HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 08:58:35 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: How to defeat AIDS

Missy J:
>In theory, I agree with much of what you say about women's control of
>contraception.  However, I note that a rather large segment of the
>feminist population already feels that it is massively unfair that
>nearly all current forms of birth control *are* the responsibility
>of the woman.  (Who takes the pills?  In whom are IUDs inserted?
>Who has to keep closest track of her bodily rhythms for Natural
>Family Planning?  Except for condoms--which women can still, if
>they choose to--have a measure of control over, *all* forms
>of contraception are exclusively left to the control of women.)
>(Sorry guys.)

The irony of the situation had not escaped me :)   I *do* think
it's massively unfair that virtually all forms of contraception place the
burden on women (I can pump my body full of hormones, I can use a device
that could result in sterilization or worse, or I can fill myself with
toxic compounds -- what lovely choices :)).  However, the choice to use or
not to use those methods rests entirely with me.

Using condoms to prevent STD's is a bit different.  First, it's the only
method available (other than abstinence) -- so I don't have many options.
Second, it can only be used with the consent of both partners -- so I lose
an element of control.  What I'd really like is a method that would act as
*both* contraception *and* disease prevention (other than abstinence, of
course :)) that I have complete control over, and that is safe, accessible,
and affordable.

Does that make sense?

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 25 Jul 1992 16:28:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Dan Quayle & Masturbation

On Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:27:40 EST 92price@GW.WMICH.EDU said:
> I wonder if people who think AIDS education should consist only of a flat-out
> "abstain or get married" ("just say 'no!'"), because those practices are safer
> than practicing the other forms of "safe sex," would also recommend
> masturbation
> for that reason.
I would.  Masturbation is totally harmless, and on its face does not
entail unfaithfulness nor promiscuity.
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CDELL
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:26:00 CST
From:         "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Politics by "mob oppression" ...

You implied harassment, and it sounded like a note of glee attached to
it. If you meant carrying signs, then perhaps you need to offer more
specificity in what you say. VMS
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 23:29:27 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: A quote

Gee, I thought the quote sounded like Bill "Great White Man from Hope"
Clinton.  Or Jesse "Keep Hope Alive" Jackson (by the way, he oughta
sue Clinton for playing off his gig).  Or Al "Scraped 20 Feet on the
Pavement" Gore.  Or Ann "Death Mask" Richards.  Or Mario "Citadel"
Cuomo.  Or maybe, just maybe, Ross "Substance?  I don't need no
steenking substance!" Perot.   Hmmm.
                                    ---Missy Justice
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:22:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject: RE: real men don't suffer consequences

On Mon, 20 Jul 1992 16:51:00 EST linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET> said:
> dear fred, a woman after my own heart.
>
> when my older son started dating seriously, i re-opened the sex-lecture. i gav
e
> him all the standard info, moral, biological, and then told him if he got anyo
ne
> pregnant i'd have him fixed, and i had the bricks outside just waiting.
>
> so far, its worked.

Careful--he may sue to divorce you.

> - linda  (going home now to make pesto and buff my bricks)
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 11:41:54 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Questions, questions

What about the men who leave as soon as they find out that the woman
is pregnant, the men who demand that the woman get an abortion, or, worst
of all, those men who kill the woman and the unborn child because he sees
them as hinderances.

Evelyn Duncan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:48:39 EDT
From:         jcs <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Positions of the Kerry ticket

>Posted on 30 Jul 1992 at 13:20:02 by BrownVM Mailer (103837)
>
>From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
>
>>Good Afternoon, and thank you all for coming:
>
>
>stuff deleted:
>
>yawn
>
>
>>                    --Missy Prez 2 B
>>                      and Kerry other president in waiting
>
>-linda suE saboE

ditto.

vote E-tickEt.
we won't bore you.

jEnnifEr
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 22:01:05 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      More on bias

From:         Andy Freeman <andy@CS.STANFORD.EDU>

>Huh?  I didn't conclude that Jamie is unaware of corruption/crime in
>the legislative branch/by demos.  I concluded that he didn't post
>about it.  I concluded that he's behaving as evenhandedly as Carl; if
>he wants to be considered unbiased, he can't do that.  Carl admits
>that he's biased; Jamie wants us to see him as unbiased.

False. I do not want anyone to see me as unbiased. I want
youse to see me as I am, and I know myself well enough not
to claim that I am unbiased.

Could Andy possibly think that it is a vice to post about one
instance of crime without posting about all the others? That's
an awfully strange view.
I suppose St. Valentine is enormously guilty for posting about
some parts of the world, but ignoring similar activities in
other parts of the world.
And I guess this is one of those vices of which I approve.

In case anyone is mistaking me for the New York Times of the
list, let me disabuse you. I prefer to be thought of as more
like The Nation. If you think what I am posting is not true,
let me know. If you object because I am not posting about
YOUR favorite issue, I'm not interested.


>-andy is contrary; he argues against his positions

We logicians have another word for that, but I suppose
"contrary" will do.

Jamie, who at least TRIES to be consistent
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:41:43 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: dumping Dan: myth or reality?

From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>

> As far as I can see, Bush will stick with Quayle for the same reasons
> he picked Dan:  Dan's a conservative and will bring the conservative
> vote, and Bush doesn't want someone like Kemp or Dole because that
> person may overshadow Bush.  So, my money's on Bush keeping Quayle.

> Evelyn Duncan

But conditioned have changed drastically so "the same reasons" theory
may not hold.  Four years ago Quayle was an unknown commodity.  People
were willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt.  Today, Quayle
is a known commodity.  He is laughing stock (sp?) of the American people.

Different set of inputs might cause a different set of output.

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:47:53 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Financing the gov't...

>> What would you consider "fair" if everyone were to pay the same *amount*
>> of tax?  On my lousy grad fellowship, I could hardly afford to pay
>> much, and if I am the standard, then the amount paid by the super-
>> rich would be less than an hour's worth of their time.  ..........
>
>I might have mislead you.  I have the *opinion* that a fair tax is
>a progressive one.

I note that a tax can be progressive on average yet flat marginally.

One disadvantage of progressive (or regressive) marginal rates is that
they make certain things impossible, things that we'd like in a tax
system.

For example, it can be hard to stop married people (or others who can
easily share expenses) from arranging their income split so as to
minimize their tax burden.  Therefore, "fairness" argues for taxing
such people on their total income; why should one's membership, or
lack thereof, in such an arrangement affect one's tax burden?

However, if we have progressive (or even regressive) marginal rates,
we can't do that.  (This is an arithmetic result, not one that depends
on how one sets up the progressive marginal rate system.)

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 10:18:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: capital punishment/abortion

that's just catholics.

-linda saboE
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: @POL
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 13:10:00 CST
From:         Ghost of Abbie <AHOFFMAN@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      Well, since I'm really the only historical ...

figure running in this elction, I say having a secretary of history is
expanding the list bureaucracy. I agree there could be a history czar
(kinda like that Logic Czar idea, what a perfect job for Jamie!), but
I agree with the Kerry ticket about proliferation of government (my
friend Valentine might vote for me if I stay anti-government, and what
the hell, I never liked those government guys like Daley and Nixon
anyway). No more government proliferation. In the spirit of compromise
with the JohnsoN/OlsoN ticket AND the Kerryx2 ticket, I can support
one Czar in each position, but they have to be their own secretaries!
Abbie, having a hot time today!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:56:00 EDT
From:         "push the button, frank!" <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: N-tickets

From: jimmy donal wales <jwales@COPPER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>
>N-tickets, please.
>It is plainly obvious that only the J1/J2 ticket can possibly win.

Hardly - you don't have any N's on the ends of any of your names.  Besides,
you have to face both the all-Kerry ticket and the all-Andy ticket, in
addition to Peter's positions and the JohnsoN/OlsoN ticket's armada of
half-spin doctors...:)

>--Jimbo
>p.s. I'm back.

Yay!  I knew you'd give in and come back eventually.

You know, with me back on the list, and Dan Evens returning, and Drew
Lewis returning, and now Jimbo back in the fold, it's almost like the
good old days of yore again...

Gary W. OlsoN                 "Turn the tables with our unity,    -L7,
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU   they're not a moral nor majority.  "Pretend
                               Wake up and smell the coffee,       We're
                               or just say no to individualty."    Dead"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.EDU
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R2).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 15:44:59 EST
From:         "Greg `TwoTone' Spiegelberg" <GSPIEGEL@BSA1.KENT.EDU>
Subject: Re: More on olympics
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.EDU

From:          "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.BITNET>

}Best,
}Peter  (running a dignified campaign for jobs and against mistreatment
}of working people)

Does this include having to pay taxes to help those who do NOT work?

-Greg
From: CORJB@RHODES.BITNET (Jason Briggs Cormier)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: ratings for tv
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:31:40 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

>The reality we see on television right now didn't once exist.  Of this
>I am certain, because the games and play that I experienced is nowhere
>near as violent as that of the children who are playing right now.
>To my recollection, violence wasn't nearly as accessible to children
>just ten years ago when I was playing my less-violent games.  True
>that doesn't prove cause and effect, but I think that it does say
>a good deal.

>>  Perhaps so, but now we've got Tipper wanna-bes censoring Bugs Bunny,
>>  Wile E. Coyote vs. Road Runner, etc. claiming the cartoons are
>>  showing violence isn't really harmful...

I was hardly referring to the cartoons, though the level of
violence and the graphicness of such in today's cartoons is
quite different from the cartoons of "my day".  I was
addressing the level of violence on television and at the
cinema.  Just think of some of the largest grossing movies
of the past two years.

>-j.b.
>>  MacPhil
-j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 00:30:00 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Financing the gov't...
              21 Jul 1992 15:42:28 EDT from <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>

KAT:

What would you consider "fair" if everyone were to pay the same *amount*
of tax?  On my lousy grad fellowship, I could hardly afford to pay
much, and if I am the standard, then the amount paid by the super-
rich would be less than an hour's worth of their time.  If they were
the standard, I would be in jail.  This seems highly unworkable to
me.  Besides, if we only taxed people at a level that *everyone*
could pay, we would hardly have any tax revenues at all.

BTW, as I recall, the much vaunted "luxury tax" only served to run
the luxury item maker out of business, and put those of the working
class who manufactured the items out of work.  If you want to tax
something that will generate revenue, you have to pick something that
large numbers of people can't just stop buying.  (Food would seem to
be the most likely candidate, but no one would suggest that.  However,
it would seem likely--to me, anyway--that a small tax on food items
would generate very large amounts of revenue, given that there are no
members of the population who would be able to simply avoid buying it
for very long.  I suppose the rich would find some way of generating
their own personal food, but since the rich are a miniscule portion of
the population, perhaps those who could not--or who chose not to go
to the trouble--would more than make up the difference.)
                                                ---Missy Justice
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%UCF1VM.BITNET@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 10:57:00 -0400
From:         Song Weaver <JULIE%DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Sex and marriage, sex and marriage, go to . . .

>-Greg, The Objective
> Vote Republican & keep gov't out of our lives
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Isn't this----^ a contradiction in terms?  At least with current
administrations...

--Julie

--------------------------------------------------------------------

"Naturally the common people don't want war... but after all it is the
leaders of a country who determine policy, and it is always a simple
matter to drag the people along...  All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger."

                          -- Hermann Goering, 1936
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:29:00 EST
From:         MING the Destroyer <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Positions of the Kerry ticket

question for the kerry ticket:

why do you wish to prevent people from burying their dead?  don't
you realize the health risks involved in waiting around for other
dead people to bury the dead?

and btw, what is it with your blatant discrimination against dead people?

brni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:16:23 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: N-tickets

Gary:
>Of course, the JohnsoN/OlsoN ticket has already demonstrated much...uh...
>dynamism, or at least some good chase scenes, so ya'd better hit the
>campaign trail fast...:)

Well, the JohnsoN/OlsoN ticket has certainly demonstrated its ability to
distract voters from the *real* issues.  Let's look at this Schrodinger gig
realistically.  How do we know Schrodinger even *had* a cat?  If he *did*
have a cat, and stuck it in a closet with a toxic gas, he'd have the SPCA,
PETA, and the ALF on him like flies on -- well, like flies, anyway.  They'd
trash his lab, and probably revoke his permission for animal
experimentation.  He'd spend so long in court he could never sit around
deriving equations.  Even if he *did* manage to derive the equation, no one
can solve the thing -- especially not with a howling cat nearby.  I mean,
really, look at it:  first you have to figure out what all those little
squiggly things are and what the letters stand for.  And then you have to
deal with the fact that the little pitchfork-thing (psi, I think) has no
physical meaning (even though the square of its absolute value has a
physical interpretation).  The whole thing smacks of Physics Correctness,
and the American people will not stand for it.

How's that, Missy?  Think we've got 'em on the run?

:) :) :) :)
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 14:54:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Entrepreneurship Chinese Style

yuck....i'm getting a little queesy with this stuff.

how far would we have to go before we'd be executing people accding to their
blood type? life for B+ ....death penalty for 0-.

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 13:49:14 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Another Gulf War?
Comments: To: POLITICS <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>

>What strikes me is that now.....Iraq will go along with the U.S.
>efforts to stop its weapons production....What do we have to do say
>we will use force every a couple of months to make Iraq comply
>to the UN?....I am surprised Bush will let the Un stand with their
>new proposal since if Bush used force it would have saved his ailing
>campaign....A little war is good for the soul....
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Charles

War is nothing but evil. It may in some cases be a lesser evil, but I
find this gung ho approach pretty offensive.

Dunstan--
 Dunstan  | Systems Design Division           |dv@gec-epl.co.uk
 Vavasour | CEGELEC Projects                  |From JANET:
          | Rugby, Warwickshire, CV21 1BU, UK |dv%uk.co.gec-epl@uk.ac.uknet
          | Tel: (+44) 788 563535             |Fax: (+44) 788 560767
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:52:57 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: questions for tkidd
              30 Jul 1992 18:34:27 GMT from <jwales@COPPER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

Jimbo the Most Moral:

And those reasons are....what, exactly?

                                       --Missy Prez 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS%UCF1VM.BITNET@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU"
X-VMS-Cc: JULIE
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:22:00 -0400
From:         Song Weaver <JULIE%DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET>
Subject:      Jails and GE

Why isn't anybody going to Jail?

The police are too busy enforcing anti-sodomy laws to worry about genuine
crime.

Locally, there was a case in which police officers posed as gay men, went
to the cruising sites, tried to pick guys up, and then busted them for
"soliciting for indecent purposes."  Note-- NO money was being exchanged.
One such exchange was as follows:

Cop: "Do you want to come to my place?"

Cruiser: "Sure."

Cop: "Would you like to *^&%*[<--insert sexual act specific to gay males here]?"
Cruiser: "Sure."

Cop busts cruiser because the act which _the cop suggested_ is illegal.

Julie "Can you say 'Entrapment'?" W.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:58:15 BST
From:         Dunstan_Vavasour <dunstan@GEC-EPL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Moves to Help Bush
Comments: To: POLITICS <POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>

Kerry;
>Hi, Sue.  Sorry it took so long to get this in :)
[stuff deleted]
>
>>10) Feature companies that promotegrowth along with environmental growth
>>along with enviornmental responsibility instead of eliminating jobs because
>>responsibility instead of eliminating of EPA policies.  (NASA in Houston
>>and Florida as featured on 'Nature' is a good example)
>
>Um, I don't think I understand this.  Demonstrating that economic growth
>and environmental soundness can go hand-in-hand seems more the Democratic
>line than the Republican one (environmental standards = job loss).  Maybe
>you could clarify?

The truth, of course, is that ultimately environmental soundness
shouldn't be a partisan issue. Do Republicans really adopt such a
hostile approach to environmental issues ?

Dunstan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: WVNET::IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 15:24:41 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: N-tickets

Dear friends,
It is a sad day in American politics when, in response to a highly
reasoned, insightful and thoughtful critique of the opposition
viewpoint, the opposition resorts with statements like this:

>  Ha!  The Kerry Campaign has apparently found it
>necessary to resort to smear ads.  Negative campaigning!
>The People of the Politics deserve better.  E Gary Olson
>and I plan to run a clean campaign!
>
>  (And, on behalf of Mr. Olson, let me reiterate that while
>he has looked at the Schroedinger Equation, he didn't actually
>solve it.  Besides, everyone did a little theorizing in their
>college days.)

Unable to defend their position with logic or reason, the Other Ns fall
back on those old chestnuts of political discourse.  Sirs, the American
people can see through your rhetoric.  Falsely impugning our motives and
offering puerile rationalizations will not disuade voters from supporting
the platform my running mate has so clearly put forth.

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:20:01 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Politics by "mob oppression" ...

VMS;

Did I say they were "harassing" Clinton?  They are holding signs.
I believe that is their right.
                              --MJ
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU