HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 07:57:46 EDT
From:         jcs <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      electronic town meeting with the N Tickets

before i go out and cast my hard-earned vote
i would like to hear from the candidates
where they stand on the shoe issue.

jcsteelE who thinks there should be E tickets as well...

oh, that reminds me, i inadvertently tossed the file
containing all the rotisserie stuff.  so, you are all
losers in my book, i mean, winners.
jcs
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 11:01:02 EDT
From:         jcs <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: This place is infested!

>>In reference to your last message:
>>1) Prove God does not exist.
>>                   --Missy Justice
>
>  It seems to me that the burden of
>proof is on those who would use "God"
>to support their arguments.
>
>  It also seems to me that there are
>lists available for that argument, and
>this is not one of them.
>
>                        -Tim

Yeah, but if it is proven that "god" does not exists,
just think of how the climate of this list will change!

just think of all the new arguments!! We could debate
currency, morals, laws, you name it! just think of the fun!

i'm getting sweaty just thinking about it.

And, if "god" does exists, i wanna know what kind of shoes
he/she wears, dammit!

jenna cole steele (who may just join the J ticket if they'll have me)
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
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 11:49:14 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: this just in!

Sorry, I forgot to include WashiNgtoN.

-j.b.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 13:25:12 EDT
From:         jcs <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      i'm on thE E tickEt to paradise

here are the things that the E-tickEt stands for.

short and swEEt, because we don't bore you, and we don't
make you gag.

bEEr:  all of it. even the non-alcoholic kind,

womEn's right to choosE

womEn's right to changE hEr mind,

Education:  including the important three: sEx, drugs, rock-n-roll, not
            nec. in that order.

low hEEls: for all! even princE!

rEcycling: EdiblE cups and platEs, hey, if they can make EdiblE
           undies, they should be able to make edible anything.

hallowEEn: biggest night in rock and roll,  in fact, it will
           become inaugral address night if you vote E ticket.


The E tickEt would also like to remind the voters that
the E tickEt are also tall girls, and can get stuff off the
top shelf of the pantry, without the benefit of a stepstool
a toadstool or a stool sample.

And while one member of the E tickEt can cook, the other
has room sErvicE on spEEd dial.

what the hEll ElsE do you want?

you know what to do.

jEnnifEr ElisE colE stEEle
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 12:03:57 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Questions, questions

On Tue, 28 Jul 1992 10:51:03 -0500 Jason Briggs Cormier said:
>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
>
>        What about them?  They should go to jail.
>
>        -j.b.

How many do go to prison?  How many get off scott free?

Evelyn Duncan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:14:00 EST
From:         MING the Destroyer <199561011@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: questions for tkidd

j.b.:

i suggest that you study world religions for a bit, like, take
a good comparative religions class or something.  because if you
think that all religions are adhering to the same moral code, then
you are very naive.

you will be unlikely to find an islamic or christian equivalent to
the kama sutra (although the jewish tradition has the song of solomon,
which christians ignore in a big way).

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:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:08:05 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: pavlov's dog vs. schrodinger's cat

Fellow listees:
Our distinguished opponents have offered the following:

>  The question of the superposition of states (the so-called "state's
>rights" issue) is one of obvious importance to the very foundation of
>this nation.  No candidate unprepared to address this issue can hope
>to keep the nation strong.

Perceptive readers will immediately take note that Messrs. JohnsoN and
OlsoN were not willing to explain the relevance of their concern for this
issue until we challenged them to do so.  The statement above is a tacit
acknowledgement that our position is, in fact, concordant with that held by
all informed virtual voters.

>  And what have we seen from the Kerry campaign.  No plan.  Nothing.
>Ask yourselves - ask them - what experience they have for dealing with
>the issue?  Can you trust our future to candidates who say "we don't
>have to deal with it - let the next generation deal with it"?

Our record speaks for itself.  Which ticket offered the first clear
position statement?  Which offered the first critical assessment of the
opposition?  Which has had the strongest effect in promoting real
discussion of the critical issues facing the virtual electorate?  Without
our leadership, would any of the voters be aware that Mrs. Smith even
existed?  Would they understand the difference between CAT scans and KAT
scans?  Would the word "shoe" ever have been mentioned?

We *are* the next generation.

>  The JohnsoN and OlsoN ticket is willing to take a stand on the issue.
>We endorse the tried and true Copenhagen interpretation.  We are willing
>to do what it takes to settle the issue.  Even though we risk alienating
>ourselves from the Stimlies (the anti-Denmark faction).

We can only be pleased that our opposition is finally responding to the
true challenge of this election.  At the same time, we must remind list
readers that, although they have apparently disavowed any connection to
sheep ranchers, their endorsement of Copenhagen suggests a more-than-
passing acquaintance with the special interest snuff lobby.

We remain sincerely yours . . .
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 11:08:23 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: If A then B

Poor Gary. He's so confused, he doesn't even know whose advice
to take. Stick with me, kid, 5 to 7 I won't steer you wrong.

Now, to Travis....

[me]

>> Yeah, but that has nothing to do with the odd conclusion you drew,
>> namely, that anything that cannot be proven false must be true.

>If 2+2=26, then 3+3=90.
>Prove the above statement false.

Dear Travis, how could I prove a statement false when it is
in fact true???

Perhaps what you MEANT to say is that if a statement is true, then
it cannot be proven false. What you ACTUALLY said is that if a
statement cannot be proven false, then it is true. That is,
you may have mistaken "If A, then B" for "If B, then A."


Jamie

I am a professional logician. Don't you try this at home.
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
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 09:20:16 -0400
From:         Andrew Allen <E7L8ALL@TOWSONVX.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: faze the nation

Our esteemed opponents make an important omission in their assessment
of the "letter thing" :

>Well, that does it for this round of 'faze the nation.'  Tune in tomorrow,
>and remember, the timothY johnsoN/garY olsoN ticket gives you two letters,
>whereas other tickets only give you one.  Think of that 'round election time,
>won't you?

We the Y's Guys remind the Tall Guys that they are running against a team
that is in fine standing regarding the letter thing...

other aNdY/ steveN raffertY

Don't allow the Tall Guys to fool you with their clever omissions of fact,
vote for the Y's Guys!!!

>Gary W. Olson

-other aNdY
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: capital punishment/abortion
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 23:19:00 GMT

[I deleted some more or less sensible commentary.  Just to skip to
the really good stuff.]

> I believe the Bible is perfectly clear in its presentation of abortion as
> wrong and capital punishment as appropriate.  If "G"od wanted us to know
> that capital punishment was not to be used, then why was it required of
> Jesus?

This is just the sort of thing I find entirely irrelevant to any
discussion of politics.  While it could of course be sensible to
quote from the Bible in the unlikely event one were to find an
actual argument there, it is *not* sensible to simply cite the Bible
in support of (for example) capital punishment.

The rest of the post was more or less o.k.  To point out that being
anti-choice (o.k., pro-life) and being in favor of capital punishment
isn't necessarily self-contradictory (since capital punishment deals
with convicted criminals and abortion deals with tissues) is perfectly
valid.  To cite the Bible's presentation (ho) is invalid.

> ---Robert
>

--Jimbo


Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:17:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Positions of the Kerry ticket

>Good Afternoon, and thank you all for coming:


stuff deleted:

yawn


>                    --Missy Prez 2 B
>                      and Kerry other president in waiting

-linda suE saboE
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 09:46:10 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      re: ... tough choice
              29 Jul 1992 12:05:14 GMT from <HUMPHRY@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU>

I would like to point out to an inconsistency between the
following two positions:

         1. A fetus is a developing human being hence abortion
            is murder.

         2. Fetus is made out of (eqaul) contributions from both
            the man and the woman, therefore the father's opinion
            has to be included before a decsion to abort can be
            made.

The contradiction is that either the fetus is a human being who
does not "belong" to anybody, or if it belongs to either or both
the father and the mother, then it cannot be a human being and
abortion cannot be called a murder.

Also regarding the second position: apparently a sperm can stay
viable (alive?) for a few days.  So my question is: after a
sexual act during which the man gives the woman all those living
and viable sperms, could the woman wash up, take a shower,
discard (kill?) the sperms from her body, or does she need a
written consent from the man?

--KAT
From: HUMPHRY@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Patrick L. Humphrey)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: re: ... tough choice
Date: 29 Jul 1992 11:53:52 GMT
Organization: Rice University

In article <POLITICS%92072621592745@OHSTVMA.IRCC.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET> writes:
 
>
>PLH:
>
>I don't understand why you claim that the law "didn't work" prior to Roe.
>It worked in the sense that law-abiding persons did not have abortions, the
>same way that other laws keep people from committing illegal acts.  Unless you
>can demonstrate that abortion law was broken significantly more often than
>other laws, I don't see how you can find it less effective than the majority
>of laws in the United States.  If you are arguing for the repeal of other
>laws, however, I suppose that a point could be made.  However, that is
>another argument entirely.
 
Laws keep people from committing illegal acts?  Then what the hell are
we doing with all these police around?
 
(Whether the law in question was effective or not is pretty much moot --
it evidently wasn't, else the term "pro-choice" would be unknown to us in
this age.  Trying to tie it to the relative frequency with which such a
law was broken is nothing more than a bad job of trying to sidetrack this
wrangle, and it's not playing here.  Back to square zero for you, and try
again.)
 
--PLH, one of those old ridge-runners from Bloody Harlan, who still thinks
the Constitution means what it says...thus, he's still pro-choice on a
*lot* of stuff.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: Marshall University
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: _IN%"POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 13:16:00 EDT
From:         "Michael J. McCarthy" <YEA003@MARSHALL.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Wichita (AP)

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 11:30:09 -0400
From: "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject: Wichita (AP)
>
> A state judge freed an abortion clinic protester, agreeing with her
> that life begins with conception.  "She was trying to prevent a
> greater harm".
> ----------
> Mark this down as a proud day for justice.  Congratulations to Sedgwick
> County District Judge Paul W. Clark!
>
> ---Robert

        Mark this down as a day for legislating from the bench.  A major point
of the _Roe v. Wade_ case was that no precedent existed for concluding that
life legally begins at conception.  You recently had an enjoyable time stating
that the phrase "separation of church and state" was not contained in the
Constitution.  Where in that document does it state that life begins at
conception?  Will you make good on your $50.00 deal?

-------------
Mike McCarthy
Marshall Univ. History Dept.
Huntington, WV 25755, USA
YEA003@Marshall.WVNET.Edu
YEA003@MARSHALL.BITNET
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:28:06 EDT
From:         Tim Johnson <ST402711@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Time and again

  JohnsoN/OlsoN

  The Candidates with History.

  JohnsoN/OlsoN

  The Candidates for the Future.

  JohnsoN/OlsoN

  The Candidates of Choice.




 [this advertisement posted by the johnson-olson presidential campaign.]
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 11:40:27 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Is Quayle pro-choice?

From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>

> You are incorrect.  Quayle is right.  If a D & C is done *immediately*
> after a rape (key word: immediately), there is almost no chance that
> conception has taken place, if the D & C is done within 72 hours of
> intercourse.  Sperm and egg do *not* meet instantaneously.  It takes
> a *little* time.

So how is this D & C different than RU486 -- the "morning
after" pill.  And why would Quayle be for one and against the
other?  Or maybe Quayle is for the RU486, is he?

>                --MJ

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:04:42 -0400
From:         "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      button your fly

 I didn't catch the ID of the sender of the Levi Strauss message but
 thanks anyway.  They were *extremely* pleased with my condemnation of
 their stand against the Boy Scouts of America.

 ---Robert

 "Before I formed thee in the womb I knew thee; amd before
 thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee."
                                --- Jer. 1:5
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 26 Jul 1992 22:02:50 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: This place is infested!
              27 Jul 1992 02:22:53 GMT from <jwales@COPPER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

Jimbo:

In reference to your last message:

1) Prove God does not exist.

2) Define "unreal."
                   --Missy Justice
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 10:56:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: more on SS#'s, Missy/MacPhil

kerry,
when were you at unm? i lived in NM from 68-77 and was in psych. dept. at unm
from 73-77.
i had same problem w/ss#...in fact, do you remember the big billboards on I-25
or I-40 (forget which one, im awful w/numbers-all kinds :)) with the childs
face? real big-brother stuff because that was when gov't. started push to
require ss# for our children.
too bad nobody paid attention.
i used to argue w/people at grocery stores, school, everywhere when they asked
for my ss#. i just kept repeating "its illegal to request that information".
sadly, i am asked for it now almost as often (never when cashing checks tho),
and just as sadly, i find i haven't the time or inclination to lecture people.
so much info is attached to that number now, seems like banging on the brick
wall.

-linda
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: delisle@eskimo.celestial.com (Ben Delisle)
Subject: Re:      new CNN polls
Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <-
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 07:57:56 GMT

        "push the button, frank!" <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET> writes:
> From today's CNN/USA Today poll of registered voters:
> 
> 49% for Clinton
> 28% for Bush
> 20% undecided
> 2% for Perot.
> 
	20% undeciced? I doubt that, I beleive that they are
skewing their data and saying that people are ``undecided'' when
they are really voicing their stand for an alternative or third
party such as the Libertarians. It makes little sense to me that 
so much coverage was goven to H. R. Perot when he was on the ballot
in states numbering in the 20's; while someone like A. Marrou is
on the ballots of states numbering in the 40's.
	I belive that the undecided percentages is really under 5%
or so, there are several third parties. The media is so well 
finance extorted into only covering the main stream people, with a 
rich guy thrown in, that they are missing important voices in their
blackouts of these people.  
 
--
 +-(c)--------------------------+  
 | delisle@eskimo.celestial.com |    Nothing is fool proof, 
 +------------------------------+    Fools are too ingenius.
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:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:29:23 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      Re: Bush/Quayle

Evelyn:
>If Bush dropped Quayle, the conservative Republicans would still vote
>for him for President, but they would not give him support after the
>election.  They never really trusted Bush, anyway.  Remember Bush's
>description of Reaganomics before Bush became Reagan's VP?

I hadn't thought of it that way.  Neat!  Do you suppose Bush (or, heck, *
any* political candidate) bothers to think that far ahead?  After all,
it'll be his last term, so what would he lose by loss of post-election
support?  And would those losses be perceived as "cancelling" any gains in
votes following a new V.P. candidate?

Thanks for the nifty response.
Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:13:37 EST
From:         MacPhil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: How to defeat AIDS
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>
              21 Jul 1992 16:39:05 -0400 from <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WV NET.EDU>

On Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:39:05 -0400 <KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU> said:
>MacPhil:
>>Women can't choose/control their sex partner(s) ?
>
>Some can.  In theory, I suppose all can.  In practice, though, many (don't
>know whether this is some, many, or most :)) can't.

Can't or won't?

Not to be pedantic...they do have a choice, just as men do.

N.B.  I didn't bring up the case of rape since it's not a sex act.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
When ambidextrous people can't do it right, we do it left.

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 14:23:37 -0400
From:         "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      locating dead node / ignore this

 knock knock.

 "Before I formed thee in the womb I knew thee; amd before
 thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee."
                                --- Jer. 1:5
From: 92price@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: GE - WE BRING GOOD THINGS TO LIFE
Date: 27 Jul 92 16:31:12 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

FRED writes:
> 2. Why isn't anyone going to jail? I have an ideological problem with
> 20 year sentences for stealing $20 with a gun but no time served for
> bilking the government or private investors out of huge sums of money.
> 
> If our system of justice is truely equal then why don't white collar
> criminals spend time behind bars in REAL jails?

No room--jails filled up with more a more terrifying menace :-), long-
haired college-students who get together on the week-ends to listen to
Pink Floyd and smoke marijuana!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Ewige Blumenkraft!!             |            Kai Alexis Price
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 10:19:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: A Good Tactical Move?

sue,
i don't think it would make a whole lotta difference.
anyway, it wouldn't be anything new, republican presidents always invoke
past (usually dead) democrats in their speeches (ie: fdr, dead-kennedy's).
even danny compared himself to jfk.
so what's one confused democratic governor gonna do to help?
-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:55:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: prolifers and informed discussion

On Tue, 21 Jul 1992 08:43:00 EDT rf35 <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU> said:
> Greetings:
>
>         I really have reservations about saying what follows in
> this post; but I believe it is correct.  I'll feel bad enough
> about sending it shortly, I'm sure.
Yes, you will.


>         I expressed my reasons for believing that women have
> a right to abortion (even granting that the fetus is a person).
> From pro-life activists all that I read in return were slogans
> that my conclusion must be wrong.  Surprisingly, it was indiv-
> iduals who were pro-choice who were doing their best to provide
> objections to the line of reasoning I was attempting to advance.
Apparently, you missed my post regarding implied consent.  It's in the
archives.

>                                         Richard A. Fyfe
>                                         rf35@umail.umd.edu
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU