HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
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:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:58:01 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Moves to Help Bush

Dunstan:
>The truth, of course, is that ultimately environmental soundness
>shouldn't be a partisan issue. Do Republicans really adopt such a
>hostile approach to environmental issues ?

I agree.  And my experience is that, yes, the general Republican stance is
pretty hostile.

Kerry
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:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 10:13:59 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Spin Control

>Let me now depart from my content-free course just for a moment.
>If our Commander in Chief really does commit forces to the Gulf,
>he is going to wreck the U.S. economy utterly. The price of oil
>will rise, and money will be sapped from investment. I predict
>that any boost given to domestic demand by spending on military
>tech. will be VERY short-term, on the order of 4 weeks. War in
>August will mean a plummeting economy in October, and doom for
>the GOP.
>
>It won't be very pleasant for the Kurds, either.

This would actually help the Louisiana economy immensely.  I
grant that it would not guarrantee the election in the nation,
but it might be enough to totally take La.

-j.b.

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:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:35:45 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject: Re: hilary or carl? tough choice!

From: linda

>what of the kids whose parents deny medical treatment or blood transfusions for
>their children because of religious reasons? what if this kid is 16 or 17 and
>wants her appendix removed so that she can live? she's still a minor, but needs
>parental approval and is being denied this approval?
>
>what if she has leukemia and her parents deny chemotherapy because they don't
>trust doctors? or are selfish and don't want to foot the bill?
>

Can't a person of that age already ask for a court order to get
treatment?  Can't somebody else file for one if the child is to
young to know about the help?

The problem with this is that it is reaching into religion.
Why is it wrong for parents to not allow their child to get
medical treatment based on religious faith, when it is legal
for parents to initiate their children into snake-handling?

>i think there's a place for what hillary's talking about-probably even a need
>for it, but it would have to be worded very carefully to make me comfortable.
>

Perhaps, but the wording would have to be so specific, almost
giving a case-by-case breakdown of what is covered and what isn't.

>anyone have any ideas how the most vulnerable can be protected w/out undo or
>unfair interference by the state into personal affairs?
>

I don't think that there is.  We either have a State that is capable
of meddling into private affairs (-whether the State is beneficent or
not doesn't really matter-) or we have a legal code that has so many
restrictions and limitations, that it makes the system almost
inaccessible the the victims in this type of situation.

>-linda
-j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:39:00 EST
From:         MING the Destroyer <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: i didn't know that toni morrison had a big hasidic following

yea!!!

anneliese is back (and kicking).

hey, did you know that you are running for president?  with js sultan as
your running mate?  better make a statement about shoes soon, before you
are accused of avoiding the issues...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 10:41:15 CST
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Sean Mills <ST4226@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU>
Subject:      Correction

FROM: Sean Mills

In my last note, I meant to say that not everyone will abide in my TWO points,
not in my TO points. My spell checker doesn't catch those kind of mistakes.

                                                 -Sean
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:58:35 EDT
From:         Tim Johnson <ST402711@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      a press leak from the JohnsoN/OlsoN campaign

  rumor has it that there may be a major
endorsement of the JohnsoN/OlsoN party
within the next day or two.  there have
been high level negotiations going on
between the candidates and the as yet
unnamed political personality.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: @POL
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:13:00 CST
From:         Ghost of Abbie <AHOFFMAN@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      The campaign ...

My ghostly plug is not yet pulled, so I can root for my candidates until
they banish me back to outer darkness. I think you have a true ticket of
balance with DuncaN/ValentiN, maturity and solidity, two careful thinkersa,
a female on the top of the ticket (only the Kerry's compete with us here),
and who else has an erratic ghost to advise! I am offering to volunteer as
Chief Yippie of the Dead, a honorary post, but one that represents millions
of constituents. You want us all to move to Chicago, and get the franchise?
A campaign shot, Abbie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 08:40:49 EST
From:         MacPhil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: more on SS#'s, Missy/MacPhil
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Tue, 21 Jul 1992 02:51:01 EST Kerry Stephenson said:

>                                                 neither do Indiana
>drivers' licenses issued since (I believe) 1989 or so.

I coulda sworn I said this over the weekend.  Perhaps I dreamed it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 11:08:30 EST
From:         MacPhil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: p.s.: linda, this one's for us :)
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>
              24 Jul 1992 11:56:55 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WV NET.EDU>

On Fri, 24 Jul 1992 11:56:55 -0400 <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU> said:
>Hi, MacPhil:
>>curiosity ?:  why would you (sic) heroes when it's the correct spelling?
>
>Well, because either Danny boy didn't know the correct feminine form of the
>word, or he was actually attempting gender-neutrality.  That is, he either
>goofed, or did something unexpectedly PC -- and I wanted to be sure
>everyone knew I wasn't putting the word in his mouth, so to speak.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh....so this is a PC lesson.  Ok. I gotcha now.

I thought that's what it was, but I wanted you to confirm it.

Should we also be careful about noun (and I suppose adjective) usage
and the gender when we derived the word from Latin?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:37:15 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Financing the gov't via taxation

>From:         ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET
>
>Technically, this is right.  Remember, though, that the U.S. has a structural
>deficit, which means that even if we grew to full-employment GNP, our tax
>revenues would still not match expenditures.  Thus, while growth can CUT the
>deficit, it cannot ELIMINATE it.

That depends on the productivity of labor. If wages grew, full employment
could eliminate the defecit even without tax hikes.

In any case, the point is not really relevant to what I was saying,
because (a) Clinton DOES have a plan to cut spending, (b) Clinton
DOES propose to raise SOME taxes, and (c) Clinton does not foresee
eliminating the deficit.

>Also remember that gov't programs intended to spur growth (such as Clinton's
>schemes for "investment") usually cost money, thus partly offseting the
>increased tax revenues that their growth brings about.

Noted.

>BTW (to all who are interested -- not just Jamie), I'm puzzled by Clinton's
>pledge to make the wealthy pay "their fair share."  Since the rich are taxed at
>a higher rate than the rest of us, it seems to me that they're already paying
>more than their fair share.  If Clinton really desired "tax fairness," it seems
>to me that a flat tax would be his best proposal.

Here I have to agree with KAT.
Why would you be puzzled that Clinton has a different standard of
fairness from yours? I certainly would have predicted that he would!

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 14:09:39 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: more fun with carl

>Can't Jamie tell the difference between me and O'Andy?

I don't know.  Why would Dave ask in a response to me?

>>>>It has nothing to do with taxes.  It has something to do with campaign
>>>>eligibility, which EVERY congress critter does.  Bush is a resident of
>>>>Texas in the same sense that Gore is a resident of Tennessee, and for
>>>>exactly the same reasons.
>
>>>Wrong. While I would be the first to admit that Gore is the Insider's
>>>Insider, and would be the most eligable for senator should Washington
>>>get statehood, Gore, according to the Washington Post, owns something
>>>like 80 acres of Tennessee. Bush doesn't even own that much. His place
>>>is a hotel room that the State Democratic Party has parties in occasionally.
>
>>"Wrong." suggests that something relevant will follow, but property
>>ownership, or even relative property ownership isn't.
>
>My point is this: Every politician may do stuff like this. I know former
>DC Mayor Marion Barry is going for city council with a rented sh*thole
>apartment in a slum district. Thing is, if Albert Gore wanted to quit
>politics, he could go back to his 80 acres in Tennessee (Him and his wife
>are democrats - 80 acres and two mules?  B)  and live quite comfortably.
>George Bush would have to rent his residency by the night if he did the
>same thing. THAT is the difference I was wishing to point out.

So?  Some people do live in hotels.  The fact that the hotel is just a
ruse to maintain eligibility is irrelevant.  Rental housing counts,
even if it is by the night.

I think that my congress critter rents out his house/legal residence
and stays in a hotel when he visits; the alternative is that he sold
when elected and has a bush-like presence in the district.  I'm sure
he has real digs in DC.  His actions after he leaves offices, or even
his alternatives, which include abandoning said residence, don't
affect his legal residence.

>You say EVERY. Gore owns a decent place in small-town Tennessee. Looks like
>I blew your EVERY, doesn't it?

Not at all.  Eligibility/maintenance of legal residence isn't
determined by ownership, even if one owns property elsewhere.

>>I don't see it.  I see Bush as another rich guy whose job requires him
>>to live in a certain place.  In that circumstance, I might well reduce
>>my permanent residence, even if I'm returning, as far as possible
>>WHILE maintaining my vacation facilities.  After all, I'm changing the
>>former, but not the latter.  (I know people who behave like this.)
>
>The way I see it, you live where you are. From that POV, the whole thing
>looks downright crooked.

According to that standard, there may be 50 representatives from
outside DC.  The rest live there.  Unless you're willing to apply that
standard to them, why should Bush be held to it?

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: questions for tkidd
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 12:51:37 GMT

In article <POLITICS%92073020551529@OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU> Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET> writes:
>Jimbo the Most Moral:
>
>And those reasons are....what, exactly?
>
>                                       --Missy Prez 2 B

Well, this isn't an ethics list, so I don't think it would be
appropriate to launch into the full details.

I'm an ethical egoist.  I think that the first question which must
be answered in any attempt to define or defend an ethical system
is: Do I *need* an ethical system, and why?

The answers to that question give rise to answers to the question
'What ought I to do?'.

I suspect, actually, that your question was rhetorical.  My experience
with Christians in general tells me that they have a very difficult
time with the idea that a person could have good reasons for behaving
morally.

If your question was NOT rhetorical, and you really ARE interested in
my moral reasoning, just let me know.  I'm always prepared to launch
into a full explanation, or I could give you some advise on reading
material.

I would start you off on the Nicomachean ethics.  That's Aristotle,
you may have heard of him.

--Jimbo

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:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 10:33:13 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      well, i guess if elves can make cookies

...then dogs can make stepstools.  i think it's a little irresponsible to
force pets to work.  i know it's tough making ends meet these days, but...
look.  i believe that johnson&olson will work to enforce pet labor laws.
let's work together to make "work like a dog" an obsolete phrase!!!!

you say they will turn on me the first chance they get?  tsch.  tell me
somethin' i don't know.

anybody can be bought?  i resent the implication that i am just *anybody*.
i have been *leased*.  or, rather, *liesed*.  hmph.

nice to hear from you, too...but since i am on the tall side myself, i guess
i'm just acting in my own best interests.  i'd vote for you, ma'am, but
the needs of the gravitationally impaired seem to be addressed by having the
tall guys around...i.e., you can make them do stuff for you, thus increasing
your leisure time.
                                            * * *liese
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 13:18:35 EDT
From:         todd pukanecz <CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: more on SS#'s, Missy/MacPhil
              21 Jul 1992 09:15:59 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU>

>The only place I haven't had any luck when push came right down to shove is
>the local supermarket -- they require SSN's on checks and simply refuse to
>take the check if you won't include the SSN.
>
I have a friend (well, virtual friend on a local BBS) who had similar
problems.  His solution, after arguing unsuccessfully with the clerk, was
to include a *bogus* SSN on his check.  The clerk doesn't know if it is
his real SSN or not.  A cool trick is to put a different bogus SSN on
the checks each time you buy; they rarely check these things.

There was a discussion about SSNs, their use and abuse.  (I thought it
was on this list, but may have been on the local BBS.)  There is a
series of numbers that are recognized by Social Security as bogus but
are legal to use in such cases.  If memory serves, if the first three
digits are in the range 980 to 990, then they have not been assigned
by SocSec to anybody and are free to be used to befuddle your merchants.
(The first three digits of your SSN indicate the region of the country
where you were born.)
    toddddddddd
>Kerry

=========== Wake up John Doe.  You're the hope of the world! ===========
--------     /^^\    ---- Todd Pukanecz ----   ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
-----      /      >   --- Ag. Econ. DPL --- "I've learned from my mis-
---  /\_ / @       \   -- Virginia Tech --   takes; I'm certain I could
-  /________________>   - Blacksburg VA -    repeat them exactly!" - COOK
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 10:05:47 CDT
From:         Sue Clark <SACLARK@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: the upcoming war

Hello once again,

From what I have heard since the 'cease-fire' in February 1991, most of
the Arab nations, especially Saudi Arabia, are no more closer to being
friendly with Saddam than before the war, except maybe King Hussein of
Jordan but he has been quite since the 'cease-fire'.  Secretary of State
Baker may be the only one who really knows how King Hussein still feels
in regards to Saddam, and whether he would back Saddam again....maybe not.

Since the US is still under the 'orders' of the UN, it would not then be
considered 'an aggressive act' of the US, also considering the backing
of Great Britian and France or anyone else.  Saudi Arabia is still allowing
US warplanes on her land, that should tell the rest of the Arab nations that
she is not friendly to Saddam and is apparantly not going to be in the near
future, and with the Saudi Royal Air Force still flying with the US, that
certainly says it all.

After seeing the posting with the CNN poll where 60-70% of Americans are want-
ing to put an end to this business, i.e. Saddam out, and the UN becoming im-
patient with Saddam, I do see the fur to fly soon.  And why wouldn't this be
a plus for Bush, when the coalition could have been in Bagdad in February 1991,
the UN said, no.  Bush let the UN run the show and have Saddam plenty of time
to conform to their conditions of the 'cease-fire', but I hope the UN is run-
ning out patience, I know everyone else is also.

No, it can't be 'American aggression' if it is UN sponsored.  It is only in
Saddam's mind.

Sue Clark

'That's the trouble when your commanding officer starts acting like an ally
instead of an American.'  - General George S. Patton when Eisenhower rejected
his plan to invade Palermo for General Reginald Montgomry's.
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:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 20:15:00 EDT
From:         "push the button, frank!" <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: CD's and Government Interference

Phantom Abbie opines:

>We absolutely oppose government interference in your personal life! CD's
>should be accessible to everyone, more relevent is that CD player's ought
>also to be more inexpensive! Vote DuncaN/HoffmaN! Abbie

I'd settle for a CD player that doesn't suddenly and without warning go
totally dead right in the middle of playing a disc.  No electricity surges,
no lightning storms, no bumps, no warning, no nuthin' - it just went
totally lifeless.  With my 'Ride' CD still inside...!

Needless to say, a vote for the JohnsoN/OlsoN ticket will bring an end to
this highly unwarranted electronic malfeasance.  And on behalf of this
ticket, we wish Mr. Hoffman well on his return to the afterlife, and hope
he will be reincarnated sometime.

Gary W. Olson, rediscovering  "Turn the tables with our unity,    -L7,
  his cassette collection      they're not a moral nor majority.  "Pretend
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU   Wake up and smell the coffee,       We're
                               or just say no to individualty."    Dead"
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 08:49:30 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject: Re: hilary or carl? tough choice!

Missy J:
>I would like to know on what grounds anyone maintains that social
>work professionals or psychiatrists or lawyers would make better
>decisions than parents.  Given the abnormally high rate of dysfunction,
>mental illness, and abusive behavior within the last 2 professions,
>and the unarguable overburdening of the first, I doubt that such
>a conclusion is valid.

Well, parents can be dysfunctional, too.  I got to thinking about parents'
choices for their kids, and concluded it'd be really difficult to evaluate
them "objectively" unless they involved real, measurable emotional and/or
physical abuse.  The reason (again) why I think we should explore new ways
of protecting kids is because we don't seem to be doing a very good job at
the moment.  Let me pose a couple of hypothetical (but, I think, realistic)
scenarios, and see what y'all think:

Given kind, loving, supportive, parents:  are the parents always right in
the following:  (1) Pregnant 13-year-old is "forced" to have an abortion
against her will; (2) Pregnant 13-year-old is "forced" to carry the child
and give it up for adoption against her will; (3) Child is "forced" against
his/her will to get braces for cosmetic reasons; (4) Child is prevented
from getting a nose job for cosmetic reasons.

I pose these examples in hopes that they'll stimulate some discussion
that'll help me clarify my own thinking.

Thanks!
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:57:20 CST
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Sean Mills <ST4226@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU>
Subject:      Another Gulf War?

FROM: Sean Mills

If Iraq doesn't back down to U.N. demands, will Bush take the country to war
again? If he does, how will that affect his re-election efforts?

On another note, what does everyone think about this new strand of AIDS that
has supposably been discovered? From what I understand, its victims have all
of the AIDS symptoms, yet test negative to the HIV virus.

                                       -Sean
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:04:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: This place is infested!

>Yeah, but if it is proven that "god" does not exists,
>just think of how the climate of this list will change!

proof or disproof of anything has never been proved to chg. anyone's beliefs
abt. anything.

>just think of all the new arguments!! We could debate
>currency, morals, laws, you name it! just think of the fun!

um, just think of all the if a then b stuff that will start overloading the
mail....dead cats, drooling dogs, i mean....i'm still not convinced there's
really an alphabet....

>i'm getting sweaty just thinking about it.

well, i guess it does have its perks....

>And, if "god" does exists, i wanna know what kind of shoes
>he/she wears, dammit!

hopefully not those berkshire whatever giant clumpy things....i just couldn't
continue to live in a world ruled by someone with no sense of style....

>jenna cole steele (who may just join the J ticket if they'll have me)

-linda (brni just taught me how to do the reply/extract thing so i don't have
to retype everything you guys already typed. ignore my post-it was practice-
this is so neat! thanks brni)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU