HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun)
Subject: Re: Bush's Pardons
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 21:02:16 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC

In article <nate.1031@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>    Perhaps so. I'm certainly not sure why innocent men need to be pardoned, 
>but I agree that it was ballsy on Bush's part because it doesn't necessarily 
>reflect the best historical light on himself. I really do think that Bush's 
>motivations for issuing the pardons had very little if anything to do with 
>fear of what would come out in trial, and almost everything to do with the 
>desire to spare good men the ordeal of having to defend themselves.

Innocent men need to be pardoned for the same reason that innocent men have the
right to remain silent, the right to be represented by an attorney, the right to a
trieal by a jury of their peers, etc., which is that, when a citizen is in an
adversary relationship with the state there need to be limits on the state if the
state is to remain a guarantor of liberty and not become an enemy of it.  In this
case, there were no limits on prosecutor Walsh.  He had unlimited money, unlimited
discretion, no oversight.  He used his powers to extort guilty pleas from minor
officials who had neither the power, the connections or the money to fight back.
From those who did fight, he got nothing.  The problem with Walsh was his lack of
limits and lack of oversight; he had to be stopped.  Bush couldn't fire him, so he
did the next best thing - make him irrelevant.  Even that hasn't stopped him though.
Clinton should now pardon Bush and call a halt to the whole farce.

>
>--
>Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
>Psychology Department               Indiana University
>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu


===============================================================================
William Crosmun
crosmun@dg-rtp.dg.com

===============================================================================
"No matter what the subject, there is some group which wants government
 to regulate or  subsidize it, and  there are always those  in Congress
 eager to take  over more power  and control.  But it  is impossible to
 get something for  nothing.  The government  produces no goods, so  it
 can hand out  favors to some  people only by taking  the earnings  and
 property of others first."

                       From the Libertarian Party platform - 1992

===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: rickertj@athena.cas.vanderbilt.edu (John Rickert)
Subject: Re: A Stolen Life, A Dying Soul
Organization: Vanderbilt University Mathematics Department
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 05:39:50 GMT

   

   Just reminded me of what Alphonse Karr, of "plus cela change" fame,
said, "If we are to abolish the death penalty, I should like to see the
first step taken by our friends the murderers."


John Rickert
rickertj@athena.cas.vanderbilt.edu


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: gsmith@polyhymnia.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith)
Subject: Re: Conservative?  Hahaha....
Organization: IWR, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 12:22:47 GMT

In article <w482wB2w165w@major.panix.com> dos@major.panix.com (Dave
O'Shea) writes:

>> Gays aren't calling for the use of the word 'fag' to be made illegal.

>Beg to differ - in many cases, that's exactly what one group or another
>is looking for.

Name the group, and give your evidence that this is what they want.

This isn't an urban myths group, you know.

-- 
     Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/IWR/Ruprecht-Karls University 
               gsmith@kalliope.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: Chelsea's school ...
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:46:14 GMT

In article <1ikjroINNbhj@meaddata.meaddata.com> johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend) writes:
>In article <nate.1038@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>, nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
||> Let's say the government gives these 
||> vouchers out and a bunch of parents decide to opt for home schooling 
||> instead. That way the parents could pocket their $2000 voucher (partly 
||> paid for with my tax dollars) and their kids could get a top notch 
||> education by reading Bible verses and getting hands-on computer training 
||> on a sleek new C-64.
|
|$2000 will buy a heckuva better computer than a C-64.  If the parents (of all
|people) care so little for their child's education that they pocket the money
|for beer or something, they're bound to get the kid taken away from them
|anyway.  Even when a child is home schooled, he or she still has to pass
|standardized tests (and they generally do far better than the kids in public
|schools).

You're both missing something.  The voucher is not cash.  The parents
can't pocket it, the voucher is only spendable at a school.  I don't
know how or if it's supposed to address home schooling.  There ought
to be some arrangement for buying textbooks.

-- 
Mike Van Pelt          | What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
mvp@netcom.com         | Judging from realistic simulations involving a
                       | sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
                       | can assume it will be pretty bad. -- Dave Barry
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bush's Pardons
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 02:21:18 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX

dodsonsl@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:

> 
> So what do you conservative types think of the Bush pardons?  Over on
> your second favorite newsgroup, alt.fan.dan.quayle, they're pretty
> upset about it.  I don't think anyone is really surprised Bush did it,
> though. I guess things will be pretty boring scandal-wise now that the
> party of the 'moral right' won't be in charge anymore.
> 
> -Scott
> 


Don't say "Republican Party".  Say "Continuing Criminal Enterprise".


Hopefully Slick Willy will finally once again allow us to use the phrase 
"Foreign Policy", without having to mention a "Special Prosecutor".

Pope Charles.

--
popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11810 alt.rush-limbaugh:13208 alt.politics.homosexuality:9115 alt.politics.clinton:19774 alt.politics.bush:15654
From: rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Special Rights for Heterosexuals (Re: Text of the CO Gay Discrimination Provisions Ammendment)
Date: 7 Jan 1993 09:16 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu

In article <1ifrblINNjji@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, an104@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ric Helton) writes...
| 
|>NO PROTECTED STATUS BASED ON HOMOSEXUAL, LESBIAN OR BISEXUAL ORIENTATION.
| 
|Notice heterosexuals are still (perversely) protected by the existing
|anti-discrimination ordinances in Colorado.

	You mean it grants Heteros "special rights"?


on Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson G
Gasdon Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gads
on Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson G
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11937 alt.politics.bush:15706 alt.politics.clinton:19874
From: popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices and Secular Reasoning 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 13:58:53 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX

paws@spam.cray.com (Daniel Baehr) writes:

> 
> In article <B74VwB1w165w@unkaphaed.gbdata.com>, popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (W
> 
>                [MUCH deleted]
> 
> > 
> > Recommended reading.  Andrew D. White's "the Hisrtory Of Warfare between 
> > Science And Religion."   Science has been hampered by religous 
> > authorities every step of the way.  This book is a great primer on some 
> > of the ways this has been done.  Even now, Pat Robertson's people, the 
> > Christian Coalitian, is endeavoring to elect school boards who will put 
> > the pseudosciense of Creationism into school curicula even tho 
> > creationism has been proven false.
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>      Just HOW does one disprove something that is to be believed by faith?
> 
> > 
> > Pope Charles
> > 
> > --
> > popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
> > Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763
> > 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis
> 
> 
>       Daniel Baehr
> --
> +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Daniel Baehr Work: paws@spam.cray.com  Home: daniel_baehr@bearsden.UUCP  |
> |              Portal: paws@cup.portal.com  -> (Public Access UNIX system) |
> +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+


If one believes by faith that 2 + 2 = 5, does faith make that so?  If the 
basic assumptions of Creationism are false and palpably untrue, does 
faith somehow turn that falasity into truth?  No.  QED

Pope Charles

--
popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: I'm Famous!
Date: 5 Jan 93 20:03:30 GMT
Organization: the HP Mtn.View Resp. Cntr.


Who cares anymore!  

Your buddies just got pardoned... I think even less of you
than I did before...  

Law and Order..Justice.. yeah, right.
From: birmingh@fnalo.fnal.gov (Phillip J. Birmingham)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: So, anyone want to talk about Rush Limbaugh around here?
Date: 4 Jan 93 13:07:30 GMT
Organization: Deep Thirteen
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalo.fnal.gov

In article <LARRY.93Jan3150126@peak.psl.nmsu.edu>, larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:

> Seriously, though, I wish Rush would start "acting up" again so there was
> something to talk about. I just saw his second appearance on
> Pozner/Donahue and he was a true gentleman. So was Pozner. Donahue was, of
> course, an ass.

         I caught part of the first appearance, and I agree with your
    impression. Phil Donahue is really embarassing to some of us lefties.

-- 
 Phillip J. Birmingham   birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov  
 I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: kellyj@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kelly Johnson)
Subject: Re: Sex Education in Public Schools
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 02:24:01 GMT

In article <C0p9Iy.Avr@vcd.hp.com> thatcher@vcd.hp.com (Garen Thatcher) writes:
>...Stuff removed...
>
>What also burns me up is the fact that those people who advocate that the
>above referenced books become part of the education are those who are 
>trying hard to remove ALL religious aspects from the education system.
>This country was founded on religious principles, many people came to the
>US seeking religious freedom, and MANY MANY people today believe in a God,
>so why are we removing all aspects from the history of our country while
>tring to replace it with this garbage mentioned above. 

You can thank the courts for their poor interpretation of the Constitution.
An amendment designed to keep the government from enforcing a state run
religion is now being used to systematically remove God from public forum.
All in the name of "sticking to the Constitution".  Heck, right now I'd even
be happy if schools would teach the importance if abiding the law rather than
teaching moral relativism.  

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: judi@wam.umd.edu (Jay T Stein -- nietS T yaJ)
Subject: Re: Sex Education in Public Schools
Originator: judi@rac1.wam.umd.edu
Organization: The Bedrock Royal Order of Water Buffaloes
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:57:30 GMT

What: <1993Jan8.205256.13847@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
Who:  sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)

>(comments about obscene books used for sex-ed deleted)
>
>Reading this made me wish that 'Farenheit 451' was real.

As long as we're burning books, Simon, how 'bout letting *everybody* burn
all copies of the books of their choice?  That should pretty much do it.
--
     _____     __      __               -=* Jay T Stein *=-
   |   |      |  \    /        
   |   |  in  |   |  |               Internet: judi@wam.umd.edu
|__|   |      |__/    \__               GEnie: J.STEIN18

But still I fear and still I dare not laugh at the madman.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Rush and the Clinton Inauguration
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:04:53 GMT

    Anybody got any good theories about why Rush is being so coy about 
his invitation to the Clinton Inauguration? I realize that the idea of 
the Clinton presidency sort of galls him, but I would have thought that 
the experience would provide him with hours of anecdotes for his radio 
show. He could probably deduct his travel as a business expense, and I 
doubt that it could be any more difficult for him to cope with than the 
Donahue show. I have a couple of ideas about possible motivations for 
him playing "hard-to-get", but I'm curious to hear what people around 
here think.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11760 alt.rush-limbaugh:13177
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Conservative? Hahaha....
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:58:04 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1993Jan11.122247.19895@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> gsmith@polyhymnia.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:

|In article <w482wB2w165w@major.panix.com> dos@major.panix.com (Dave
|O'Shea) writes:

|>> Gays aren't calling for the use of the word 'fag' to be made illegal.

|>Beg to differ - in many cases, that's exactly what one group or another
|>is looking for.

|Name the group, and give your evidence that this is what they want.

|This isn't an urban myths group, you know.

University of Michigan for one.
-- 
Mob rule doesn't become any prettier, just because the mob start to call itself
a government.
It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: Conservative?  Hahaha....
Reply-To: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:26:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.051743.26682@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:
]on the grounds that they were left-handed. The 'Cracker Barrel'
>
>]restaurant chain, however, flatly states that they will deny
>]employment to any and all gay applicants, strictly on those grounds.
>Hm, considering the high rate of AIDS in the gay community compared
>to that in most other groups, maybe they aren't so stupid in doing so.
>


It's not because of AIDS. They don't say, "We're concerned about AIDS.
Take an HIV test, and if it comes out OK, we'll hire you." They just
don't want gay employees, period.

BTW, are you suggesting, based on your comment, that discrimination
against HIV-positive individuals, of any sexual orientation, should
be *mandatory*?


>John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)

Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: fritzs@microsoft.com (Fritz Sands)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 07 Jan 93 18:44:07 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1993Jan6.202458.10613@csc.ti.com> dp writes:
| 
| Maybe you should talk to the over 6000+ people that were exposed to
| Hepatitis-A at various parties catered by a company in Texas that had a
| practicing homosexual male food handler contaminate their food at several
| holiday parties last month and see if they think that it's stupid.  Maybe you
| should talk to the 20+ people that are still in the hospital and see if either
| they or their insurance company thinks that it's stupid.

Do you propose that all food workers be tested for hepatitis?  Are gay
hepatitis carriers more contagious than het hepatitis carriers?

| Isn't it stupid to ignore the fact that sodomy (specifically anal/oral sex,
| performed in that order) IS a public health issue.  To ignore this is a
| "stupid".

I assume that you are in favor of explicit "safe sex" instruction, therefore.
Condoms, after all, are effective in stopping the transmittal of hep viruses
as well as HIV.

| True, but so is pretending to fighting for "homosexual rights" by giving the
| AIDS virus "civil rights". 

I am aware of no move to grant voting status to viruses.  What are you talking
about?

|  I have a cousin who died last fall because of the
| "civil rights" that the so-called "defenders of the gay community" were able
| to win for the AIDS virus.  Sure, he chose (his words, not mine) to live the
| homosexual lifestyle that eventually killed him (once again, his words),

A virus killed him.

|   but
| the "leaders" of the gay community must accept responsibility for their
| fighting against an early quarantine of those suffering from the AIDS virus.
| How many people are now dead because these "leaders" fought against such a
| quarantine.

Probably not many, since people are able to spread the virus for years before
any symptoms appear.

| He also would raise the question of how homosexuality fits the evolution
| model.  Would homosexual male animals ever reproduce in nature?  If they did,
| they would clearly be bisexual, NOT homosexual.  How could male homosexuality
| have ever evolved?

First, many/most people who identify themselves as gay are not Kinsey-6.

Second, there are certainly ways in which a trait that lowers fertility in
an individual can be selected for, if the trait can enhance fertility in
the group as a whole (which tends to include a lot of close relatives).
One possible selective advantage would be for some percentage of the males
in a group to be interested in each other and whumping predators on the
outskirts of the troup, rather than fighting over females.

   Fritz

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: Jeffrey.Thorson <Jeffrey.Thorson@mixcom.mixcom.com>
Subject: Just like America
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 03:34:53 GMT

Is my count accurate?

Clinton's cabinet consists of
all lawyers except for 1 doctor
and 1 educator. 

Note the absence of business people.


-- 
Jeffrey.Thorson@mixcom.com    | There are two rules for success:
Symmetrix Software, Inc.      |    1) Never tell everything you know.
                              |                      -- Roger H. Lincoln
                              |
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11965 talk.politics.misc:66757
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Conservative Values (Re: New group proposal:  alt.conservative.forum)
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:54:27 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1993Jan7.160030.1478@hemlock.cray.com> rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:

>Let's see if I've got this straight.  The recession started in July 1990
>because of a budget compromise that was not passed until the end of 
>September 1990, right?

 As I posted in a different message, the problems of 1990 were rooted in the
Deficit Reduction Act of 1986. Remember when the Media Elites were all cry-
ing about how the over 100 billion dollar deficits of the mid-80's would
cause ruin. The hysteria caused many revenue-neutral tax proposals which were
mainly tax increases. The amasing part was that the GDP continued growing
until 1990. The Darman Budget Deal of 1990 was crafted to raise taxes again
to cut the deficit. And again and tax increase caused tax revenue fall off. 
How many times must we raise taxes and drop revenues before we get the picture.
We are over the peak of the laffer curve.

>Could you name some of these economists?

 I was wondering when these posts would be questioned :> I watched a debate
held on PBS which was sponsered by Mr. Buckley. The debate was held in a 
college called "Bards College" or something simular. The main topic was the
national debt, one of the major problems facing our country. Four economist
defended each side of the issue. The attendees were Professors from major
colleges. Unfortunately I was not in a position to take notes. The debate
was heavier than the usual mass market stuff. Some additional research would
be required to provide names. I was assuming that a lot of netters had 
watched this program though. Its content was a surprise to me. Ill be back.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: thatcher@vcd.hp.com (Garen Thatcher)
Subject: Re: Sex Education in Public Schools
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:20:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

The passages that were posted were very troubling. I have 2 kids that have
not yet begun school. If I were to hear that the local schools were using
any of the above books, I would opt for a private school, home schooling,
or a church education of my choice. I do think that there are some things
that I as a parent should teach/expose my kids to. It is not up to the
educators to decide what is best for my kids. That is the parents resp. and
is why systems like the school board and the PTA were started. 

What also burns me up is the fact that those people who advocate that the
above referenced books become part of the education are those who are 
trying hard to remove ALL religious aspects from the education system.
This country was founded on religious principles, many people came to the
US seeking religious freedom, and MANY MANY people today believe in a God,
so why are we removing all aspects from the history of our country while
tring to replace it with this garbage mentioned above. 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc