>

On Fri, 24 Jul 1992 15:11:18 -0400 <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU> said:
>j.b.
>>It is the accepted opinion in the military circles that
>>a government should never stop fighting a war until its
>>political objectives are accomplished.  This is what we
>>did.  The two objectives were to free Kuwait and remove
>>Hussein from power.
>
>Removing Hussein from power may have been one of Bush's motives, but it was
>not one of the U.N.-sanctioned objectives (am I remembering this right,
>everyone?).

And remember the federal directive banning the US from assassinating
the head of state for another country...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
When ambidextrous people can't do it right, we do it left.

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
From: PWHMDS@NCSUVM.BITNET (Patrick W. Hamlett)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Baker running Bush campaign
Date: 22 Jul 92 14:29:03 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

On Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:15:21 EDT todd pukanecz said:
>There are rumors that Bush is asking Baker to take a "leave of absence"
>as secretary of state in order to run the Bush/Quayle campaign.  At
>first I thought this was a fairly cheesy tactic as part of Bush's
>"whatever it takes to get re-elected".  Baker is one of Bush's better
>appointees and to have him abandon a crucial post to head a potentially
>troubled campaign seemed frivolous.  But if Bush doesn't get re-elected
>then Baker leaves the post anyway, so why not have him take an active
>role in the "job security".
>  Thoughts?
>     toddddddddd
>
Also, Baker pretty clearly want to be prez himself, one day, and needs
to shove J.D.Q. aside. Four more years as veep for Quayle might (just
barely) overcome his huge public negatives. From Baker's perspective,
a Clinton/Gore win against such a weak pres as Bush/Quayle might be
a better place from which to launch Baker's own campaign...
Hamlett
>=========== Wake up John Doe.  You're the hope of the world! ===========
>--------     /^^\    ---- Todd Pukanecz ----   ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
>-----      /      >   --- Ag. Econ. DPL --- "I'm in a nuclear submarine
>---  /\_ / @       \   -- Virginia Tech --   under the polar ice cap and
>-  /________________>   - Blacksburg VA -    I need a Kleenex." - ZIPPY
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:00:02 CDT
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: a good tactic

Sue Clark says that the republicans should invite unhappy democrats to
speak at their convention.

Sue, weren't you the one who was complaining about the democrats stealing
ideas from the republicans for their convention? Why is it acceptable for
the republicans to do this but a dirty trick if the demos do it?

I don't think that the republicans will gain much from having no choice
speakers at their convention because they already have a lock on the no
choice vote. The only way I see a benefit for them is if they present an
abortion under very tight restrictions platform. This will attract some
voters who do not like the demo ticket but do not want a total ban on
abortion.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: pmoloney@maths.tcd.ie (Paul Moloney)
Subject: Re: Is Quayle pro-choice?
Organization: Somewhere in the Twentieth Century
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 10:00:36 GMT


So I take it from the sudden dearth of postings in this thread that we've all 
accepted that Quayle _is_ pro-choice?

Good.

P.
-- 
moorcockheathersiainbankshamandcornpizzapjorourkebluesbrothersspikeleepratchett
clive P a u l  M o l o n e y "Lines of light ranged in the nonspace of the  rem
james Trinity College,Dublin PMOLONEY%MATHS.TCD.IE@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU mind." vr
brownbladerunnerorsonscottcardprincewatchmenkatebushbatmanthekillingjoketolkien
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 08:38:34 CDT
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      cost vs. return

Perhaps someone like MJ who is active in single parenthood could give
some figures on the cost to raise a child from birth to the age of
majority. I think that you could buy a lot of sex ed materiels for
the cost of one unplanned pregnancy.

Jason, if you start a referendum to remove sex ed from the schools and
my kid becomes pregnant could I sue you for denying my child access to
the information that would have prevented the pregnancy?

I also grew up in a very rural area (<600) where everyone could read and
very few people got pregnant outside marraige. However, there are probably
certain school systems with more cases of STD or teenage pregnancy than
the number of people in my whole childhood world.

I never received any sexual education from my parents, both of whom were
regular attendees of religious services. Many children aren't comfortable
discussing these issues with parents. Should we leave them in ignorance?
A pregancy that never happened will never be terminated.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 26 Jul 1992 16:16:11 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject: RE: Is Quayle pro-choice?
              26 Jul 1992 12:06:09 EST from <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>

MacPhil and others:

I don't care what the paper says Quayle said.  I *watched* him say it,
and wrote down his exact words.  Maybe the reporter didn't have access
to a tv, but I do, and I stand by my quotation.

                                               --Missy Justice
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 14:10:46 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: questions for tkidd

Jimbo:

Most people in the world follow whatever moral rules they
choose not because of the religious tradition with which
they are affiliated, but because to them it is right.
It is this internal sense of right and wrong which guides
everyone even if they are atheists.

-j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CDELL
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:12:00 CST
From:         "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: dumping Dan: myth or reality?

My immediate reaction is dumping Dan would be bad politics for Bush. The
man has been loyal, done all he was asked to do, took some abuse (thereby
taking some heat off Bush) and has basically done no serious political
wrong. I think Bush would be shooting himself in the foot with the
conservatives in the country, already unhappy with the reneging on the
tax pledge, among other things. VMS
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 09:40:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The theme of men's magazines ...

>That too, of course one has to remember the inverse is also true of men's
>magazines--"the American women's ideal of masculine perfection" is someone who
>is a self-centerred, egotistical, womanizing ass who is not only a jock, but
>apparently extremely wealthy too.  Of course, in both cases we are generalizing


maybe these male/female ideals have more to do w/advertiser & publisher ideals
than with what real people actually think about each other.

then again, i could be wrong.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>BTW, frat boys and sorority "chicks" deserve each other  |  Kai Alexis Price
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

who could argue that one?

-linda  (think E-ticket)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 11:51:15 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: school choice revisited

j.b.:
>Why is coming from the bottom up better than starting at the top
>and working down?

Aside from the fact that school funding comes from local communities, two
reasons for working from the "bottom up" would be (1) different local
communities have different needs; schools should be able to tailor
themselves to the needs of local communities; and (2) actual classroom
teachers (as opposed to education bureaucrats) probably have a better
feeling for what works and what doesn't work in real classroom settings.

>Why are Bush and others unwilling to institute a national
>curriculum of some sort.  It could be done is such a manner
>that still left lots of room and freedom to the individual school
>systems.  This would give a uniformity to the US educational
>system.  As it stands now, high school diplomas are meaning
>less and less and a liberal arts education more and more
>desired.

I *do* like the idea of a broad national curriculum that leaves room for
flexibility at the local level.  I don't have a clue how to get there from
here, though :)  I guess I'm thinking along the lines of working both ends
against the middle -- work from the top and the bottom toward the same goal
.

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
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:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:35:24 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      dumping Dan: myth or reality?

Hi, y'all.
I know we've touched on this before, so excuse me if I've been too dense to
recognize the answer to this question :)  My d.p. and I were talking about
the possibility of Bush dumping Quayle.  I said that I thought that would
be a bad move, as many conservative voters seem to like Quayle, and are
sticking with Bush largely for that reason.  He suggested that dumping
Quayle would be a good move if Quayle were replaced by a Kemp or Dole-type.
He argued that the more right-leaning conservatives would stick with such a
ticket simply because they'd have no other choice.  Such a ticket might,
however, woo back some of the Regan Democrats from the Perot camp.

What do y'all think?

Thanks
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 26 Jul 1992 14:07:00 EST
From:         the anti-elvis <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is Quayle pro-choice?

how about this as an explanation of dan's statement:

dan thinks that abortion is murder, because the fetus is a person, etc
etc blah blah blah. *nobody* should have an abortion, but everyone else
should not. ;)  now he thinks thsis dispite the fact that it is legal.

however, it seems to me that this shows an important distinction that
exists even in many anti-choicers minds:  a fetus is NOT the same kind of
thing as a 2 year old or an adult.  it IS (to them) still a person, having
the rights of a person, and is still an incredibly important critter, as
critters on this planet go, but most will say that the health of the mother
(an already viable human) is more important than the health of the fetus,
even tho the health of the fetus is extremely important.

so aborting the fetus IS murdering it, but it is not the same as murdering
a 2 year old; it becomes a different form of murder (lets say 4th degree
murder). it is still horrible, but there are worse things.

i think that in this way, quayle's statement might make more sense.

btw: according to the penn law, he could simply not give parental consent
and thus prevent her from having a legal abortion.

also btw: i don't know if quayle's statement was politically expedient
(as his wife's was), but it was honest and is (to date) the only admirable
thing i've heard of quayle (his kid comes before political expediency)

brni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET (Kerry Stephenson)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Flying in the face of logic, and history
Date: 31 Jul 92 02:23:37 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU


    Jamie says:

The Kerrys publically admit that they hate ilk.
One of them chides us for not having read Roe v. Wade, then
displays her ignorance of its content

     This is a misrepresentation of fact.  I responded to the
     statement that it is not legal to abort after the 20-21st week
     by stating that abortion is *legal* throughout the nine months
     of pregnancy.  In response, the details of Roe were posted.
     Those details did not refute my statement. The state in the
     second trimester *may* impose such regulation as may be related
     to *maternal* health.   In the third trimester the state *may*
     regulate or even prohibit abortion, except in such cases that may
     present a danger to the life or health of the woman.  (In practice,
     and in the notes to Roe, "health" can be construed to refer to
     physical, emotional, or economic well-being.)  Furthermore,
     not all states opt to exercise this right.  Thus, in the state
     of Kansas, it is permissible and legal to abort a child
     as it is being born, while it is still in the birth canal.
     My statement, as originally stated, was correct.

                                     --Missy Prez 2 B
From: 92price@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Where are you, Norton?
Date: 29 Jul 92 09:32:04 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

I understand from NPR that Bush's new killer vote-getting theme is going to be:
"Trust me."  Ha, ha, haaw!  This, from the most insincere person in American
politics since Nixon.

With the sad loss of the ghost of Abbie HoffmaN, I feel a void.  What this list
needs, I think, is the ghost Emperor NortoN I (two 'N's, good chance to win)--
if anyone runs into our first Emperor in, say, a deserted squat house in San
Francisco during the midnight hour or something, would you direct him toward
this list, please.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atta 'boy Saddam--you sure showed him who's boss      |     Kai Alexis Price
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:31:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Pro-Choice and the GOP Convention

On Mon, 20 Jul 1992 15:22:13 -0500 Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET> sa
id:
> If men must share legal responsibility after a child is born, why can't
> he share legal responsibility before?  Why is the right to abort purely
> the woman's perogative?
I TOTALLY 100% AGREE!!

> For record, I am not pro-choice.  Everyone should be given a chance to
And neither are most Americans.
I would bet that no more than 1 or maybe 2 of the women senate can-
didates will actually win.  One of these is Yeakel, who is running
against a pro-choice Republican.
The guy who ran the graphic anti-abortion television ads in Georgia won
(or was winning, last I heard) his primary.  Granted, that doesn't speak
for the election, but neither do all these women senate primary wins.
Remember, in the case of Braun and I think Boxer, both won their primar-
ies with only a plurality.  Braun got what--38%--I would hardly call
that a convincing victory.  And she got that much only because the two
other candidates bashed each other.  Pro-life will win elections, as
long as there is no wishy-washiness.   And, BTW, I believe Anita Hill
lied her ass off at the Clarence Thomas hearings.

> live.  That is the way I see the issue.  I couldn't speak with a woman
> who chose to abort my child.  I would share responsibility in raising
> as is my right and duty, I couldn't accept losing a child that is as
> much mine as hers.
Me neither.

> -j.b.
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:00:59 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      N-tickets

I suggest we nominate two tickets.

Ticket One, Kerry KilburN and Kerry StephensoN.

Ticket Two, Tim JohnsoN and Gary OlsoN.

I don't care which within each pair runs for Pres and which for VP,
they can fight it out between them.

The Ticket One has balance, and has the advantage that in case
the president is assassinated and the vice pres. has to take over,
the White House staff won't have to change the first name stencilled
on all the towels. Oh yeah, and of course it's the right sex for
the '90's.

Ticket Two has height, a predictor of electoral success nearly as
powerful as the N factor.

If I have forgotten any ____n people, forgive me.



      Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:59:43 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Financing the gov't...

Here's an idea for US taxation.

Tax all the income of individuals making over $500,000 down
to that amount.

Businesses need a different type of structure because they
should be investing.  The suggestion for businesses would
be to tax them a flat 35% or so and then tax down to $1.5 mill
for those businesses that don't invest in research and development.

The rest of the populace would be taxed at current rates.

I would also tax inheritance, lotteries, sweepstakes and the like
to individuals down to $5 mill after the standard tax is assessed.

Does anyone have an idea of what sort of revenue this would generate?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 26 Jul 1992 19:13:38 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Is Quayle pro-choice?

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

> I just saw the Quayle statement again(1. He did *not* say "I would support
> the decision."  He said "I would support my daughter.  I hope she would not
> make that decision."  The hypothetical was phrased as pertaining to the
> daughter *as an adult*, not as a child (as was the one posed the next day,
> to which his response was that she would have the baby.)(2  I have yet to
> meet a prolife activist who would abandon his or her child for *any* reason.3
>  Prolife activists, as I have said before, are capable of separating an
> evil action from a sinful human being.(4  The human being in sin is offered
> sympathy, love, and support; the action is condemned as wrong.  Any loving
> parent would have responded as Quayle did.(5

Again I have added numbers AFTER each point that you have made.

   1. Was is the original one on Larry King Live?  Or was it one
      of the many statements that followed the original one?  If
      the answer to the first question is a definite "yes" then
      I have to accept the possibility that I and my local paper
      were wrong and you are correct.  I'll keep looking though...

   2. Factually correct but no related to the point I was making.
      (You love to make statements like that, don't you?  :-)

   3.  Have you seen a pro-choice activist who would do such thing?

   4. Weren't you the one who said it is the "nature" of criminals
      which is sinful.  (I can bring direct quotes, you know. :-)
      How do you reconcile this with what you said before?

   5. You are correct.  As I have said it before, I would have
      answered the same way, as would any loving pro-choice
      parent -- that is why I think Quayle is pro-choice.  :-)

>                                         --Missy Justice

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:42:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: prolifers and informed discussion

On Tue, 21 Jul 1992 13:47:35 -0700 Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU> said:
> Yes.  My father used to work with 7th graders, a surprising fraction
> of which were either pregnant or parents.  Before then he worked with
> older kids.  I've hung around such kids myself.  Some of my friends
> did pregancy counseling (abortion services).
Did you say SEVENTH graders?????

> -andy
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU