HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rslugg@med.unc.edu (Robert Slugg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,talk.politics.misc,triangle.politics
Subject: Re: Release from the Clinton Camp
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:42:24 GMT
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine

In article <1992Nov12.084847.1657@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:

B
>
>I wish you people would get the (IMHO silly) analogy correct.  The Brady
>Bill doesn't require a waiting period before *using* a gun.  It requires
>a waiting period before *buying* a gun.
>
>Thus, a waiting period on purchasing a printing press would be the

>appropriate analogy.
>
Actually, a better analogy would be for PC's.  Imagine having to wait a
week to get approval from some bureaucrat before you could buy your
computer.  I'm sure many of us have experienced that with our purchasing
departments.  Imagine how PO'd you'd be if they said you could only buy
one with 2 floppy drives, that posession of a hard drive would allow you
to posess dangerous amounts of information and would give you the ability
to distribute that information at politically unacceptable rates.  When a
government goes bad, they pretty much go after guns and printing presses
(today we call these PC's and copiers) in their first move to suppress
people.  Sometime down the road I expect to see PC's and modems regulated
under the guise of being able to reduce crime due to hackers breaking into
banks and government offices.  The proposed law seems reasonable, but the
real intent will be to either tax computers (remember, NC already requires
you to list both guns and computers for your county personal property
listing) or to regulate their use.  As with guns, it would be the innocent
being punished for the acts of the criminals.  While some of you say this
is impossible given the millions of PC's in private hands, there are 200
million guns in private hands, and the same people willing to have them
banned believing it will grant them safety are the same people who believe
taking privately owned PC's away from people will guarantee that their
credit card and and bank accounts won't be mangled by little geeky
socially inept hackers.  Ben Franklin said that those who trade essential
freedoms (ie gun ownership) for temporary safety deserve neither.
Remember, the gun in my house protects you as well, because if a criminal
doesn't know who lives in a house, it might be me, he probably won't break
in.  If all you people who want guns banned think they do no good in
society, then put a big sign in front of your house saying that there are
no guns on the premises.  I knew you wouldn't.

Bob
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: d-yang@cs.columbia.edu (David Yang)
Subject: Re: cito gaston: first af-am manager to win world series?
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:55:48 GMT

From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
>This is true. Like all Blue Jays managers, Cito's gotten his share of criticism
> but since the World Series, Gaston has gotten nothing but praise in Toronto's
> newspapers. He has led the Jays to three (?) ALeast pennants and now the
> AL championship and the World Series. He is much appreciated in Toronto
> as is Juan Guzman, our star pitcher who destroys that other myth, that
> African-Americans can't pitch. The biggest star, and most appreciated in

Actually, I'd say Vida Blue (for the Oakland A's) proved African-Americans
can pitch extremely well in the majors back in the 70's (I think he won the
Cy Young award).  And to be fair, Satchel Paige proved his skill a long
ways before that.

> T.O. is Dave Winfield. Class act all the way. It is sad that the team that

Yeah, he definitely deserved to get the series-clinching rbi.

> has been most willing in baseball to allow African-Americans (and Dominicans,
>which has supplied a steady stream of Jay heroes for years) to prove themselves
> is in Canada. We have our problems with racism here, but at least you wont
> here anything about Africans being unable to be leaders in sport. Heck, even
> the goalie for the Toronto Maple Leafs is African.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: lkk@panix.com (Larry Kolodney)
Subject: Re: Thank God for Ron Brown
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 04:59:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1dc8g7INNohm@morrow.stanford.edu> HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:


	[on Ron Brown]


>.
>Otherwise, the dude could do good in The Clinton Cabinet and not in
>some of the "black" type positions like HUD.  How bout Attorney
>General?

Look for Vernon Jordon, late of the Urban League, to fill that post.

-- 
larry kolodney:(lkk@panix.com) 
_(*#&)#*&%)@(*^%_!*&%^!)*&#+!*&$+!?&%+!*&^_)*&#%)*&^%#+&
The past is not dead, it's not even past.   - Wm. Faulkner

Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: stovall@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Steven Stovall)
Subject: Re: nbcsl
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Distribution: usa
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:02:33 GMT

HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:

>.
>And for alla yall who want to see how beautiful black men (again)
>can be, catch the Mapplethorpe special collection of photographs of
>black men.
>.
>I know, I know.  He was gay, white and controversial.

That reminds me of an old riff re R.W. Fassbinder: Look, he was
a homosexual, he was an alcoholic, he was a drug addict...but the
boy sho could shoot some film.

>But he, like Cocteau, loved photographing black men in the nude.

No shit Sherlock :-)

I took a peek at the book in the art library here (they keep it behind
the desk). Actually the stuff aint bad, although I prefer Annie Liebowitz's
work. Didnt notice any of the "bullwhip up the rectum" pictures people used
to talk about. I *still* dont get how S-M imagery could be erotic. Oh well.

_______________________________________________________________________________

steven stovall
stovall@exeter.cs.ucla.edu
(310) 825-7307
Xref: sparky soc.culture.african.american:10706 alt.politics.clinton:16105
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Thank God for Ron Brown
Date: 6 Nov 1992 18:07:19 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aerospace.aero.org

In article <1992Nov6.054321.20824@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> a74k110@phobos.ucc.umass.edu writes:
>In article <Bx9y2B.6K1@news.udel.edu>, johnston@me.udel.edu (Bill Johnston) writes...
>>In article <Bx9HKC.FH3@news.cso.uiuc.edu> locker@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Locker) writes:
>> 
>>>Anyone care to speculate on the man's future?
>> 
>>I'm not sure whether he'll be willing to give up working the political
>>side after his success as the party leader, but I was impressed by
>
>He's pretty much said (in not so many words) that he'd love to work in a 
>Clinton Admin.
>
>>Ron Brown's discussion of the law and legal education when he gave
>>the commencement address at a local law school last summer.
>> 
>>Attorney General or Education Secretary?
>> 
>
>
>Vernon Jordan (former civil rights leader) has Attorney General pretty much
>locked up....

Oh, would that be sweet revenge on the Reagan/Bush years! The only thing
that would be sweeter would be (alright, I admit, an unlikely event)
Anita Hill for the next Supreme Court seat.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu (Art Johnson)
Subject: Rich and Poor (was Re: DEBATE: Statement - 10/19/92)
Organization: Physical Sciences Lab, UW-Madison
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 18:24:18 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.200845.28896@oakhill.sps.mot.com>  
pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:
> 
> Also:
> Under Reagan Average Household income for _every_ fifth went up
> 
>         lowest   2nd     3rd     4th    Highest  top 5%
>         _____   _____   ______  _____   ______   _______
> 1977    7,193   17,715  29,287  42,911  76,522   117,023
> - this was mid Carter
> 
> 1980    6,836   17,015  28,077  41,364  73,752   110,213
> -This is the beginning of Reagan, notice everyone is on the 
> downswin from Carter's mismanagement
> 
> 1989    7,372   18,341  30,488  46,177  90,150   145,651
> -At the end of Reagan's term _every_ group has improved
> 
> 1990    7,195   18,030  29,781  44,901  87,137   138,756
> - George "waffle boy" Bush increases government and raises taxes
> 
> Source: Bureau of the Census, Money Income of Households, 
>         Families and Persons: 1990, p. 202
> ----
> 
> Average family income went up steadly during Reagan.
> Source: Bureau of the Census, P-60, No. 174
>

     Uh, Pat, let's look at the total percentage increase in average  
household income between 1980 and 1989, using the above raw data:

Lowest:  +  7.8%
Second:  +  7.8%
Third :  +  8.6%
Fourth:  + 11.6%
Fifth :  + 22.2%
Top 5%:  + 32.2%

As you see, simply saying that average household income for each group  
went up during the Reagan years, while true, is only part of the story.  
When the raw data is expressed as a percentage increase over time, one  
sees that the average household income of the top fifth increased at a  
rate 2.8 times faster than that of the bottom fifth, the rate of increase  
for the top 5% was 4.1 times faster than that of the bottom fifth, and 2.8  
times faster than that of the *second* fifth. Clearly, the tax policy of  
the Reagan Administration was far more effective at boosting the income of  
wealthy households than those of the poor. Now, what is the raw data  
comparing the average household income for black and whites in 1977, 1980,  
1989, and 1990, divided into fifths, and including the top 5% as an extra  
category? (Aren't analytical chemists annoying? :-))  
> ----
> 
> Pat
> 
> "Visualize Kemp President."

Arthur Johnson
johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu
From: mmrwlm@sn370.utica.ge.com (Wanda L McCrae)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: single blacks
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:21:03 GMT
Reply-To: mmrwlm@sn535.uca
Organization: General Electric

In article 28701@cs.ucla.edu, gds@york.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
~In article <1992Nov10.005334.6961@osf.org> kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) writes:
~>True, but quick- how many brothas out there *not* run into this? It
~>must be some state law in Mass that unmarried (now, or ever) sisters
~>have to have at least one child. Everybody's got kids. Hell, I'll take
~>a smoker over a parent anyday.
~
~You're entitled to date whoever you want, but that's no reason to
~criticize other people (women in this case) for their circumstances.
~Some of them were abandoned by the fathers of these children, some of
~their husbands/boyfriends/lovers died, etc.
~
~I also don't see how this is relevant to the original point, raised by
~Ronald Davis, that (paraphrased) it's heavy women, or women who have
~kids (and no husband) who are criticizing black men for dating
~non-black women.  That matter aside, if you're going to criticize
~them, do so on the basis of their arguments, and not on their weight
~or how many kids they have.

Thank you, Greg.  I've been following this thread for quite some
time, and I was beginning to wonder if there were any reasonable
men out there who would refute a lot of the sexist comments that
have been posted.  The air has finally been cleared.
(Deep breath; Ahh! I can breathe again!)  :-)

---
______________________________________________________________________
Wanda L. McCrae            | "Free your mind and the rest will follow.
mmrwlm@sn370.utica.ge.com  |  Be color-blind.  Don't be so shallow!"
                                 - En Vogue
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,triangle.politics,talk.politics.misc,soc.women,talk.rape
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Subject: Re: Eva Clayton bio
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:23:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.193927.4546@rock.concert.net> bing@jazz.concert.net (Carter E. Bing) writes:
>	Just name a better group and we can move the
>conversation to it.

talk.politics.guns
>			Carter
>
>ps. working in cary i can understand why you hold such
>right-winged ideas. :) (that is a triangle joke)  a durham
>native...........

Right winged? Defending the Bill of Rights is right winged?
I suppose that you are one of those folks who believes in 
only exercising those rights that don't offend other people...
i.e. - no rights at all...



-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: wbrown@access.digex.com (William Brown)
Subject: Re: BLACK ATHEISM
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:44:49 GMT

In article <1471600050@igc.apc.org> rdumain@igc.apc.org (Ralph Dumain) writes:
>
>From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain>
>Subject: BLACK ATHEISM
>
>issue: the role of religion in retarding the development of
>Africans and Black Americans.  It is time to break the taboo in
>the black community against this issue once and for all.  Here are
>some points for discussion.  Negative responses are not welcome.
>

[...etc., ...etc.,]
   "Free thought... Negative responses are not welcome." ?  BUddy, that
doesn't sound like free thought to me.  If you don't want to hear opposing
viewpoints, don't read the USENET.

   In your entire post, you had nothing to support the tenant that
religion and free thought are mutually exclusive.  Would you like to prove
your point?

>
>(3) The history of black freethought is extraordinarily difficult
>to research, since it is the one area of black history effectively
>suppressed by blacks themselves.  (You crybabies out there can't
>pin this one on whites.)  We need to supplement the scanty list of

   Namecalling is an indication of a incompetent argument.  Please stick
to the points, and offer some proof.

   Beef it up!  Or was this just a "call-for-like-minded-people" post?

Welcome aboard...

Peace.
 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: BLACK ATHEISM
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:46:05 GMT

What do you want to know?

	-Kenny

-- 
Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142	+1 617 621 7306
kenny@osf.osf.org			OSF has nothing to do with this post.
	  Religion: The longest-running gag ever played on Mankind.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,talk.politics.misc,triangle.politics
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Release from the Clinton Camp
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:08:01 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.084847.1657@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:

>In article <1992Nov10.172358.12239@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.235237.22175@rock.concert.net> barber@jazz.concert.net (Scott Barber) writes:
>>>In article <1992Oct22.143719.5031@dg-rtp.dg.com> crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
>
>>>What it takes is to 
>>>>ignore the fact that the Constitution expressly prohibits the government
>>>>from infringing the right to bear arms, 
>
>>>I'm not aware that the Brady Bill infringes on anyone's right to
>>>bear arms, does it?  Please correct me if I'm wrong.  I thought it
>>>was a measure to require a waiting period before purchase.
>>>Personally, it seems to me to be moderately useless, but I don't see
>>>how it is an infringement of the right to bear arms.  
>
>>Well, I guess it is no more an infringement on the right to bear arms
>>than a waiting period before printing anything would be an
>>infringement of the right to free speech.
>
>I wish you people would get the (IMHO silly) analogy correct.  The Brady
>Bill doesn't require a waiting period before *using* a gun.  It requires
>a waiting period before *buying* a gun.
>
>Thus, a waiting period on purchasing a printing press would be the
>appropriate analogy.

       A waiting period on the purchase of something is equivilent to a 
waiting period on the use of it, because your ability to use it is denied 
for the duration of the waiting period.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
                         Information Services Group
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (Mail to VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu will bounce.)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,soc.culture.jewish
From: wbrown@access.digex.com (William Brown)
Subject: Re: Jewish/Islamic issues
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:10:24 GMT


In article <1992Nov10.225610.21551@midway.uchicago.edu>
thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes: 

>In article <Bx7Gqp.DI1@access.digex.com> wbrown@access.digex.com (William
Brown) writes: 

>>  My own sister-in-law, a Black Muslim OVERLY-QUALIFIED lawyer,  can 
>>get no job from her Christian, Jewish, or other denomination would-be 
>>employers, because she wears traditional Moslem dress.
>
>There are a lot of over-qualified lawyers out there who can't get jobs.
>
>If I wore traditional Jewish dress, I'd be one of them.
>
>>Peace.
>>
>>REALLY.
>
>Agreed.
>-- 
>ted frank

     ...and if you were discriminated against, I'd defend YOUR rights to.


Peace

Bill



Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: Interracial Dating (The Atomic Dog Speaks)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:11:00 GMT

In article <1ds8e2INNkip@morrow.stanford.edu>
HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:
>Look, man.  On the third or fourth date, you might have said,
>hey--I like you a lot and let's just continue to have fun.  What do
>you think?

If I had thought it would have been necessary, I definately would have.
It took several months for that to occur, and I guess I was too busy having
fun to see it. Even eagles fly into buildings now and then.

>You'dda been spared a lotta grief. 

I think the grief landed elsewhere, though.

>(Lotta stuff deleted here folks, because the dude is advertising
>his charms.)

No, no, no. Why are you forever on my case? I only explained *everything*
simply because I didn't want to have to do what would essentially be
posting pieces of the whole in conversation after conversation. I could
have fronted a lot (more?) if I were "advertising".

	-Kenny

-- 
Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142	+1 617 621 7306
kenny@osf.osf.org			OSF has nothing to do with this post.
	  Religion: The longest-running gag ever played on Mankind.
From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Interracial Dating (The Atomic Dog Speaks)
Date: 11 Nov 1992 16:27:46 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1992Nov11.230334.2924@osf.org>,
kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) writes:
>In article <1drk12INNcgp@morrow.stanford.edu>
>HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:
>>Frankly, dude, if you wanna have fun, great.  But front with your
>>partners...not string them, that's the point. Maybe then, my girl
>>wouldn't have thought you were serious and wasted her time dreamin
>>and schemin.  But perhaps that's your line anyway.
>
>But, see, that ain't it at all. This whole thing was going along just the
>way I wanted it- no one (she didn't, and I sure as hell was never)
>ever brought out sticky, problematic words like "love" or "future" or
>"commitment" (consider also this is the word they also use when they throw
>you in the looney bin), so we were just doing our thing, having a good time,
>going everywhere and doing everything.
.
.
Man, just because a woman doesn't say nothin, doesn't mean she's not
thinkin about it.

I respect and care for the woman I'm with.  If this constitutes
"strangin'", well hell, I'm sorry.  I should know what is and what
ain't by now- I've been at this since I was thirteen years old, and
have plenty of "field experience" to go by.  Maybe, like I eluded to
in another post, certain appearances, possesions, actions and
careers may subconsiously put ideas in somone's mind, but this
wasn't an active thing on my part.  (Maybe I'm just nice to be with-
<gasp>!)
.
.
Look, man.  On the third or fourth date, you might have said,
hey--I like you a lot and let's just continue to have fun.  What do
you think?  You'dda been spared a lotta grief.  Which is what I look
for in men.  No strain and no pain.

(Lotta stuff deleted here folks, because the dude is advertising
his charms.)
>
>
>In the short time I've been alive, I have found out that there may not always
>be another contract, or another project, or another job, but there will
>always, ALWAYS be another woman. The doomsayers (usually the married or
>otherwise c*mm*tt*d) are always reciting the "one day, The Right Woman will
>come along and rock your world" litany, not realizing that some have already
>come and gone, and besides, I don't buy it. The decision to c*mm*t will
>ultimately be mine, and mine alone.
.
.
Well, hell--go for it.  That wasn't my drift at all.
>
>
>p.s. - what's the "T" for, Ms. D?
.
.
Theresa.
From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Whoopi and Ted Danson
Date: 6 Nov 1992 15:17:44 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

Interracial theme time, y'all!

Check out Whoopi Goldberg and Ted Danson.  I read in
"Entertainment Weekly" that my girl always gets a crush on her
white leading men (with the studios insisting on her having
exclusively black guys or none, and cutting out that hot love scene
between her and Sam Elliott in "Fatal Beauty") but this is the
height.  Especially when his wife is supposed to have almost died
giving birth to one of their kids, way back.  Looks like Patricia
Neal-Roald Dahl-time.  (For those not in the know, Patricia Neal was
an actress who had a stroke and her husband nursed her back to
health.  Eventually Dahl, a children's book author, got tired,
possibly of being a nursemaid instead of a husband, and divorced
her.  That shattered his halo but good.)

Furthermore, Whitney Houston's movie with Kevin Costner is coming
out soon, called "The Bodyguard." I saw the trailers:  Costner looks
a little chunky, to say the least.  All that fame and fortune must
be getting to him or perhaps he beefed up a bit to look like a
bodyguard.  And my girl Whitney, just beautiful as always.  La Diva
minus Bobby Brown's baby.  You got any information on any of this,
Steve Stovall?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.usa