HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Subject: Re: Feminists for Life (was Controlling Women, etc.)
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 18:37:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.020824.9640@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>From article <adams.717437733@spssig>, by adams@spss.com (Steve Adams):
>> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
>> 
>>>Of course.  With handy dandy abortion clinics on every corner, society has
>>>no incentive whatsoever to abolish _any_ of these terrible abuses of women.
>>
>> ... The glass ceiling has nothing to do with the availablity of abortion...
>
>Of course it does.  Professional women all over the country are EXPECTED
>to terminate their pregnancies or face serious derailment of their careers.
>If they can no longer be expected to terminate their pregnancies, they will
>gain the leverage they need to fight back.

You must be in a fascinating line of work, if the level of sexual activity is
regularly taken into account during performance evaluations.  In the 15-20
years I've been in my line of work (depending on whether you include college
years), not a single woman in my environment was denied promotion because of
presence or absence of children.  In one company my vice president regularly
brought her infant to work with her.  In the company I currently work for,
the pregnancy-related leave policies are very liberal and apply both to the
mother AND, less liberally, to the father.  If a woman wants to work part-
time or from home while the child is an infant, that can also be arranged --
in fact, one of my colleagues is working from home right now, both because
she has an infant (in addition to a toddler) and because her husband's com-
pany required them to move too far for her to commute comfortably.  In short,
the pregnancy or otherwise of any member of every organization I've ever
worked for had absolutely nothing to do with his/her performance evaluation.
And what's this amazing line of work, where sexual activity is not consi-
dered as a factor in performance evaluations?  Software quality assurance.
Come to think of it, my mother (doctor), sister (librarian), and sister-in-
law (lawyer) were never interrograted about their sexual activities at per-
formance review time, either.  What line of work *are* you in, anyway?


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|	"Test everything; retain what is good."  1 Thessalonians 5:21	      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Humor Re: Slick Willy's Peace Movement
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:19:47 GMT

In article <5715@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>
>>His next post will lament the fall of the gold standard.
>
>Well, I do wonder how come a substance that is pure gold is 24K. 
>Why is that? <<Andy Rooney voice>>
>

Must get a lot of "out of memory" errors....


--
"I was trying to figure out which of my friends were hedgehogs, and which
were foxes...."
"Shakespeare wrote _King Lear_, NOT _King Leo_...."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: It gets bigger (was Re: The Big Lie)
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:43:01 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes in reply to Anwar Mohammed's
article:

[Multiple screenfulls of quoted text deleted.... Come on now people!  Quote
 as little as possible.  Only include previously posted text that is
 relevant to your comments.]

:     Amazing, this guy listed all the numbers and estimates, but didn't
: list source of reference.  

No, but he did say,

: >[I can e-mail you the references as I dig them up, if you like, although
: >they'll likely be dismissed as products of the deluded mainstream press
: >or "conservative tools of the media".]

Yes, I would rather he posted the references right there, but it seems
like appropriate foot/endnoting of arguments is next to nonexistant on
USENET....  At least he did say that he has references, and that he
is willing to name them to people who express an interest.

:     Fortunately, most of people on Internet are academically trained. 

References, please?  ;-)  (Just kidding!)
With some of the noise in some of these newsgroups, you have to wonder
about the academic training of some of these people.  And, you haven't
used IRC (Internet Relay Chat) before, have you?  Now, THERE'S a program
that will make you wonder about the IQ level of many people on the
internet.  

: I 
: guess even people like J. Wagner should be aware of some of the basic 
: principles regarding data reporting, even though he may not practice it.
: That me remind you, son, no matter how vivid and believable you make it
: look, what you write without reference is DISCARDED.

True.  Never believe 90% of what you hear on Sixty Minutes and USENET.  :)

:     Now if you were my student, you would be called into my office and
: we'd have a good talk.

Where, I'd hope, he would provide you with the references you wanted.  

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92



Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: moselecw@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (moz [chris moseley])
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: AIDS crisis
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:23:44 GMT
Organization: Electrical Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:
> >AIDS is not God's way of punishing the homosexuals for their lifestyle.

> AIDS is not a punishment from God at all. It is a natural consequence
> of ignoring the users manual. Sort of like jumping of a cliff.

Can you please let me know where I can get a copy? It's not listed
on any of the catalogues I can access. I assume it has Humans/ people/
homo sapiens AND `users manual' in the title/subject.

(or possibly this post was meant for alt.folklore.urban?)


*love* & *hugs*
  ____MOZ___    (moselecw@elec.canterbury.ac.nz)
 /\  _______\
 \ \ \____  /   If you disagree with anything I have said
  \ \ \/ / /    you have my permission to discard the message,
   \ \/ / /     then write a rejoinder based on
    \  / /      what you hoped I might have said
     \/_/
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Subject: Re: Poll Potpourri
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:39:43 GMT

In article <1agbjqINN27c@overload.lbl.gov> bks@s27w007.pswfs.gov (Bradley K. Sherman) writes:
>
>Some recent poll results in no particular order:
>
> Region     Clinton   Bush   Perot    ME     Sample    Dates Polled
>+--------+----------+------+-------+------+----------+--------------+
>USA            44      39     14      4.5    616 lv     9/23-9/27
Pat's desk       1       0      0      0.0      1 lv     10/1
-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
From: merlyn@digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: More republican Cowardice at Penn State
Organization: DigiBoard Incorporated, Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:10:53 GMT


More garbage from the Tedmeister...

kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
>In article <1992Sep27.191107.2016@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes:
>> Well, may I ask you what is an American?  Or who is an American?

>In this sense, I am using it to refer to one who has been brought up
>and educated in this country and is thus familiar with the political
>and cultural conventions of this country -- regardless of one's ethnic
>heritage.

Guess American immigrants aren't Americans, eh?
Wadda maroon.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: garrett@Ingres.COM
Subject: Re: Bush Never Had to Fight an Unjust War
Summary: Just say no to thinking!
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:18:52 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.232634.14126@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shacke writes...
>In article <FOX.92Oct2065604@graphics.nyu.edu> fox@cs.nyu.edu (David Fox) writes:
>>I don't think a man who was never confronted with the dilemma
>>of an unjust war and an unjust selective service system is
>>really qualified to be president.
> 
>The United States has never participated in an unjust war.

This isn't aimed at you David, becuase you are a lost cause
for when it comes to independent thinking. But I am curious
what everyone who agrees thinks why Vietnam, the Mexican War, and
the hundreds of times we massacred the Indians was just?

>Neither is the selective service system unjust. 

Check the 13th amendment.

  We got into Viet Nam because the President decided
>it was necessary for national security.  We entered every
>other war for the same reason.  
>
"National Security" has been the code words for brutal repression
of people for centuries. 

>There is no dilemma involved -- the only right choice is
>to obey the law.

THIS is what I have the most problem with. If this was the case 
then we would still be a British colony. Do you think that we should
still be a British colony? It is unconscionable to obey a bad law
just becuase it is the law. Jesus Christ broke the law and was punished
by the law. Do you think that was justice? What justice is there
in sending our young men to die on the other side of the world
for a puppet dictator who's idol was Hitler and had his own private
torture chamber? Which is more 
important to you; Justice or the Law?

>Clinton broke the law, and is unqualified to be President.
>
So did Bush for his involvement in the Iran-Contra scandel, so did
Quayle for buying weed. If this is your qualifications for 
president, then we have only Perot and Gore left (unless someone
can prove that they broke the law(I believe Marrou was busted for
possession)). Finally, does jay-walking count? How about tearing 
those tags off your mattress? 

>David Shackelford

-Garrett
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: More republican Cowardice at Penn State
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:34:59 GMT

In article <Sep.27.13.24.20.1992.15940@romulus.rutgers.edu> kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
>In article <1992Sep23.024521.3088@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes:
>
>> MY suggestion is to file a lawsuit in the court. If nothing else, it
>> will result in a lot of publicity, as I assume this will be the first
>> of it's kind.  The suit should be filed against the university, not
>> the republican party.
>
>You're not American, are you?  There is nothing unique or even unusual
>about what is being done at Penn State.  Both parties do this as a
>matter of course, and no one of any political standing -- of either
>party -- is likely to support a suit against this sort of thing.
>
>And don't think the media aren't wise to what's going on.  They're
>right there at every campaign stop seeing it with their own eyes.
>Such a suit will probably generate ZERO publicity and get thrown out
>of court without so much as a hearing.
>-- 
>The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
>my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
>believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
>this would hold such views???       ||

When Clinton had a rally in Denver a few weeks ago, it was at lunchtime
and workers from nearby offices could just walk right up and watch and
listen.  No tickets.  No fences.  Afterwards, he waded right into the
crowd to shake hands.  I am not aware that politically acceptable people
were brought in from other parts of the state for this rally.
-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 10:35:20 EDT
From: <JFL4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Comments on Republican Cowardice

From the Daily Collegian, Oct. 1:

_OPINION DENIED_

-Preventing signs at Bush rally impairs true representation, speech-

Last week, as thousands of people filed onto Old Main lawn to hear
President Bush speak, many were told to leave their opinions - or at
least those on signs - at the gates.

In a crowd of 20,000 people, a sign is often the best way to be heard.
But during Bush's visit many anti-Bush signs were confiscated as
spectators walked through the gates - a move that paints a biased picture
for the media and one that should be regarded as nothing less that a
violation of civil rights.

Amid the confusion of just what group - the White House, secret service,
of College Republicans - was taking the signs, only one valid reason is
remotely understandable.  For safety reasons, signs mounted on sticks were
removed.  But even this reason is flawed since the signs could have been
removed from the sticks and returned to the holders.

Members of the College Republicans claim that since they sponsored the
visit, they had the right to restrict what people had to say.  However,
the event was held on public property and open to anyone - not just Bush
supporters.  Unless the even was held in a private setting, and the
general public not invited, individual opinions may not be quelled.

Tricia Giannini, College Republicans chairwoman, has said that signs were
restricted only in the reserved VIP section.  Yet at the gates leading to
the general public section, many anti-Bush signs lay on the ground and
people claiming to be organizers of the event told spectators they could
not bring in signs of any kind.

Under the First Amendment, the Constitution guarantees the right to free
speech.  And since the event was open to the public it was open to all
opinions, not just those that supported Bush.

There was only one reason for taking signs and that was to make the Penn
State community look fully supportive of Bush - an image that many people,
despite attempts to make it look otherwise, showed was not true.

 -30-
From: aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Allan Schaffer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
Subject: Bush email address & Republican Platform
Date: 26 Sep 1992 22:00:16 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: holodeck.csd.sgi.com

Almost a week ago I posted the following:

aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Allan Schaffer) said..
>I've seen several people ask this but nobody seems to know the answer.
>Does the Bush campaign have an email address set up?  A mail server?
>Anything?

To date I have received 0 responses.  Now in addition to a Bush campaign
email address, I'm also looking for a copy of the Republican platform.
Does anyone have it?

Allan
-- 
Allan Schaffer                        It's Tuesday September 22, 1992 -- 
aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com         time for the Presidential Debate.
aschaffe@netcom.com                   Do you know where your President is?
For a free copy of Bill Clinton's economic recovery plan, call 1-800-272-9763.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush
From: mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao)
Subject: Re: Does it really matter ? Re: Bush's failing health
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 04:13:57 GMT

In article <5602@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes:
>@cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>@>tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli) writes:
>@>> I've been very concerned about Bush's failing health.
>	[Rest of article deleted.]
>	[I edited :]
>@>I heard on the Bob Grant radio show on WABC - New York
>@>that a Little Rock prostitute named Bobbie Ann Williams claims
>@>to have a 7-year-old son fathered by Bill Clinton.
>
>@   Good for Clinton !   
>@ 
>@   I wish there is someone out there who mysteriously come out and claim 
>@I have a son !  There is nothing happier than that.  Some of you may not
>@like kids, but I love them. 
>@   And shall I remind you that most men have slept with more than one women 
>@before. What's the big deal?  I often dreamed someday somehow some kid comes
>@to me and calls me daddy. Imagine the happiness and joy ! And the fun to 
>@do all the catching up. 
>
>I hope your spouse feels the same way.
 
    Just like Hillary Clinton who showed her understanding and support for
her husband, many women will also understand and keep supporting theirs.
If this were not the case, I am sure there would not be too many families 
left, and the republicans will have no family values to talk about. Let's be
realistic and not too hypocritic. 
    I am always open about my past with my spouse. A man has to have the 
courage and responsibility to face the consequence of his past, right or wrong.
But most importantly, a man must be able to work toward the futher. 
    If George can do nothing but digging at someone else's past, I say, please
go away. 

>
>@   This is a weird post ?  Not really.  I am saying to some of you people out
>@there who has nothing better to discuss, go out and date some women (or men)
>@and have some real fun. I will take a President who might have other women 
>@before but who can manage the economy and give people decent jobs and living
>@rather than a proven failure who might be ailing.  I am saying Bush go away 
>@if you are sick and you can't do anything but pointing finger at some man who
>@slept with some women. 
>
>What's the point if both men are sick?
 
    Then we decide which one is sicker. In this case Bush apparently looks 
like he is.


>-- 
>Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
>Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
>Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
>August 31, 1992 - May 16, 1993	Taking life pretty seriously. NOT.


Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:7789 alt.politics.clinton:8561 alt.politics.elections:15233 alt.rush-limbaugh:6580 talk.politics.misc:49651
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: I'm surprised!
Date: 5 Oct 92 21:03:13 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

DATE: October 5, 1992 (Monday)
More like I'm a bit disappointed that no one has railed on Bush for last
night's interview with Larry King.

Get your VCRs going on Larry tonight when he has Clinton and Gore for 90
minutes on CNN. !!! But that comes in the middle of Monday Night
Football !!!

Enjoy the game! :)
Paraphrase from Bush from last night's Larry King on CNN:
	There are states in this country that require parental approval
if their child wants to get his/her ears pierced. Yet we can't even tell
parents when their child is going to have an abortion. Something's
wrong.


-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		eyc@acpub.duke.edu
Biomedical Engineer 1993	Never take me too seriously.
I don't have to have a 4.0 GPA to succeed in life because I'm 
good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: sulkanen@xanth.msfc.nasa.gov (Martin Sulkanen - NRC/ES65)
Subject: Re: Slick Willy's Peace Movement
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Distribution: na
Date:  5 Oct 92 14:01:26 GMT

mci41087@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Occaisionally) writes:

>Plain and simple: Clinton stood up for his beliefs by refusing to kill people   
>he believed this nation had no business killing.  Pick up the New York Times
>from Wednesday, Sept. 28 (I think, maybe the 29th), and you will see a letter
>to the editor from a Vietnam vet from the Marine Corps (Semper Fi!....excuse me)that says basically the same thing.  He makes an even better point: Who do you
>want to be Commander in Chief when your son's life is on the line, a guy who
>debated the moral questions about whether fighting is right in the first place,
>or some gung-ho old man who fought in a bold, neccessary crusade that will not
>happen again in our lifetime?  Bush sent my brother to Iraq for oil, the son of
>a bitch.  He coulda killed my bro for some bullshit hunk of sand, and he NEVER
>killed Hussein, even though anyone with half a brain knows we coulda done it in
>our sleep without an invasion, and with far more morality then bombing the Hell
>out of 100,000+ innocents.  I have reason to belive that Clinton might not do 
>that, mostly because he has struggled with whether fighting is right in a given
>situation.  Bush just pulls the trigger.

>Matt Ivaliotes

Well, not plain and simple: I found it a fascinating observation of Clinton's
character that he agonized about how he could duck the draft and yet not 
become damaged goods in national politics! This from a twentysomething guy 
where such concerns would be twenty years away...This makes me ask: would 
this man be willing to commit political suicide (say, bag a second term) 
in order to do something very important for the country (say, balance 
the budget)? Methinks Slick would win the James Buchanan Presidential Award
for politcal courage. I really believe this *is* a character issue, though
not quite the one that root weevils of the press claim - that of draft
dodging. Rather, this casts some needed light on Slick's life-long 
machinations to achieve the Presidency.

As far as the comment about how service in WWII makes one a war-monger, that
runs contrary to the discussions I've had with every vet of every recent war
we've had.

|_________________________________________________________________|
| martin sulkanen      ][ internet: sulkanen@xanth.msfc.nasa.gov  |
| es 65                ][ span:     ssl::sulkanen                 |
| nasa/msfc            ][ voice:    205/544-5823     >>,--```;('> |
| huntsville, al 35812 ][ institute for troutphysics              |
|_________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush