HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 13:34:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Gays and lesbians in the military

>take it for granted that most male heterosexuals are attracted
>to the body of most females.  Combine this with days and sometimes

kat,
are you saying that you are attracted to every female you see? god, that
must be incredibly distracting.
i am a heterosexual female, but i am certainly not attracted to every male
i encounter, and even when faced with years of celibacy (in the past thanks for
small (teehee) favors), i was still attracted only to certain individuals.
now, unless females are totally different from males this way (which i doubt),
why would you think homosexuals are attracted to all those of the same sex?
who...er, i mean, what gives?
-linda
tentative list mother
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 23:03:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Pregnant women in the military

Joe:

        That figure showed Navy women who *became* pregnant while at sea.  I
never said anything about the pregnancy being the issue - the fact that they
*get* pregnant while at sea is the concern.  I doubt that each of these women
are serving alongside their husbands while on sea duty.  Sexual activity of
any kind (except, probably, solo) is prohibited aboard Naval vessels.
So, if women are getting pregnant, they're either doing it in-vitro by mail
or they're having sex.  I think I'll try to find out how many of those
pregnancies were the result of forcible sexual encounters.

-T.
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:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 12:24:29 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Wages and productivity

From: CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET

>Jason Briggs Cormier writes:
>>
>>
>>(stuff deleted)
>>(this is to Steve)
>>I think your position totally sucks,............................
>>
>>
>
>
>Glad to see the recent admonitions about improving post quality have been
>heeded.
>
>
>-T.


First of all, you are taking my words out of context.  Tsk, tsk, tsk.
Maybe you didn't read the entire post to see what I was saying, but
that isn't my fault that some people's eyes only see *sensational*
vocabulary when reading from this list.

Second, is there something totally wrong with my choice of words?  That is
exactly what I meant to say.  There was no other way of expressing it because
that is exactly what I wanted to say.

What would you have preferred I write to express my extreme sympathy with
the circumstances about which I was speaking?

j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:22:52 EST
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Reagan and Facts

In article <POLITICS%92111801385603@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>, Loren Ryter
<ST701831@BROWNVM.BITNET> says:
>
>>
>>Hmm, didn't Herr Goebbels have something to say about this concept?
>>
>Actually, this is Hitler's big lie theory:
>
>Says Der Fuhrer:
>"The great masses of people...will more easily fall victims to a
>big lie than to a small one."  --Mein Kampf
>
>A general truism which applies from mundane medium lies like
>characters smears to massive big lies like trickle down
>economics.
>--Loren

I think Goebbels also said something about lies repeated often enough and
loudly enough becoming truths.
--andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 09:50:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Uncl: Re: Uncl: two quick points

-T finds out:

>After Robert's last post, I'm beginning to see that the Pro-Life movement
>believes that life actually begins when you *agree with them*.

yes, i've noticed that you are to be protected at all costs before you are
born, but once that's done, your life is expendable.

go figure.

-linda

>(apologies to Dennis Miller)

>-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 12:37:33 -0800
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: RE: Ever hear of a Compass?

>No sorry. That excuse has been tried and it don't cut it.
>Rich, if he was confident of his spelling abilities, he would have ignored
>the card.

Interestingly enough, "potato" and "potatoe" are both correct.  Quayle
did make a mistake in this incident, but not the one commonly
attributed to him.

>The fact is Quayle needed cards.

In public, everyone uses cards.  That's as true of Clinton/Gore as it
is of Quayle.  (Interestingly enough, CA just elected a Senator,
Feinstein, who cheated in a debate during the last election cycle by
using notes scribbed on her hand when the rules specifically
prohibitted such aid.  She lost that election, for governor, to
Wilson.)

>His ability to question anything that is given to him does not exist.

And now we know what Jonathan considers good evidence.  Maybe someone
will publically apply those standards to Jonathan's oxen.  Others will
do so privately.  Others will just go with "he's just another partisan
whiner, and not a particularly interesting one at that."

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
From: STK1236@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Reagan dodged the draft!
Date: 18 Nov 92 19:58:58 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

There were many people against Vietnam that did not protest against it.  Also,
Clinton's dodging was a "slick" whereas Quayle simply used family influence.
-Rich
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, 20 Nov 1992 09:18:00 EST
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Words
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

In article <tfilt395065@drew.edu>, Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU> writes:
>>His anti-gay bias shows a hint of facism, yes.
>
> Hmm.  Is that because bias is fascist or is there something different
> about anti-gay bias?  (I not that our favorite example of Fascists
> were both pro and anti-gay.)
>
> It is nice to see more and more support for my "fascist" = "something
> a liberal doesn't like" theory.  I have run into people who use it
> "correctly" - they rarely use it.
>
> -andy

Fascism: "a system of gov't lead by a dictator and emphasizing
excessive nationalism and racism"  Fascist: a person who believes in
fascism.  I think homosexuality would be something a fascist would be
against for homosexuals are a type of people, a kind of racism is to
be against them.  Of course the fascist is against the race of
"others" so there can be a homosexual fascist though I doubt there are
that many.  Fascist is a wider way is a dictatoral person, some one
who would take away rights for the better order or nationalism. A
person who will ban guns can be called a fascist, I guess.

However Fascists are more inclinced to have more conservative agendas.
They would not like much rights of criminals -- better order.  They
wouldn't like free speech to be supreme (vs. hate speech may be
fascism as Nat Hentoff says, but conservatives are apt to be vs. hate
speech plus much more).  They wouldn't support disrespect for the
gov't, much dissent, or burning the flag.  They wouldn't like reducing
military spending (nationalism) for more social concerns.  Overall
they would want less freedom not for equality (groups different from
the main group aren't equal to fascists) but for order.  Thus, a
Fascist is a someone a liberal doesn't like.  For a liberal to like a
fascist would be problematic unless the fascist is only a semi-fascist
in ways liberals like.  Libertarians aren't fascists nor is many
liberals call fascists, but the error in their ways is understandable.

    -Joe, who won't be hear to read any displeasure about this post
From: FOXML@RHODES.BITNET (MARTIN FOX)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Perot's influence on the election
Date: 18 Nov 92 19:04:54 GMT
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


 Hello again.  After that little respite I had after Jayce et al
had their temper tantrums,  I've decided to stick my head up from my
shell and mail something in.  This may have already been disscussed, but:

How did Perot affect the electoral votes in the election?  Did he make any
difference in any states?  Consider who Perot voters would have voted for
had he not run, and also whether Electoral votes would have changed.  Any
thoughts, anyone?

-Martin
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:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 04:55:09 -0500
From:         Coed Naked Trivial Pursuit is the Game For All Ages!
              <STUSTITH@EKU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: questions for Brett' et al.:

   I have been silent for a while, I think i shall speak now!


    Economics by their nature should be intertwined with government.
 Economics deals with resources and production and industry. Government
establishes rules and regulations of order. Now, in our society and our
modern world, we as ongoing civilizations continue to search for the ideal
 niche in which we can govern the numbers of people in our own country
and on earth for that matter. We have various political theories and various
economic theories from people whom we have considered some of the greatest
minds of all time. But, in every government, when it has reached a certain
size and a certain level of power, it begins to decline. Now... today
many can not see who the next major power nations will be aside from some of
the old nations such as Germany and Japan. Now, in an never ending effort to
find the ideal government, new ideas are tried and toyed with. This is the
current mixture of economics and government. Now...this may not have been
intentional, but it can be studied and the strong and bad points can be
identified. The U.S. has always been a first-world nation..we started out
that way, a land led by great thinkers and glorious heros. We truly
were an experiment though.... perhaps the first government in the history
of our planet, completely and logically reasoned out before hand. As we
progress in our evolution of government, new ideas must be thought and old
ideas reconsidered. I myself agree with much of what our forefathers said in
their documents and their writings, but they were not infallible.... the
ideas and practices and theories must be rethought completely when trying to
apply them to our world today. So please, when you do all the re-evaluation
and such, consider this.... Thomas Jefferson said we needed
a revolution every 20 years or so.. do we not owe it to him to do it...
do we not owe it to ourselves, if for nothing else than to rethink our opinions
on our lives in the world. Economics and Government are necessary together
to provide for our current future together!



                        John Stith (Freud)
                Bitnet:         STUSTITH@EKU
                Internet:       Coming Soon (hopefully)
                                STUSTITH@eku.acs.eku.edu


     "Life is much to funny to take seriously!" or " We Apologize for the
      Inconvenience" or "a sketch about idiots! Called the Idiot's
      Sketch"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 12:16:00 EST
From:         "Carl A. Lahetta" <U952020@RUTADMIN.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Flag Burning

> Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:49:33 EST
> From:         andy <2893684@QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA>
> Subject:      Re: Flag Burning
>
> >| Our flag is not just a
> >|"piece of cloth," it is indeed a symbol of our country, one of if not the
> >most
> >|powerful of symbols.  What exactly do you find wrong about pledging
> >allegience to a "piece of cloth"
>
> Would it not make more sense to pledge allegience to the country or its
> Constitution? The US is the only nation on earth whose citizens pledge
> allegience to a flag.

    You forgot part of the pledge, "and to the nation for which it stands."
The reason why we do not pledge allegiance to our "country" is because the
word "country" refers to the geographical aspects of a "nation."  When
pledging allegience to our "nation" we are pledging allegience to the people.


Carl---+
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: STK1236@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Draft Dodging Illegal?
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:28:05 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

Dan Quayle along with many other men avoided the Vietnam draft.  Vietnam
was a horrendously gruesome war.  A war that the U.S. was not going to win.
Anyone who avoided Vietnam was not scared, but smart.   Clinton's reasons
for avoiding  the war were the same as everyone else's.  Most people un-
fortunately did not have a way of avoiding the draft.  Clinton had taken
a draft physical.  I believe he received a draft notice before he went
to school in England.  So don't tell me Clinton's avoidance of the draft
was for a different reason than Quayle's.

-Rich
From: CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: RE: Gays in the military
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:54:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

Joe:

        The last figure my wife has for Navy pregnancy was that 16% of all
women in the Navy *at sea* became pregnant there.  (I think that's for 1991).
I'd agree that's no majority, but it is significant enough to warrant a
solution - especially when you realize that the boats women *can* serve on
have a high proportion of women aboard (since the billets are limited, you
see a kind of bunching together).  If women were spread out aboard many
ships, the resulting shift in male/female proportion *may* increase the
problem.

-T.
From: jfisher@NETXWEST.COM (Jonathan Fisher)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Words
Date: 18 Nov 92 18:31:54 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> Johnathan:  Homosexaulity is a hint of facism in Herschenson?
  Jonathan
>
> I'm confused.
>
> --Julie
>

His anti-gay bias shows a hint of facism, yes.

Jonathan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:10:58 CST
From:         fred <CCHILDER@UNMCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: another victim

Sue:

Sorry to hear about your mother. I think her anger is probably directed
more toward the helplessness of her situation than at the suicide doctor
in particular. The guidelines for use of the machine are quite specific:

1) The person must have an incurable disease

2) Person not responding to pain medication

Personally, I would rather die than bankrupt my family.

fred
From: ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: the wages of sin
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:16:38 GMT
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

>From: Steve Rafferty <E7L8RAF@TOWSONVX.BITNET>

>Baltimore _Sun_ reports this morning that "low wages" are the
>equivalent of stealing in the eyes of the Catholic Church, who
>have produced a revised catechism (first revision in 400 years).

Hmmmmm.  I wonder how much your average priest is pulling in these days.  Maybe
the Pope decided it was time for a raise...

Just another example of the Catholics treading where they ought not to tread.

>Steve R.

JasonZ
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:54:36 -0500
From:         STK1236@VAX003.STOCKTON.EDU
Subject:      Re: Ever hear of a Compass?
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

Julie:

Would you care to give some examples of Quayle's incompetence.  I think the
recent campaign proved Quayle to be a very capable politician.

I agree that Gore's getting lost in the woods is not relevant to his abilities
as president.  How is the spelling of potatoe relevant?

-Rich
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, 17 Nov 1992 10:05:00 EST
From:         JCOCURUL@DREW.BITNET
Subject:      Gays in the military
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

    First of all, the comparision used by Jason about how men and
women together leads to increased preganancy is a bad one.  Of the
many cases on a particular ship (the one often used to show the danger
of pregancy) nearly all were either on liberty or came on after being
preganant.  For the small remaining number (if there was or how big it
was is somewhat hard to judge, besides me not having the figures),
this is a problem to conquer -- not including women in combat or
service doesn't seem to be the answer, at least it seems a rather
drastic thing to do.  Especially, since the support staff is nearly as
important as the combat groups, and keeping women out of those areas
is a drastic step.

Major Rhonda Cornum, a POW in the Gulf War, noted in her book about
the experience that modesty was not a high value in her book, doing
her job was.  Several times she was not completely covered, but her
authority and the group's effiency didn't falter.

The big problem in the gay in the military issue is showers, and fear
that conduct will come to play that will be a problem.  The guy on
David Brinkley states such fears quite graphically.  ? Will the ban
bring forth a mass of gay servicemen and women who will come out or
flaunt themselves even with the dangers involved?  Like being a women
seems to be dangerous in the service these days, especially with the
possibility of people in your ranks are attracted to you.  Anyone who
flaunts their preferance and becomes a problem, besides being dumb,
should be asked to leave.  And I think the gym reference is a good
one.  Apparantly there is a de facto ban of gays in high school and
college gym and sports (and sports in general) for people shower
together there.  It seems people think homosexuals are pretty dumb, if
they think their behavior will be so that it will cause problems.
Such people who would don't belong in the army, as much as those who
say are women in the service and cause problems because of their
sexuality.

I think one of Clinton's commissions are in order, as is a countrywide
move to teach people about homosexuality.  NYC plans to have such for
students, and a presidental order (I think it's a fair comparison)
now will be like the one for blacks by Truman: the first tiny step to
solve a big problem of prejudice and misunderstanding.

   -Joe
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 02:14:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Wages and productivity

Jason Briggs Cormier writes:
>
>
>(stuff deleted)
>(this is to Steve)
>I think your position totally sucks,............................
>
>


Glad to see the recent admonitions about improving post quality have been
heeded.


-T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:16:00 EDT
From:         CLARK@EVMSVMS.BITNET
Subject:      RE: Influence and the presidency

Jamie:

        I agree about people's objection to Hillary Clinton's advice - where
is the problem?  However, your argument contains an error.

        In our federal republic, the great masses cannot vote on each and
every issue that comes our way; hence, representation.  You noted that
"nobody elects cabinet members".  Actually, they do - indirectly.  The Senate
must confirm each appointment the president makes to his cabinet.  The famous
"advise and consent" is the representational government's form of allowing
the "people" to even have a say in who officially advises the president.
        Who knows?  Maybe that's why some have a problem with Hillary - maybe
they want her subject to advise & consent!  They probably aren't aware of
just how many "advisors" a president actually has.

-T.
From: E7L8RAF@TOWSONVX.BITNET (Steve Rafferty)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Wages of sin
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:12:28 GMT
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

Brett' asks why should we pay someone $17 / hour when someone else
will do the work for $7 / hour.

O'andy smirks:  Ethics?  B)

New reason:  Because it is a SIN.

Baltimore _Sun_ reports this morning that "low wages" are the
equivalent of stealing in the eyes of the Catholic Church, who
have produced a revised catechism (first revision in 400 years).

Steve "recovering Catholic" R.

The state of Maryland's a sinner, the state of Maryland's a sinner!"
From: jfisher@NETXWEST.COM (Jonathan Fisher)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Uncl: Re: Uncl: two quick points
Date: 18 Nov 92 22:22:13 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu

> >You have just given the perfect definition of homophobia.
> >Jonathan
>
> So Jonathan also believes the term homophobia is being misused/overused
> by many posters.  As my comments in no way reflected a fear of homosexuals
> *and* were designated the perfect definition, then it follows that
> homophobia has nothing to do with fear of homosexuals.
You just don't get it, do you Robert?  It is really very sad.
>
> What have we learned?  We have learned that Jonathan believes homophobia to
> be the ability to see and understand the gay movement for what it really is.
> That being, a vehicle for removing the stigma and shame from engaging in
> perverted sexual behavior.  Thank you Jonathan for clearing this up.
>
> ---Robert
>
Why must you pretend to misinterpret everything that is said, Robert?
By miscasting homosexuality on purpose you are engaging in homophobic
behaviour.  You continue to do so and continue to twist what I say as evidence
of your insiduous reasoning.
As I said above, It is sad.  And I feel very sorry for you.

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