HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:16:17 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: William Jefferson Clinton -- anagram
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>Isn't it great that after a dozen years, we finally have a President whose
>definition of "human rights" doesn't mean the right to a capital gains
>tax cut?
>-T.

        It's too bad it doesn't.  Every cut in the capital gains tax rate has
caused an increase in the revenues.

        Too bad those increases were politically incorrect.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:MEC038@ukcc.uky.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 07:09:44 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: smoke smoke smoke that cigarette
              27 Jan 1993 17:59:57 -0800 from <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>

On Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:59:57 -0800 Andy Freeman said:

>>Well, let's see.  I don't want strychnine in my coffee
>>because it kills.  Now, do I care who it kills: No!
>>Does it matter.......: No!
>
>We're talking about the folks who do "do want strychnine in their
>coffee".  What should we do about that?  I say nothing.  KAT wants
>someone to get clubbed over this.  It's a difference in values.

No.  KAT thinks assisted suicide should be legal.  Draw
your own conclusion.

>>I am a bit unclear here as to what you mean.  Second
>>hand smoke kills and I expect to be able to use
>>government/public facilities without being exposed to
>>it.
>
>KAT is assuming that the lethality does not depend on exposure levels.
>The 3k is overwhelmingly people who voluntarily live with smokers or
>associate with them to make a buck.  Their voluntary risk has little
>to do with KAT's risk.

All I KNOW is that smoking kills.  Second hand smoking
also kills but the difference might be the lethality
level.  So some levels of second hand smoking might not
kill but may definitely hurt a person's health
significantly.  I also know that smoke could be very
unpleasant for some.  Now why should I be exposed to
something that might kill and is unpleasant especially
that I am not preventing others from smoking, period,
rather from smoking in public (indoor) places.

Is Andy claiming that say 50 years living with second
hand smoke in public places does not affect one's
health adversely?

Say the lethal level of strychnine is n mg per day.
Would Andy allow me to put n/10 mg of it in his coffee
everyday?

>EVERYTHING kills, so only the dead are safe.  However, few things are
>dangerous enough for rational people to worry about.  We don't have
>the resources to piss-away on every "risk" that gets some fool excited
>and we certainly don't need to club someone for that reason.

I say the public has the right to ban smoking in public
indoor places based only on the fact that the smoke has
a bad odor and is unpleasant, even if it didn't kill.

>-andy

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:28:52 +01
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@CC1.KULEUVEN.AC.BE
From:         GHGAOAT@CC1.KULEUVEN.AC.BE
Organization: K.U.Leuven - Academic Computing Center
Subject:      Clinton and JFK

I read that JFK is Clinton's idol.

Does that means that Clinton is waiting to be killed? Or does it mean something
different? Could anyone explain me, please?

>An ignorant European.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 12:21:21 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Bushwhacking Saddam
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>On Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:04:07 -0400 The Integral Differential said:
>
>>     There wasn't any reason to be embarrased.  Nor did the military have to
>>provide the anti-war crowd with a number to misrepresent, either.  People die
>>in war (surprise) and whether it's one or a million,it's a tragic consequence.
>>Why place and importance on the actual number?
>
>Firefighter:  "Sorry we couldn't save all you children."
>The father:   "How many died?"
>Brett':       "Death is a tragic consequence of fire.  Wether one
>              was killed or all five, what's the difference?"

        Hey, no fair changing estimates!

        Firefighter: Many people die in fires each year...
        Reporter: How many and what are their names?!
        Firefighter: That's not important, what we are trying to do...
        Reporter: Not important!! Tell that to the families!

>General:      "Mr. President, we can shorten the war and save hundreds
>              of thousands of lives, if we drop a couple of A-bombs
>              on Japan."
>
>President:    "But how many are going to die as a result of the
>              A-bombs?"
>
>Brett':       "Death is a tragic consequence of war.  Whether one
>              would be killed or hundreds of thousands, what's the
>              difference?"

        Oooo, right on target :).  'Cept I would stress that it would be far
less than if we invaded.

>The President waged war against the nation of Iraq on behalf
>of this country.  We have every right to know whether he made
>good decisions or not.  As soon as releasing that number would not
>jeopardize military planning and the security of American soldiers,
>the public has a right to know that number.  And I would say it
>is about time.
>--KAT

        I wouldn't say "right", but I'll support your right to search through
gravedigger reports to add it up.

Brett'
From: U952020@RUTADMIN.BITNET (Carl A. Lahetta)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: "On Gay Rights ..."
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:40:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:U952020@RUTADMIN.BITNET>

> Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 07:51:14 EST
> From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Re: "On Gay Rights ..."
> To:           "Carl A. Lahetta" <U952020>
> In-Reply-To:  Message of Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:24:00 EST from <U952020@RUTADMIN>
>
> On Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:24:00 EST Carl A. Lahetta said:
>
> >   A homosexual act is a homosexual act.  Besides, if gays and pedophiles are
> >   different then what about NAMBLA.  To NAMBLA both sex and gender are
> >   important.
>
> A heterosexual act is a heterosexual act.  Therefore,
> all heterosexuals are rapists.

   This absurd!  Not all heterosexuals rape.  Did I write that all homosexuals
   are pedophiles? No!  I wrote that some pedophiles want to specifically have
   sex with male minors.  Homosexuality is a desire to have sex with someone of
   the same gender regardless of age.

> And what about all
> those evil men who molest young girls.  To them both
> the sex and gender (what ever that means) are
> important.

   I suppose so, but that doesn't change the fact that some homosexuals are
   are also pedophiles.

> Teah, what about THEM, Carl.

   I don't know, you tell me KAT.
>
> How is your lunch, Carl?  Is all the housework done?

   My lunch was delicious.  I had pork chops and mashed potatoes covered with
   mushroom gravy.  There is still more work to be done around the house.  When
   one owns a home there is always something to be done.

> >Carl---+
>
> --KAT

Carl---+
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:08:00 CST
From:         TI0PSR1@NIU.BITNET
Subject:      two religion points

Joe,

Doing a little research on secular humanism inthe Supreme Court, but
if you ever hear anything about that case (around 1960, White), I
would like to know which one it is.

It's smelling like a draft case at this point, but please let me know
if you come across anything.

                            P.S.Ruckman,Jr.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:28:40 CST
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      hypothetical situation

There has been a recent discussion concerning deaths during the Iraqi
conflict and the public right/need to know. I have no evidence to back
any of this so therefor it is strictly speculation.

If the government tells us that we have performed "surgical strikes"
and all casualties are military in nature, should a journalist release
a report contradicting the official story, if the report can be
verified? Why or why not?

Another thread of the thread dealt with who/how many are being killed.
If 70% of the casualties are members of a minority that makes up 15%
of the general population, is this a policy statement?

fred
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:27:05 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: where liese is; or, i once was lost, but now am found
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>
>If they could have linked everyone up to e-mail systems (with
>Eichmann sporting the notebook computer with wireless e-mail, of
>course), who knows?  We might all be speaking German now...
>
>Und dann wirden Sie alles viel Spass haben!
>(Trans: And then you'd all be having fun.)
>
>Mit freundlich Gruessen,
>Stan Jacobs

        Having the last name Kottmann, and sporting blond hair and blue eyes,
they would have loved me, but it would be unrequited.  Ulch.

        Interestingly, almost every "germany wins WWII" SF story I've read has
the basic premise of Hilter being overthrown in a coup, or prevented coming to
power by the army.
        Even more interestingly, it almost happened, until Munich, 1938.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:44:55 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Business Optimism
              25 Jan 1993 13:59:41 -0500 from <MCW001@ACAD.DRAKE.EDU>

Travlr & others:

Be careful where you fling the accusation of hypocrisy.

Remember whose "fault" everything about the economy was for 4 years
(Bush).  And four years before that? (Reagan)  Of course, when
things were going quite well, it had nothing to do with the
president; it was just greed, remember?

So, if things get better under Clinton and rich Democrats get
richer, and the general standard of living improves, is that
Clinton's fault?  Or is it just a sign that the rest of the
Democrat party has learned the value of greed under the tutelage
of the Thomasons?

Economic indicators are like the Book of Revelations; we can all read
them, we just can't figure out what they mean.

--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:26:44 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: William Jefferson Clinton -- anagram
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>Brett',
>
>First you tried to kid then you tried to muddy the
>water.   :-)

        For my next trick: denial :).

>Once again:
>
>You said that since investment money has already been
>taxed, its profit should be taxed at a rate lower than
>that for earned income.  Am I correct so far?

        Not really.  I don't think there should be "a" rate at which we tax it.
The rate should be deterimened by what brings in the most revenue.
        And it should be a single rate, indexed for inflation.

        Whether that rate is above, below, or equal to the income tax rate is
for the market to decide.

>Now in my example a guy started with $20 which he has
>already paid income taxes on, bought A and B, put them
>together and sold the end product for $25.  A profit of
>$5.
>
>Are you or are you not saying that the $5 should be
>taxed at the capital gains level which is lower than
>the earned income level.

        If the rate is lower than income taxes, sure, why not?

>Please answer this straightforwardly.
>--KAT

        Hey, quit throwing curves.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:02:03 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Reagan's legacy and the politics of the SC
              26 Jan 1993 17:04:06 -0600 from <CDELL@VAX1.UMKC.EDU>

Val:

The War Powers Act has been argued by every President since it was
written to be an unconstitutional infringement on the President's
authority as Commander in Chief.

Each has refused to comply with it.  Ford, Carter, and Reagan notified
Congress within the required 48 hours, but refused to acknowledge the
time limits within the Act.  Only Bush actually asked the Congress's
to declare war before embarking on a full-scale, public military
intervention.  (And he did it voluntarily, nobody required it of him,
and he did not acknowledge his action to be a concession to the WPA).

Whether the act is *actually* unconstitutional is a matter of debate,
much like the President's alleged line-item veto power.  It has yet
to be tested.  However, since there is no power by which the Congress
can enforce it against the President, it is unlikely to ever be
fully accepted by a US President as constitutional.

--NINAR Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:14:30 -0500
From:         MCW001@ACAD.DRAKE.EDU
Subject: Re: Supreme Court decision
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

        The same stuff you condemn the 'Choicers for, the 'Lifers
do as well... Here in Des Moines, an OB/GYN who performs
abortions has had one of your deeply concerned group
1.  Stand guard across the street from his house
for nearly a year...
2.  Harrass him, his wife, and his children (example, this
man has run up to the Dr.'s children-pre-teens-and told
them that their father is a murderer...
3.  Harrass the people who attend his synagogue, telling
them that they're "all going to Hell for supporting that man"...
4.  Conduct an ongoing picket outside the Dr.'s private
residence with other members of Op Res...

        Do onto others? Only if they aren't freaky enough to do it
to you...
                        Travlr
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:24:05 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: did I miss something?
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>. . . Or did the UN Security Council adopt a resolution (#7-somthing)
>calling on Israel to bring back the deportees from Lebanon?  And didn't B-G
>(I can't begin to spell the guy's name) call upon the Council members to
>enforce the resolution?  Is anyone doing anything about this?
>
>Kerry

        When?  Last I heard the US had promised to veto anything resembling a
"must" or containing punishment for Israel.

        BBG is indeed pressing for such a resolution, though.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:dunstan@gec-epl.co.uk>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 10:38:03 GMT
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Corporate America (was Re: Uncl: class discussion)
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.acs.ohio-state.edu

Fred and Robert:
[stuff deleted]
>>Would you care to comment on IBM, GM, Silicon Valley job losses between
>>November 1986 and November 1992? Using the Robert scale of whose to
>>blame (da prez), the winner must be GHWB. I don't believe that, just
>>trying to follow your logic.
>>fred
>
>IBM is having to adjust to a shift in demand from mainframe systems to
>midsized systems and LANs.  After they get back up to speed, they'll
>dominate this area just as they did the other.

In my Sunday paper there was an article comparing the fortunes of IBM
and Sun. IBM found a niche for itself, milked the market and got fat.
Now that it needs to change it finds that it can't - it's too late
anyway. Contrast that with the fortunes of Sun which has ingrained
constant change to market circumstances - to the point that three of
the four founders are now gone (retired as millionaires in their
twenties - fumes of jealousy).
>
>GM suffers from piss poor management.  BTW, IBM probably has enough
>cash reserve to buy GM.

GM, Ford, IBM, DEC, Chrysler - it reads like a Fortune 100 (is that
right ?) role call - all victims of poor management.
>
>Go ahead, blame Bush if you need to.  It's just like a liberal to blame
>a man that's not in a position to defend himself. :)
>
>---Robert

It doesn't matter who you blame, what matters is that companies which
are in terminal decline are left to die and have their place taken by
new and better companies, and not buoyed up by some artificial means
thus stifling initiative and enterprise elsewhere in the economy.

Dunstan.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 03:46:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Reunion on the Mall

>
>         (Clinton's is the most expensive since Kennedy's.)
It also is generating more excitement than anyone's since Kennedy's!


Having been in town for the last four (and this one on TV) I can pretty
much back this statement up.

Then again, Reagan may have inspired patriotic emotions in some, but he
and Bush never exactly drew rock-fan type crowds.  You never saw many
70 year old Republican matrons going ga-ga over the Gipper.

Secret Service staff meetings are livelier than Republican Inaugurals.
And we all know how wacky the T-people can get.


-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:08:14 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Fear and loathing of the USSR
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>While the standard "assumed" bug seems to be a very deadly, very
>short-lived virus with little transferrence (important - malaria
>is carried by mosquitos and rabies infects most animals, including
>humans), there is some evidence (most of mine is anecdotal*) that
>AIDS was a test-tube made virus.
>From the Desk of Dave,

        Anecdotal is right.  That is straight out of the KGB and East German
propaganda machine in an attempt to win converts in Africa during the mid-80s.

        The story was that the evil Pentagon created aids to kill Africans.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:31:24 PST
From:         Jonathan Fisher <jfisher@NETXWEST.COM>
Subject:      Re: The rantings of the right-wing.
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> On Tue, 19 Jan 1993 09:11:10 PST Jonathan Fisher said:
>
> >> Other examples are middle
> >> class tax cut
> >He hasn't promised to break it.
> >
> Theree are ways of saying things without uttering the identical
> words.  It is my understanding that he will not seek a middle
> class tax cut.  Do you really think he will cut the middle
> class income tax?
I think it's possible.  I'm not holding my breath.  But even when
he said it in the campaign, I wasn't holding my breath.
But that's not the question.  You said that he (Clinton) had promised
to break some of his promises.  I am telling you that he (Clinton) _hasn`t_
promised to break his promise on the middle class tax cut.
>
> >> and admitting gays in the military.
> >He hasn't promised to break it.
> >
> As the commander in chief he can reverse that policy today
> afternoon.  Do you think he will do it?  It is not that he
> said he will study or consider reversing the policy, he said
> flat out that he would reverse it.  Want to bet some money
> if he would reverse that policy today?
Since I have delayed in responding to this :-), I have to say YES,
let's bet!
>
> However, I am pretty sure that he would reverse some policies
> very very soon (if not today).  He promised he will reverse
> the gag order on clinics against mentioning the word abortion,
> and I am sure he would do just that.  Why wouldn't he do the
> same regarding homosexuals in the military?
He signed on his first day in office a presidential directive which
told the military not to look for or ask questions about gays in the
military.
>
> >Which, coincidently, is the one that he is going with.  Further, I think
> >that #1 is the valid promise.
> >
> I never liked coincidences.    :-)
>
> >>>Jonathan
> >> --KAT
> >Jonathan
>
> --KAT
>
Jonathan

P.S.
Was it you that wanted me to come up with evidence of my statement that
Reagan issued a presidential finding making an illegal transfer of arms
legal retroactively?  If so, hang in there.  I found an article (which
is at home) which talks about Bush's diary and mentions 3 of Reagan's
findings, the first of which was the retroactive one.  I'll reprint it
sometime this week.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU:DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:31:25 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: "On Gay Rights ..."
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

        Most experts make a distinction between gays and pedophiles.  Were you
assualted because you were a kid or because they were gay and you were male?

        Gays have had to fight the "gays are rapists" because of pedophiles
assualting kids (the studies show that it is the age that is important to these
people, and not the sex of the victim).  If they only have access to males (eg
priests), then it appears as if homosexuality is the "cause".

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU,@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU:R3EJD@AKRONVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:28:55 EST
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Hillary & Health Care

IMHO, the controversy over Hillary being named as head of the Health
Care Task Force is raging because she's the First Lady.  A lot of
people take a dim view of a First Lady who dares to do something other
than show people around and take care of the family.  How many people
complained when Bobby Kennedy was named as Attorney General by his
brother?

Evelyn Duncan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU