HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jse2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JASON STEVEN EUCULANO)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: "President Clinton"
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:22:01 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov6.050228.85543@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu>, sme3@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (SC
OTT MATTHEW ESTRIN) writes:
>>>>Listen DICK, You talk about grammar and spelling, don't you know that proper
>>>nouns (for example your dumb liberal ass name).  So shut up.
>>>
>>>THAT was entirely inappropriate, Jayce, and illustrates your total intoleranc
e
>>>and immaturity.  This list is not for flaming -- it's for the exchange of
>>>ideas.
>>>
>> THANK YOU FOR TELLING JAYCE HOW HE MAY EXPRESS HIS OPINION, DADDY
>>
>WHAT somebody says is perfectly legitimate.  HOW it is said is not.  There are
>standards in this country of what is morally acceptable and what isn't.  Maybe
>you think, since the country elected Clinton (who doesn't exactly have a
>clean record for morality), that morality no longer exists, and that "Anything
>Goes".
>
>I know that I'm not in charge of this message system, but there are some
>things which are generally considered inappropriate to say in public.  And the
>message which originated this whole thing is generally considered
>inappropriate to say in public.
>
>Obligatory Political Statement: Now thathere's going to be a president that
>agrees with Congress, and vice versa, maybe we'll get something done in this
>country.  We won't have this Republican-Democratic gridlock ("gridlock"... you
>like that word, don't you Stockdale?)
>
>                -- Scott
>
>
>
I want to get this entire mess straightened out right about now.  I wrote to
"james" to tell him that someone's grammar, spelling, or typing skills should
not be poked fun of.  Now james wanted to ridicule someone (I forget who) and
I wanted to point out that he doesn't even capitalize his name.  Period.  I
think that such criticism of my responce should only come from those who
understood from the beginning what was going on.  If you don't know what
you're saying, don't say anythng at all.
                                        Jayce

                                        
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  JNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:00:00 CST
From:         POHENRY@STMARYTX.BITNET
Subject:      my life with the thrill kill cult

How about the Spanish Inquisition and/or the decimation of the indigenous
American people in the name of the propagation or protection of the
catholic faith.
From: sbc3@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (SHAWN BRENDON CREWS)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Calooh! Callay!
Date: 6 Nov 92 01:06:20 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <01GQR3J5Z8WI000KA3@RHODES.BITNET>, FOXML@RHODES.BITNET (MARTIN FOX)
writes:
>
>  Forgive my chortling, but:
>
>We've got Democrats in the White House.
>We've got Democrats in the Congress.
>We'll take care of the Supreme Court later.

Hopefuly, someone will "take care" of Clinton and Gore soon.
(i.e. the Mafia or the CIA)

>  Wow.  It seems the nation hit itself in the collective forehead
>today, saying "What the Hell were we doing 12 years ago?".

In four years, the nation will hit itself in the collective forehead, but this
time, they will be saying, "What did we inhale on November 3, 1992 when we
stupidly voted for Slick Willie and Mr. Treehugger?"

>I'm not sure we Democrats will know what to do now that we haven't
>lost the election.  Congratulations to Clinton/Gore and their campaign.
>  I'll agree that Bush's concession speech was prob. the best thing he's
>done during this campaign.  During Quayle's concession speech, though,
>someone yelled "Quayle, You suck!", which I found quite amusing.

If you thought that Quayle "sucked", wait until Clinton and Gore start
fucking up big time.  They should start about, oh, January 21.

>  All this *and* we took Arizona.  I'm amazed.
>  I'm also a bit ecstatic.  I'm
>sure you can tell.
>-Martin
REMEMBER:  KEMP/BAKER IN 1996
           KEMP/BAKER IN 2000
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman)
Subject: Re: gays in military (Canada)
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:18:15 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalno.fnal.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

> Speaking of gays (and lesbians) in the military:  I thought I heard
> something somewhere about Clinton ending the ban on homosexuals in the
> military through executive order.  Is that how it works?  Or does it
> require legislation?

In this instance, simply put, President Elect (God, I like the sound of that)
will become Commander in Chief of the US Armed forces this January.  This lets
him give orders like "Don't discriminate against Gays" to the military.

-- 
Daniel B. Holzman                    | Eight Words the Witch's Rede Fufill:
HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET                  | An It Harm None, Do What You Will
HOLZMAN@FNALC.FNAL.GOV.INTERNET      |
                                     | All Acts of Love and Pleasure are
Love doesn't subtract,               | Her Rituals
   it multiplies    - Heinlein       |
                                     | Speak the Word.
Disclaimer:  Fermilab's far too large to have an opinion, let alone mine.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 4 Nov 1992 14:07:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      NHP

This is a short message to anyone supporting Single-Payer, Universal Health
Care for America:

        E-mail me directly PRONTO!  Citizen Action is coordinating a major,
nationwide campaign to take advantage of the first favorable WH/CONGRESS in
12 years.  Postcards, media blitzes, speakers tours.  We'll prove the breadth
and depth of support for a National Health Program!

        If you are interested in any way, shape or form, contact me directly
ASAP  (by the way NO MONEY is involved - education, speaking your mind, etc. -
kinda like this list).

DEMAND THAT HEALTH CARE BE A RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE!!!

End of message.

-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 01:47:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Calooh! Callay!

Bennett '96???!?!?



How about Bennett/Buchanan '96?  That way we can destroy education AND
culture at the same time!!!


-T.


"Compassion knows no ideology."

                                -Anthony DeMello, _Taking Flight_
From: DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU (The Integral Differential)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Politics and Celebrities
Date: 6 Nov 92 01:56:11 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.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
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>	Really?  Isn't Eastwood the mayor of a town in California also?
>Or is that one of the other movie stars that I always get mixed up?
>Perhaps the party should contact Eastwood about doing some promotional
>appearances...
>						Robert Head

	Yes, Eastwood is Mayor of whatever small beachfront town he lives in.
I don't think you'll see him doing promos though.  He's always been very
private.

	Speaking of L/libertarians, I was pretty disappointed in this year's
showing.  The Marrou campaign had many of the same problems that the Bush
campaign suffered from.  Poor organization, late start, lack of agenda (at
least perceived).... Plus some that the other's didn't have: friction within
the ticket, following the debates around like puppies, generally acting like a
small party.

	I'll save the general rants for Libernet. :)  Suffice it to say that
unless/until the LP starts growing local organizations in all 50 states, 1980
will remain an abberation.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma"
X-VMS-Cc: E7L8RAF
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:05:57 -0500
From:         Steve Rafferty <E7L8RAF@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Flag burnin'

T.  muses in his tongue in cheek unpublished editorial:

>     You know what else? Men and women have died for this
>national symbol.  And it's not just another symbol representing
>the U.S.  It is an entity to itself.  During wars (and even in
>peacetime, some places) you couldn't even get one - demand was
>high and supply of raw material low.  They really *were* fighting
>and dying so back home their relatives and neighbors could have
>their own.  And we don't need fools who don't know what they're
>doing burning one after all those folks who gave their lives.

I will respond to this as though T. was being serious - about the
flag that is, I think anyone who burns a pie, should be shot, after
they recover from the beating.  ;-)

To those who feel that burning the flag is disgraceful.  It is precisely
because those veterans have given what they have given that some
feel compelled to burn the symbol of their countries ideals.  *Thinking*
people (excluding idiots who just wanna be on the news or some such)
might burn the flag because they feel the government is disgracing
the ideals this country supposedly stands for - and in turn disgracing
those who have given much to preserve the nation and its ideals.
For example, if the government of the US formed a mercenary army to
destabilize and attempt to overthrow the democratically elected
government of say some latin american nation - some might feel that
the government was disgracing those who have suffered and died to
achieve the power that the US was then abusing. Burning the flag
in that instance could be seen as a patriotic gesture.
Follow?  Didn't think so.


>>Jayce says that "they are 'opposite' us" reffering to the former Soviet
>>Union and right vs. left wing.

>Simply put, that is an extreme oversimplification.  I posted something

Gosh, Jayce, <snicker>  Julie must not know who Tom Clancy is huh?

>P.S.  Anyone watch the movie "Red Dawn?"  Tell me it didn't make you think at
>least a little bit...........

Well, it's clear it made you think. A little.

Steve R.

Vote Y's Guys December 1992
1-800-4NO-GOVT
From: sbc3@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (SHAWN BRENDON CREWS)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: America Has Spoken
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:47:48 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <01GQSRLT8DDE8WW08H@INET.D48.LILLY.COM>, SLOFFER_CHRIS_A@LILLY.COM (C
hris A. Sloffer) writes:
>>"if your not a part of the solution, your part of the problem". . . Aside from
>>the grammatical errors, this is a rash generalization. I, myself, am NOT a par
t
>> of the
>>of the solution but this does not include me what causes the problem. In
>>addition, Clinton will not "rule" MY life but he will have a strong bearing
>>upon it -- to much so!
>>--Steve
>
>
>I don't want to get into your argument, but it seems to me that if I were
>going to criticize the grammar of others, I'd be damn sure that I didn't
>have an error of my own in that very paragraph.  :-)
>
>Chris
>
IF YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GET INTO THE ARGUMENT, WHY DID YOU POST A FOLLOW-UP?
"I AGREED WITH THE MINORITY, BUT I GUESS I WOULD HAVE VOTED WITH THE MAJORITY."
WHY BILL CLINTON DODGED THE DRAFT:
   HE WAS AGAINST THE WHORE...OPPS, I MEAN WAR.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:18:08 -0400
From:         MIKE <8612775@SSCVAX.CIS.MCMASTER.CA>
Subject:      Re: Calooh! Callay!

>Pat Buchanan-- He'll do for America what he did for George Bush

Bill Clinton--  He'll do for America what he did for Arkansas.

--mike...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%OHSTVMA.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:22:00 EST
From:         Song Weaver <JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: World View of America
Comments: To: POLITICS%OHSTVMA.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU

Brett':

South Africa is not Iraq or Cuba and comparing it to them is spurious
at best.  Maybe if economic sanctions are ineffective, you can explain
to me why it is illegal in South Africa to advocate divestment. By
South African law, it is illegal to make any statement advocating
divestment.  Bush Tutu has been made a permanent exile from South
Africa because of this law (Lousy editor-- that should have been
"Bishop Tutu" hmm... :-)), as have many other individuals.  So tell
me why the South African government would spend its time and energy
jailing and arresting people who advocate divestment if it has no
real impact.

--Julie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.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, 10 Nov 1992 08:56:14 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: transition -- the lighter side
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>Does anyone else remember how Nancy Reagan wanted to Carters to move out
>early so she could "redecorate?"

	No.

Brett'
From: ST402711@BROWNVM.BITNET (Tim Johnson)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: history staff, other stuff, val.
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:43:17 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Response to our History Czar:

My Vice President took time to call in from his celebration
cruise aboard the "Monkey Business" (where he is, I understand,
holding auditions for his own vice-squad) to remark:

>Unless any of them want higher cabinet positions (I was thinking
>Val might make a great virtual secretary of state, fer'instance),

  I can only add that unless Val does want a better position
(being king, god, stockdale of his own little society on Val-l-nam
does place demands on his time) the staff choices seem fine by
me.  I'll remind our History Czar that being Czar entitles you
to pretty substantial autonomy.  (Although I do wish you would
refer to the 1860's invasion by one of the names other than
C.W. ;-)

  Oh, and for Jimbo"the false Dmitry"Wales; we are rolling a
cannon up to the top of college hill for you.  (An obscure
reference for Val.)


                     -Tim"the choice of a new generation"J
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <BRIDEC92@IRLEARN.UCD.IE>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:14:03 GMT
From:         james p mcbride <BRIDEC92@IRLEARN.UCD.IE>
Subject:      RE: A simple Joke
              6 Nov 1992 01:26:46 GMT from <sbc3@NS1.CC.LEHIGH.EDU>

On Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:26:46 GMT SHAWN BRENDON CREWS said:
>
>In article <POLITICS%92110418352893@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>,
>CLARK@EVMSVMS.B
>ITNET writes:
>>A more complex joke:
>>
>>OCTOBER SURPRISE        IRAN-CONTRA     IRAQGATE
>>
>>Thankfully though, this joke is OVER.
>>
>BUT, A BIGGER ONE WILL BEGIN ON JANUARY 21.
>
>HOPEFULLY, SOMEONE IN THE MAFIA OR THE CIA WILL
>
>END THIS JOKE BEFORE IT CAUSES TOO MUCH HARM.

Good grief, there is humour and there is being downright pathetically bloody
minded.  I ask again, give the man a chance to take office before you look
for his head (metaphorically, of course).  This kind of of moronic talk, be it
in jest or not, only takes one lunatic to turn it into tragic reality.
If you must get rid of all this aggression, do it to a punchbag or something,
but please, end this thread of looking for someone to kill the president-elect.


james
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, 10 Nov 1992 11:30:00 EST
From:         PSICILIA@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Catholic tradition
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

Andrew:

        I did not intend to imply that the Church does not reform at
times, but it is extremely difficult.  You know we are allowed to eat
meat on Friday now, and not fish.

        But, there are some issues that the church may never change
on, and one of them is homosexual rights (another being abortion).  I
believe any efforts to reform the church on those issues would be
futile.  About tradition, the Church does have certain traditions that
date back to 300 A.D. (B.C. is one of the political correctness
crowd's really pathetic changes), and that the Church should not
sacrifice tradition, because some people do not agree with them.  Most
dissenters, by the way, are not Catholic (althoug some are) and have
no intentions of being Catholic.

-Paul
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%OHSTVMA.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:25:00 EST
From:         Song Weaver <JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: transition -- the lighter side
Comments: To: POLITICS%OHSTVMA.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU

There are probably lots of supporters who would love to have the
Clintons as House Guests.  If _I_ had room, I'd invite them to stay
with me for a few weeks.

Does anyone else remember how Nancy Reagan wanted to Carters to move out
early so she could "redecorate?"

;-)

--Julie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.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, 10 Nov 1992 17:03:43 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: morons, imbeciles, idiots, and the stanford-binet memorial cup
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>anneliese's top ten confirmations that she is a few bricks short the load
>10.  acquired fake i.d. in order to vote in 1980

	Wish I'd thought of that. :)

	Of course, it's pretty easy to get a cat registered here in Ohio.

Brett'
From: PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET (Jamie)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Justice
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:29:19 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

>From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>

>> Who is J. Kilpatrick? Just wondering.
>
>He is a newspaper columnist, somewhat on the conservative side.

Oh. Does he have any qualifications for the Court??

>In an answer to the question of who would be appropriate for
>the Supreme Court, Clinton, I believe appearing on MTV, said
>that he thinks Cuomo would make an excellent Supreme Court
>justice.

That's very odd. What exactly are Cuomo's qualifications supposed
to be? I hope Clinton's advisors will come up with someone better.
(Clinton used to be a law professor! He should have better sense.)

>You mean not even an age limit?  I am pretty sure U.S. citizenship
>is a requirement, though.

Not as far as I know. There are specific requirements of natural
citizenship for the president, and age limits for senators and
the president, in the Constitution. But no such requirements
for judges of any kind.

Jamie
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:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:38:00 EST
From:         PSICILIA@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Pat Buchannan
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

X-News: drew bit.listserv.politics:30363

>From: Song Weaver <JULIE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
>Subject:Pat Buchannan
>Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 10:38:00 EST
>Message-ID:<tfilt378847@drew.edu>

>I actually met up with some Buchannan supporters when I was in Manchester
>with ACT-UP/RI (AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power, Rhode Island Chapter)
>for a rally.  I had my "Silence=Death" T-Shirt, which is basically a
>black shirt with a pink triangle on it, for those of you who haven't
>seen the logo.  There was a group of them outside our bus when we pulled
>up and I had to run back to the bus to drop something off and one of
>them spotted my t-shirt.  He referred to me as an "AIDS Candidate" and
>compared me to Jeffrey Dahmer.  I guess that some ACt-Up members from
>other states actually were outside the Buchannan Headquarters and things
>got really ugly-- no violence (I dunno what would have happened wihtout
>the police being there though) but some very confrontational happenings.
>
>I found the homophobic attitudes of Buchannan's people enlightening
>however.  He seems to rely on hate as a primary motivational force and
>not much else.  I'm saddened to see people with attitudes like his
>because it's so shallow and foolish and does us all more harm than
>good.  I wish people would just grow up and stop looking for scapegoats.
>
        During the primary season, I was a proud supported or Pat
Buchanan, and I am not a homophobe.  Buchanan does not rely on hate.
You must stop listening to everything you hear on the news.  Just
because Dan Rather says somethinh, it does not mean that it is
correct.  For years, I had watched Buchanan on Crossfire, the Capital
Gang, and the McLaughlin Group, and Buchanan's views on several issues
are mainstream conservative beliefs that the majority of the
population agree with.

        Secondly, I would never defend ACT-up.  As a Catholic who is
proud of his religion, the acts of ACT-up are dispicable, and I surely
doubt that ACT-up was behaving peacefully in front of Buchanan's
headquarters.  When ACT-up started throwing condoms around during
Catholic services and burn pictures of the pope and insult the
Catholic Church, I become sick.  ACT-up wants the American people to
accept them, but are unwilling to accept Catholic Doctrines.  No one
is forcing them into the church.  ACT-up is famous for scapegoating.
Ask them who is responsible for AIDS, and they will tell you Ronald
Reagan, but never take responsability for their own behavior.>

        As a said before, I do not consider myself a homophobe, but
over 50% of the American population do not approve of homosexuality
(that's a fact, in which I am in the minority).  So, I guess more than
half this country is shallow and foolish, quite a shock!

-Paul
 The Conservative Voice of Truth
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:04:44 -0500
From:         ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET
Subject:      Re: right v left

Kerry:

>I'd be interested in your comparison of hard-core communist and our "left".

Sure.  The way I was taught, the left-right spectrum runs like this:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|           |            |          |                              |
Communism  Socialism   Democrats  Republicans                    Nazism

Using this traditional spectrum, the hard core communists wind up on the far
left.  Of course, that is not to imply that all those who are left of center
are communists!

Really, I see no difference at all between Nazism and communism (both result in
totalitarianism) which is why I prefer wrapping the spectrum around.  In this
case, communism and Nazism would both be far-left while the right would be the
domain of libertarians (they don't fit very well into the traditional spectrum
above -- I sure wouldn't call it a "centrist" ideology).

Hope this helped.  As for international comparisons, you'd better stick with
Julie -- I don't know that much about international politics.

Jason
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU