HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: mgreen@cs.toronto.edu (Marc Green)
Subject: re: Something Wicked THis Way Comes
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 24 Jul 92 13:24:41 GMT

>From: <ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET>

I've tried to restrain myself from responding to posts like this one,
but it's hard to ignore such stupidity and ignorance. 

>It boils down to providing leadership, and to come up for "the least
>of thesethy brethren." Since Bush claims to stand for God, he might
>start reading the New Testament, especially the four gospels: you
>know, stuff about compassion and caring for the poor and powerless,
>amongst other non-Republican behavior.

The Reagan/Bush administrations have spent several trillion dollars on
social programs. That's enough compassion and caring for the poor.
What about compasssion and caring for the working stiffs who have have
to trudge to work every days to support the indigents, so they can
stay home and have more babies?

Unlike most of the jerks who write posts like the one above, I have
actually worked in poverty programs and dealt with the poor first
hand. They are not some pathetic downtrodden hoard, like the liberal
media portrays them. They tend to be lazy, stupid and greedy. Their
main goal is to bilk the system as far as possible. To them, working
is for suckers.

>Hmmm.  --And then this latest crap about being "anti-American" for being pro-
>environment???  What kind of message does this convey?  What am I supposed to
>tell my kid? --"Sorry Johnny, President Bush didn't sign the Rio de Janeiro
>protocol, 'cause its gonna hurt his millionaire friends?"  Of course, that is
>*not* what we're told: --"It will cost us jobs" 

Again, don't let facts get in the way. The US has the strictest
anti-pollution and species protection legislation in the world. Bush
wisely refused to sign a treaty which would have required the US to
give away huge and unpsecified sums to the Third World.

>Ah, I see! The military will always justify its existance, even at the expense
of social and domestic issues (expenditures).  Your "era of rapid nuclear
>proliferation space-based defence" is a complete hoax.  It is the same old lie
>that perpetuated the (nuclear) arms race: "they *might* be able to launch
>MIRV's with 3 warheads, so we build 'm with 6+ (plus a higher yieldage), etc."

It was the arms race that spent the Soviets into submission and freed
the peoples of Eastern Europe. It was not wasted money. 

>Did I ever say I would like to see the US "disarmed"? --Give Me A Break. Just
>that we scrap unjustifiable defence spending (star-wars, stealth bomber, bat-
>mobiles, whatever.)  So long arms and guns are *more* important than people,

Guess what Bunky - it is the democratic congress which is the major
roadblock to defense spending. Bush wanted to kill the Stealth bomber,
and several other major weapons programs but was blocked by
_democratic_ congressmen whose districts would have suffered job
losses. The democrats talk a good game - as long as it's some elses
money.

Marc Green 
Trent University
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: warrenk@cix.compulink.co.uk (Warren Kovach)
Subject: No subject
Reply-To: warrenk@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 17:58:00 +0000

> +From         : jmunro@wyse.wyse.com (Jim Munro x2497)
> You are forgetting Jimmy Hendrix, but on the other side don't forget
                     ^^^^^
                     Jimi Hendrix - PLEASE!

> Cliff Richards, Petula Clarke, Hank Marvin, and lots of other pathetic
> performers.

--
Warren Kovach
From: ed@wente.llnl.gov (Ed Suranyi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Olympics
Date: 29 Jul 92 20:59:01 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: UC Davis Dept of Applied Science at LLNL


In article <1992Jul29.162533.10590@u.washington.edu> cbrand@cac.washington.edu (Carol Brand) writes:
>How about interviewing the 13 year old platform diver from China who
>spanked the rest of the competition.  No I guess we would rather hear
>from the 3rd place American.

There was very likely no Chinese-English translator available poolside.
For similar reasons, there are rarely post-event interviews of non-English
speaking athletes.

I would have liked to have heard from the Australian cyclist, though.

Ed
ed@wente.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Re: Where is the "Bible Belt"?
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:08:21 GMT
Organization: The Puzzle Palace, UKentucky

In article <13v93mINNt36@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes:
>
>The term "Bible belt" comes up frequently in postings on the net.  Yet
>posters seem to have widely varying ideas of where it is located.  So
>let's hear some opinions on where it is, or what defines it.  Is there
>any support for the idea of a perforated Bible belt, where the country
>and small towns are in it and the larger cities are out of it?  Are there
>any Bible belt communities in regions that are not generally considered
>part of the Bible belt?

I've always considered the "Bible Belt" to include parts of the following
states:

	South Carolina
	North Carolina
	Georgia
	Tennessee
	Kentucky
	Alabama
	Mississippi
        Louisiana

Arguments can be made for other states, such as Arkansas and Missouri.
However, I find that the most "fundamentalist" organizations are based
in the states I listed.

Of course, the largest Protestant denomination in the US, the Southern
Baptist Convention, is based in Tennessee.  If you mapped the locations
of Southern Baptist churches, you'd probably get a close approximation
to the densest portion of the "Bible Belt".  8)

An interesting aside: the Clinton/Gore ticket is the first all-Southern
Baptist ticket in US history.  I would expect an interesting debate when
Clinton's pro-choice position runs up against the conservative Southern
Baptist pro-life stand.

-- 
 morgan@ms.uky.edu    |Wes Morgan, not speaking for|                MORGAN@UKCC 
 morgan@engr.uky.edu  |the University of Kentucky's|     ....!ukma!ukecc!morgan
 morgan@ie.pa.uky.edu |Engineering Computing Center| morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
     Mailing list for AT&T StarServer S/E - starserver-request@engr.uky.edu
Xref: sparky soc.culture.usa:6275 sci.environment:10370
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,sci.environment
Subject: Re: [transport] car versus bus/train (was: car pooling / carpooling)
Date: 31 Jul 92 06:08:37 GMT
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...

In article <9207291635.AA12671@efi.com> dchung@efi.com (Daniel Chung) writes:
>     Some people like to drive because they do not *like* to walk
>five or ten minutes to the bus station, or stick to a firm train schedule.

Right.  So what?

>If it is not an expenditure of time, it is *good* excercise.

Some people (but not most) would be unable to perform that exercise.

>People are definitely spoilt.  

By some measure, *most* people (i.e., anyone who has more than is absolutely
necessary for physical survival) are spoiled, yourself included.  Do you walk
everywhere you go?  You *could* live without your beloved public
transportation, you know.  Do you buy your food from the store?  You
*could* grow it yourself, you know.  I could go on and on...

>If the U.S.A. does not have unreasonably cheap
>petroleum (should be something like a U.S. dollar per litre),

Exactly what measure of "should" are you using here?  You claim that the
price of petroleum here "should" be $1/liter, or about $4/gallon.  Back
up your statement with some facts: provide the calculations that show that
the actual cost of gasoline here in the U.S. is $4/gallon.

Don't give me the "environmental costs" bullshit.  If you can't quantify it
in rational terms (I would consider arguments based on what people, in the
environment under consideration, are observed to be willing to pay to be
rational arguments), you can't use it in an economic discussion.

>we would all be "obediently" taking public transport.  

No we wouldn't.  We'd be using methanol or some other more than competitive
substitute, at something like $1.50-$2.00 a gallon, if not gasoline derived
from something other than sweet crude.

>					Daniel Chung, U.S.A.

So...why don't you support such artificially elevated prices for *all*
things?  After all, pollution is produced in the manufacture of pretty
much everything, including food...

-- 
				Kevin Brown

			    kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
			    kevin@taronga.taronga.com
From: orpheus@reed.edu (P. Hawthorne)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Something Wicked THis Way Comes
Date: 30 Jul 92 04:34:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Jul30.043400.29084
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR


  orpheus@reed.edu (P. Hawthorne) writes:
: I maintain that you don't cure anything by throwing money at the symptoms.
: Compassion and caring for the poor is not a budget outlay, unless you
: consider compassion and a welfare state to be equivalent.

  crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
: If by this you mean that our current approach to solving (I should say
: dealing with. solving may not be possible) social problems is misguided
: and unhelpful then I agree wholeheartedly and 100%.

  Then we are in agreement that the current approach does at least as much
to perpetuate poverty as it does to eliminate it.


  crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
: What we need is an approach that empowers people to improve their own
: lives and work their way out of poverty. Instead of discouraging people
: from working we need to encourage and enable. Instead of making decisions
: for them we need to empower them to make their own and to take
: responsibility for them. We need to get away from a model where
: government provides the service and move toward a model where government
: provides the wherewithal and the people choose the services they need.

  Nicely put. Couldn't agree more.


  crosmun@mickey.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
: Reagan's line was that trying to help those who don't have by taking from
: those who do is simply hurting everybody. Instead of redistributing the
: pie we need a bigger pie. To the extent that he was successful, wealth
: went up in the '80s and poverty did decrease. Unemployment went way down,
: and 13,000,000 new jobs were created. Seems to me that this is a more
: successful anti-poverty program than anything the welfare state has been
: able to accomplish.

  Of course those statistics are perverse relatives of the statistics that
were used by previous administrations. The Reagan administration redefined
employment to include members of the armed services to produce an
artificial decrease in unemployment. New jobs came with increased spending
which in no way addressed our budget deficit. I suspect, empirically, that
many jobs earned less by the time Reagan left office, despite the fact that
the administration did not succeed in dismantling minimum wage law.

  Let's have an honest and effective campaign against poverty, let's bring
back the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Works Progress Agency! We
could fund them by streamlining other social services and merging them with
those agencies, and bringing the defense budget back down to $275 billion.
For good measure, we could decrease taxes for the middle and lower classes,
raise taxes for those who earn more than $200 thousand per year, and
effectively slapping large scale industrial polluters with commensurate and
punative fines.

  Theus (orpheus@reed.edu)
From: r2d@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (richard.del monaco)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Manners (was Re: Pronounciaton of Three-Syllable Words)
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:47:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbfsb.1992Jul24.164739.9124
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Jul23.222612.13232@uwm.edu> bruce@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bruce A Clark) writes:
>I have noticed the lack of politeness in the US as well, although it
>seems to vary regionally. In the places I've lived, I've found people
>in Silicon Valley (south San Francisco Bay) to be the most polite. I
>commented on this to my brother and his theory is that this is due to
>the diverse ethnic mix found there (probably the high number of
>professionals doesn't hurt).
>

I think that politeness is perceived differently in the various regions of
this country.  I disagree with your brother that diverse ethnic mix is a
contributing factor.  New Yorkers are generally perceived as less polite
than Midwesterners and there certainly is more ethnic mix in the New York
metropolitan area.

>Japan has had one of the highest population densities in the world for
>centuries. Considering the level of violence in this country, I think
>that as US society becomes more urbanized, we need to practice better
>manners if only to reduce friction between people.
>

Yes, that would be nice.

>Just to throw out something for discussion to the Sociology majors:
>Does formality (manners, politeness) only go along with class
>conciousness? Considering that the Japanese and European (less
>recently) histories are rooted in feudal societies.
>

I don't know the answer to this.  The British certainly seem more polite
to me.  A short story:  I was on a crowded London underground with two friends
at five o'clock.  We all were carrying quite a lot of baggage and we were
packed pretty close to the center of the train.  When we approached our
stop, I was amazed at how cooperative people were in moving out of our
way and even passing bags to us.  It certainly doesn't corelate to anything
I've ever seen or experienced on the subway in New York.


Richard Del Monaco		rdelmonaco@attmail.att.com
Somerset, New Jersey		    r2d@cbnewsg.cb.att.com
Disclaimer:  I am not an official company spokesperson.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: silva@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Holly Silva)
Subject: Re: Olympics
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 06:50:05 GMT


	Is there anyone else who finds NBC's coverage of the Olympics
to be generally vile, over-focussed on the gold and demeaning to the
athletes?  The network promotes an ugly, whining jingoism and a Geraldo
-outlook on the event that should make it the butt of both jokes and
criticism, but no one seems to notice. Possibly some of the rec.sports.*
newsgroups have covered this topic, but it seems sufficiently significant
to warrant discussion in s.c.usa.  Does anyone find the spectacle of 
Sports Illustrated renting a cruise ship/yacht from which to cover the
event just a little too '80's? I have to admit, it probably does spare 
Barcelona the worst of their presence, but Christ! What grotesque, spend-
thrift hubris!


--
======================================================================
|| Holly Silva			I have nothing terribly clever to say||
|| Applied Earth Sciences	today.  You're in luck.		     ||
|| Stanford University						     ||
From: @@efi.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: [living] cohabitation (fi al ili!)
Date: 21 Jul 92 21:09:06 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.hongkong


     I am not using "cohabitation" in the legal sense; I am only
referring to living boy-and-girl-friend together.  It is probably
due to U.S.American isolation.  One would be living with one's family or
original roommates instead.  Why can one not wait to live with a
loved one?  Or are you so picky that you want actually to live
together to determine whether the loved one is a right one?  What
if you get so close that you biologically marry, even when you are
not legally married yet?  Who is responsible?

     Fi al ili!

					a reader, U.S.A.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.usa:6176 alt.california:1537 soc.culture.lebanon:3421
From: karr@ukc.ac.uk (K.A.R.Razzooqi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,alt.california,soc.culture.lebanon
Subject: Information about American Universities
Date: 23 Jul 92 09:10:23 GMT
Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.

Hello Everybody,

        I am seeking some information about American Universities.
        The ones I am interested in are MIT,Carnegie-Mellon,Stanford and Northwestern.
        I am going to apply for PhD in the field of Data Communication/Networks.
        And I need some information about projects and names of supervisors whom I can contact at these Uni's.
        So I will be very grateful if somebody can help in this matter.
        And thank you in advance.

Kutaiba Razzooqi.


(PS: currently I am doing my MSc in Optical Communication and I wish to apply        for Sep.1993)
:w
 q
From: beatty@nlm.nih.gov (Charles Beatty, MSD)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Moral Infallibility of U.S.
Date: 22 Jul 92 22:03:43 GMT
Reply-To: beatty@nlm.nih.gov
Organization: National Library of Medicine

You can use the handy and "obvious" rule that many Canadians (and quite
a few Europeans and Australians as well) use:

We (the Americans) are always the "bad guys".  Whomever we might be in
conflict with, for whatever reason, are the "good guys".

Easy, right?  Oh, and we'll try and get right on that Yugoslavia thing.

---
Charles Beatty					beatty@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer)
Subject: Re: From New York Times
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Dept. of Independence
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 11:47:00 GMT

In article <l7eun7INN8ut@girtab.usc.edu>, draskovi@usc.edu (Zoran Draskovic) writes...
>The following article is reprinted from Monday's New York Times.
>            Heaviest Cross for Egypt's Copts: March of Islam.


Well, we DO have that pyramid on our dollar bill, but...
From: vigneswa@ecs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Nightmare: A Nuclear War......
Date: 30 Jul 92 11:01:21 GMT

	Though the Republicans and media(ha!!) praise the Foreign Policy of 
Prez. Bush, his achievements are not commendable.  I do not want to present
a list here.  Apparently, Prez. Bush claims that he is the  champion of the
so called Cold War (Neither CIA nor Mr Bush was  aware of a possible 'coup'
which flipped the things up side down).  He says  that the  American people 
can go to bed without any fear about a possible nuclear war now.  I am won-
dering how many Americans went to bed with that fear before the collapse of


Vicky:
UMass, 
July 30
From: shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu (Sergey Shimkevich)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Something Wicked This Way Comes
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:08:15 GMT
Organization: Boston University Chemistry Department

In article <92205.214125ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET> ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET writes: 

//It WILL be re-elected. Not by a margin as wide as the last time, but it will.

>"It"? --"IT will be re-elected???"

Oops...

>Besides, WHO are those evil nations, nuts and able enough to waste billions of
>dollars on space-based "defence"?  I guess there are those who keep fighting
>the Cold War...  For your information, I'd read Tom Clancey's (sp) latest
>best-seller called: "The Sum Of All Fear."  This novel presents a far more
>likely scenario when a bunch of terrorists-with-a-cause obtain a crude nuclear
>device, smuggle it to the States, and detonate the bomb in Denver.

Oh, NO!!!! I bought the book yesterday!!! (I really did) Here goes the
suspense (sigh). 

>So long arms and guns are *more* important than people,
>please don't claim you've God on your side.

Hmm, some gods are quite vicious.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Ryan: What is it to you, demon?       //// Sergei Shimkevich             //
// Lune: It is Sir, Demon to you, worm!  //// shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu        //
// -Phantasy Star III                    ////                               //
From: shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu (Sergey Shimkevich)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Something Wicked This Way Comes
Date: 23 Jul 92 21:04:43 GMT
Organization: Boston University Chemistry Department

In article <92204.194051ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET> ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET writes:
>What "if" the current administration would be re-elected? 

It WILL be re-elected. Not by a margin as wide as the last time, but it will.

>Suggestions: (comes to mind first) --Quayle four more years?  (for an ongoing
>if not slightly amusing discussions on this very subject, I kindly refer to
>the "alt.fan.dan-quayle" user group)

I don't mind Quayle at all. Its the advisors that matter, not the head of
state.

>                                   --Four more years of ... what... actually?
>More of the same?  Hmmm?  Can anyone explain to this sucker why anybody should
>vote *FOR* Bush in the first place? 

Why anybody should NOT vote for Bush?

>                                   --Four more years financing of high-tech
>military toys like "star-wars," and this, while our nation's (economic/social)
>infra-structure and energy network stands in need for a major overhaul?

In the era of rapid nuclear proliferation space-based defence is a must.
A disarmed US is not something I will be happy with.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Ryan: What is it to you, demon?       //// Sergei Shimkevich             //
// Lune: It is Sir, Demon to you, worm!  //// shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu        //
// -Phantasy Star III                    ////                               // 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
From: dcd@cactus.org (Danny C. Deng)
Subject: Living cost in Alaska?
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:01:13 GMT

Could somebody tell me the living cost in Alaska?  For example, the
rate of a one bedroom apartment, state income tax, sales tax, auto
insurance fees, etc.  Thanks in advance.
From: dchung@efi.com (Daniel Chung)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: [moralo] biologia geedzig^ado
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:47:38 GMT


     Mi legas iun nuntempan Usonan fikci-rakonton, en kie dek-kvin-jara knabo
(note: "knab-" kaj "knabin-" prefere estas apartaj radikoj) biologie
geedzig^as al knabino.  La knabo nur pensas pri materieco, ne pri kiel
faras bonaj^on por lies "edzino".  Pensite, ke tio estas nur rakontaj^o,
nur rakonta "lud-knabo" (Anglo-lingvaj^o).

						Danielo
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Something Wicked This Way Comes
From: <ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET>
Date: Wednesday, 22 Jul 1992 19:40:51 MDT
Organization: Brigham Young University

What "if" the current administration would be re-elected?  S'pose that this
event would be the "wickedest" thing that could 'befall' the nation in
November, which policy "line-item" (to use the vocabulary of The Man Himself)
in particular would be the hardest to swallow?

Suggestions: (comes to mind first) --Quayle four more years?  (for an ongoing
if not slightly amusing discussions on this very subject, I kindly refer to
the "alt.fan.dan-quayle" user group)
                                   --Four more years of political stagnation,
especially in area's which are long overdue and in need to be addressed like
(universal) health-care (yes, it CAN work, as is evident in most other Western
nations, with the exception of the Brits naturally, but who would be surprized
by that anyway?   :-)
                                   --Four more years of ... what... actually?
More of the same?  Hmmm?  Can anyone explain to this sucker why anybody should
vote *FOR* Bush in the first place? (and not merely *against* Bill & Al Inc.!)
                                   --Four more years financing of high-tech
military toys like "star-wars," and this, while our nation's (economic/social)
infra-structure and energy network stands in need for a major overhaul?

Any other thoughts?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa