HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU (macphil)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Did you vote for Carter
Date: 13 Oct 92 22:03:42 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.IUPUI.EDU>

On Tue, 13 Oct 1992 13:14:00 EST linda said:

>anyway, i voted for carter both times.
>at least he won once. usually the guy i vote for loses.


Could you perhaps move to Chicago and vote there where they won't
mind you voting three times?  Say once for each of the frontrunners?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:34:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: The VP Debates

        Pretty good considering that Quayle kept saying, "Well, this can
be checked."

                                                Chris Morrison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 9 Oct 1992 10:58:02 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: gun control, kinda'
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.IUPUI.EDU>

On Fri, 9 Oct 1992 09:46:00 EST linda said:
>>death penalty ok for rape?  The death penalty is meant for a deterrent
>>against murder, not assault.
>
>i don't agree. the death penalty is not meant to be a deterrent against murder.
>it is punishment for murder. those who espouse it to be a deterrent are either
>trying to fool themselves or others. allowing the state to execute people is
>much easier to swallow if it's touted as a deterrent for the good of society
>instead of punishment of the individual.

It is a deterrent, just not in the way you think.  It's not a means of
making people choose not to do it because of the penalty, it's to keep
them from doing it again.

If we as society have a notion that some are obligated to give up
hard earned funds to provide for others who won't provide for themselves
(as opposed to those who are unable to provide), then why is society
also not obligated to protect itself from these individuals?

Do they have a right to many of the amenities they enjoy whilst incarcerated
while others on the streets do not?  And if we wish to examine their
rights, what about the rights of those who would be violated should we
allow them to be free?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
From: CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: RE: michelle e. olson
Date: 15 Oct 92 06:34:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"


      I will post the info.  I have gotten the stuff two years in a row,
but it is the Republicans who send it not the Dems.

                                                Chris Morrison
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <BRIDEC92@IRLEARN.UCD.IE>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 16 Oct 1992 12:18:39 GMT
From:         james p mcbride <BRIDEC92@IRLEARN.UCD.IE>
Subject:      Re: Happiness is Bush
              16 Oct 1992 08:12:52 GMT from <aquigley@UNIX1.TCD.IE>

On Fri, 16 Oct 1992 08:12:52 GMT Aaron J. Quigley said:
>
>WELL THE LAST FOUR YEARS HAVE BEEN SHEAR BLISS FOR THE REST OF THE
>WORLD>
>
[stuff deleted]
>
>But don't let me change your mind, but who would you like to see in
>control of your nuclear weapons President Bush or the other guy.
>
>?????
>Your life .

Well, um, yeah.  Allow me to apologise for this infantile rant from this
side of the Atlantic.  Methinks Mr Quigley has been a little TOO indulgent
with the Guinness thing.  Sorry.



james p mc bride
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:55:48 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: campaign politics -- uggh

>- linda  (first tim upsets me w/stupid reality and now kerry confuses me...is
>this anyway to treat an old beer devotee??)

Linda, are you related to Norm Peterson?  :-)

You should love him.  Yesterday I saw an episode in which he gets
the job of inspecting beers in a brewery.  When it was payday he
would say to his bosss, "No sir, I cannot take this, I just can't."
Later there was this scene that he was hugging huge tanks filled
with beer.

Having you thought about a getting a job is a brewery?   :-)

--KAT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman)
Subject: Re: Aztecs
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 22:00:10 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalno.fnal.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <POLITICS%92101313412366@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>,         
"Carl A. Lahetta" <U952020@RUTADMIN.BITNET> writes:

>    This was one of the responses I was looking for to my Aztec question.  I
> bet that alot of people who dislike what Columbus represents would agree that
> we cannot judge the Aztecs, or other primitive peoples, by our standards.  
> Yet, they are quick to use our standards to judge Columbus.  

Columbus is a European being judged by Europeans and their descendants.  This
differentiates them from him.

>  Listening to some anti-Columbus people one would think that everything here
> in the New World was perfect, but how grand was it?  On one island emasculated
> young males were fattened to be eaten, women were kept and constantly
> impregnated so that the baby could be feasted upon, and other peoples had
> human sacrafice.  Too bad these cultures are not around today, I mean people
> being eaten and killed against their will.  Also, the Indians had slaves,
> engaged in wars, and many other evils associated only with the Europeans.

Which of these justified conquest through genocide?

>    Columbus may not have been a saint, but he was not a devil, or the devil
> that despoiled the New World.  It was already despoiled before he arrived.  To
> be fair, these anti-Columbus groups should shed light on some of the 
> activities on this side of the Atlantic instead of attributing all these 
> ills on the Europeans.

Actually, it is sufficient to note that the population of Natives was in the
millions for a very long time before Columbus got here, and dropped to the
point of extinction shortly after his arrival as a result of his conqusts and
those of his followers.

Your line of argument is, at best, that the Natives deservedf what happened, a
defense which rapists have been using for ages.

-- 
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
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 23:49:00 EST
From:         YONI@BROWNCOG.BITNET
Subject:      Re: The VP Debates

THE VALIDITY OF QUAYLE'S REMARKS
I was watching CNN and their one-man truth squad reported that he investigated
page 300 of Gore's book which Quayle remarked upon. Quayle used the information
on this page to make Gore look bad. When the truth squad checked the quoted
pages, they saw that none of what Quayle claimed was written was actually writte
. Just goes to show you that it's not a good idea to challeneg an author on wor
   k
he has written.
Another thing, Quayle stated that Gore voted against a certain bill in senate
while in reality he voted for it. (or vice versa, I'm a little rusty on this
point,but I know for sure that the truth squad reported Quayle's assertion as
100% false according to senate records.)
Well, that's the info I heard about Quayle's assertions. There will be plenty
of more inaccuracies pointed out in tommorow's paper I assume
Lance
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Acknowledge-To: <NY911179%PACEVM.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:25:28 EDT
From:         Mark Susskind <NY911179%PACEVM.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject:      quick note
Comments: To: POLITICS%UCF1VM.CC.UCF.EDU@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU

A quick note before I go away for the Columbus Holiday Weekend...

Instead  of the  government taking  the initiative  by cutting  taxes to
business  to stimulate  job growth,  could  we let  businesses take  the
initiative  by applying  for some  public funding  to help  the business
expand, hire new employees, or  improve benefits? This public assistance
might  take  the form  of  vouchers,  tax  credits, tax  deferments,  or
what-have-you. Does  that look  better or  worse than  giving businesses
the money up front, or not much of a difference?

Have a Great Weekend!
Mark R. Susskind - Mr. MRS
<NY911179 @ PACEVM.BITNET>
From: PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET (Jamie)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Instant Karma's gonna get you....
Date: 16 Oct 92 15:45:18 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Oh, whew.
And there I was thinking Robert MacElwaine was a lunatic.
Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 10:04:27 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: gun control, kinda'

From:         Teddy Jack Eddy <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>

>>choice of anger and retribution (especially when victim impact
>>statements are used like the criminal knew or cared how serious impact
>>were or if the fact there was less or more impact mattered on valueing
>>the life ended) without knowing the individual charged very well.

>So the suffering of the survivors doesn't matter to you either?  Are you
>so overcome with concern for the criminal that you have no consideration
>left for the victims?  Would you tell a 5 year old child, "Your daddy
>isn't coming home anymore but don't worry, his murderer will be."?

Then maybe Robert could tell us in concise terms how we
should use the victim impact statements?  Should they affect
the verdict or the sentencing phase?  And exactly how should
it affect either of these two?  (Like 2 years for every
surviving child?)

> ---Robert

--KAT
From: ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: chris! cut it out!
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:14:15 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

look, see?  there, with your talk of human sacrifice not existing, have now
opened the door for robert mc elwaine (b.s., university of wisconsin at eau
claire) to show you ten thousand examples of people who do practice this
(including, presumably, members of the trilateral commission, gordon hinckley
{the head mormon guy.  i got a pamphlet on this the other day from a guy
in the airport.  apparently he thinks the mormon tabernacle is an abbatoir.
the white stone is not really an altarpiece thing, but a butcherblock.  okay.
but how is it if you try to make fudge on it?}, j. edgar hoover, the
bavarian illuminati, the knights templars, and the oto).

isaac was not sacrificed.  remember?  yhvh, at the last minute, stopped
the abe-meister.  however, there is good information that baal and
ashtaroth continued to be major gods in the area to both the jewish people
and other folks who were there up until close to the time of constantine.

read "the blood of kings" by mary miller and linda schele for a good analysis
of human sacrifice in central america.

pedantically yours,
anneliese (who forgot to say earlier that jimmy wales feels better than
james brown.  aaooohhh.).
From: CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: On the death penalty once again ...
Date: 14 Oct 92 06:26:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"


        Now Michael, it is interesting that two of the most fanatically
dedicated to religious values states in the world should engage in practices
such as executing children and mentally retarded that are arguably among
the practices regarded as abominable throughout the world, by people of many
religions.

                                                Chris Morrison
See how pompous I get when I'm tired?
From: GE0793@SIUCVMB.BITNET (Steve Bratten)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Who's the ignorant one, here?
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:39:08 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

>
>  Jamie, Jimbo, liese, and the rest of y'all - I think
>you are being way to harsh on this guy.  I mean, I sort
>of agree with him.  I think having uneducated opinions
>on the list is important.  The ignorant doubtless have
>a lot to teach us.
>
>                     -Tim"I'm a fan of Geraldo, so I know I'm right"J

You are a prime example of the type of arrogance I was referring to
in my last post and your statement paints a picture of you in my mind.
I can't help but wish I could how you would survive in the oilfield or
any other type of hard labor. On the other hand, I'm holdiny my own in
your world. But, I suppose I am jumping to conclusions just as you
have. So you tell me, have ever really worked a day in your life?

roughneck
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:         Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:52:00 EDT
From:         welcome to the faith dome explosion <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Virtual Campaign
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

>Anyhow, the point is that the president of this hyere joynt
>orta be enjoyable.  And what do we enjoy more than pure and
>unadulterated controversy?

Clearly, the answer is beer.  Preferrably Guinness, or Bass Ale, in yard
long glasses.  But beer, nevertheless.  It's more portable than scandal
(which the tall guy ticket has plenty of, as well).

johnsoN/olsoN
we tap into the desires of the masses

Gary W. OlsoN                "My lips may promise but my heart is a whore"
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU  - Nine Inch Nails, "Last"
19 days and counting down...
From: gpn0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (GARY PHILIP NEWHART)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Perot--in, out, what?
Date: 7 Oct 92 12:14:36 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <POLITICS%92100511412171@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>, SABOE@VUVAXCOM.
BITNET (linda) writes:
>>       I don't get it and I doubt that any of you are older
>>       than me...
>
>ginny, so how old are you?
>
>-linda (please oh please let her be older than me :))
>
Does age matter as much as the ability to put forth intelligent ideas? Is this
bickering over status levels? Gee, what could be wrong with fighting over
unnecessary points, when in the big picture, the ideas matter? Oh, I get it.
This is Bush vrs. Clinton, isn't it!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 14 Oct 1992 13:26:08 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: the kErry tickEt

On Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:33:48 EDT Tim Johnson said:
>
>  I can't speak for the other tickets, but the JohnsoN/OlsoN ticket
>has never *had* to drive 750 miles for a beer.  If Kerry can't keep
>beer available in her own state, how can we risk putting her in
>charge of the whole list?
>
>                         -Tim

I, for one, do not drink beer or any other alcoholic beverage.  I think
a person doesn't need alcohol or drugs to have a good time.  So, if you
want a candidate with a clear head, bright eyes, and who has never had
a hangover, vote for me!

Evelyn
From: SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET (linda)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: gun control, kinda'
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:16:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

>But if it's not a factor, why is it brought up?

i thought you brought it up when you said you didn't like supporting
these guys in prison with hard earned $$.

- linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:03:07 EDT
From:         Tim Johnson <ST402711@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Gonna try to be first this time

Gore ruled.

Quayle looked small minded and vicious.  Like a wiener dog.

Stockdale ... um ... was an embarrassment, really.

                                             -Tim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 12 Oct 1992 08:51:30 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: post-debate reaction
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.IUPUI.EDU>

On Sun, 11 Oct 1992 21:38:39 CDT Craig Rooney U of MO-Columbia said:
>Jason, what are you talking about?  Bush and the Republican Party propagandized
>this entire Clinton-trip-to-Moscow-"thing".  Clinton was responding to the Pres
>ident's ridiculous assertions which were made safely outside of Clinton's prese
>nce.  Bush has resorted to yet one more divisive tactic to win votes through fe
>ar.  Sad.  Pathetic. You and the GOP--Shame!  Shame!


What's most interesting about all of this is that Clinton doesn't spend
much time dealing /c whether he went or why.  Just that it's an unfair
accusation.  Let's hear when and why and allow the people to decide.
I'm sure it was nothing like what is being asserted, but why should he
be the one to decide this?  It's much like the Gennifer Flowers deal.
Accusations were made and the reply was "that's not for you to know."

Saturday's NYTimes had a cover story (at least the Nat'l edition did)
about Clinton refusing to hand over his health reports.  The physicians
will confirm he is healthy, as will his staff, but details will be made
public only after he is elected.  The article went on to point out the
timing of this attitude just after the physicians conducting the
JFK autopsy revealed the fact JFK's adrenal glands were nearly gone.
Not that this is important, per se, but the JFK et al denied there were
any problems (at all).

Lest I appear to be taking sides, the same thing should be applied to
the arming of Iraq, Perot's personal investigations, etc.  While some
of this information may not have direct bearing upon the ability of the
person to hold the office, their inability to trust us /c the
information or right to "candle" the candidate does show something about
their person.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:51:00 EDT
From:         "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: New Tax Structure

> Folks (economists, I guess) often complain that Americans save less
> than comparable nations. The idea is that if we collectively forgo
> consumption now, then we have more real wealth to invest in the
> future. Investment pays more returns than consumption. So in the long
> run we benefit.

True enough.  But I start wondering when these arguments are applied
to individual behavior.  According to my reading, it seems that one
of the largest individual influences on a nation's saving rate is the
size of the surplus or deficit in the national budget.  So in the US
the deficits act as a drag on the savings rate, whatever individuals
do.  Also, if programs such as Social Security were actually funded
(in other words, if the surpluses were kept instead of being applied
to the deficit), that would also serve to increase the savings rate.
(Assuming, of course, that it didn't just serve to make the deficit
even bigger).

I am very skeptical of arguments that try to put the blame for the
nation's economic problems on individuals and families who are just
trying to get by in the face of eroding real wages and rising prices
for necessities.  They always seem to be a prelude to the claim that
we need to extort even more sacrifice from the people who have been
taking it in the neck all along.

> One question is whether we can afford to look to the long run. A big
> problem with Perot's plans, for example, is that they would put
> the squeeze on the economy right now to reduce the deficit. Reducing
> the deficit should help in the long run, but not if it crushes the
> economy. For example, if we drastically cut spending in favor of
> saving, and that deepens the recession, then we'll have a smaller
> pie, and so wind up with even less to save (and a smaller tax base,
> so maybe we don't even reduce the deficit).

Part of the problem (and you've alluded to this before) is that we've
been doing the wrong kind of spending.  If we had spent the same amount
of money on education, mass transportation, research, job creation and
the like as we spent on the Cold War we'd be in much better shape now.

> That's just one problem, of course. I agree that the Nunn/Somebody
> plan doesn't look very progressive when you think about it.

Me too.  And one of the most offensive parts of the proposal is that
it doesn't take into account the fact that much of the nation isn't
capable of taking advantage of the savings deductions in any but the
most trivial ways.  A lot of people have to rely on pension funds for
much of their saving, and others don't even have that.

In a nation with no real support for the unemployed, saved money is
freedom.  A freedom that too many have no access to.

Best,
Peter

> Jamie
From: SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET (linda)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Bloody Nose
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:35:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

>Why bash someone who's been dead for several hundred years when there are
>live people to bash? :)

good point, unless you're afraid to be bashed back.

i don't understand why people get so upset about history. i don't see it as
bashing or demeaning the memory of someone if you are recounting facts. what
is wrong, is glossing over facts to preserve some mythical stature, or in an
attempt to justify policies based on prejudice.

i have found that most of the history i was taught as a child was little more
than fiction. it was biased in a way to promote patriotism and dismiss entire
nations of people (native americans). this is the real injustice.

also, i can't afford to bash anyone ... i'm 3/4 italian and 1/4 norwegian.
my ancestors were bugging people all over the damned place.

- linda (looking forward to halloween so i can be somebody else and eat lots of
candy and not gain weight .... uh, that should work dontchathink, i mean if i'm
somebody else, how could *i* gain the weight...right? logic czar?)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU