HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bjones@convex.com (Brad Jones)
Subject: Re: Media coverage for Marrou/Lord (call these #'s!)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:29:48 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

Although I probably would not vote for any Libertarian candidates, their
party has long had my sympathy.  The Democrats and Republicans, together,
have very effectively stifled competition.  Just look at the mish-mash of
requirements that must be met by other than the "Big 2" to run for office.
Hell, in Texas we even have a law in place that negates a write-in vote
unless the candidate has "officially declared as a write-in candidate".
So much for trying to vote for whom you please.  In the small town I live
in, we used to elect half our city council that way, but no more.

We need half a dozen candidates _plus_ "none of the above" for all offices,
but the media (which is by their own admission liberal and pro-Democrat) is
happy to limit things to 2 parties, except when a third presence is over-
powering (i.e., Perot today, Wallace in the 60s).  I wouldn't care if the
networks can't make their predictions 2 seconds after the polls close or
if it took a week to tabulate the votes if it meant I could vote for some-
one I truly wanted rather than always picking the lesser of 2 evils.

As far as I'm concerned, the US only offers one (1) more candidate for each
national office than did the former USSR.  Lucky us!  Two people that espouse
different philosophies, but when they get to Washington, D.C. they join
together in their race for the pork.


Brad
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pas@kepler.unh.edu (Paul A Sand)
Subject: Re: Call 1-800-LIV-FREE if you want to nuke Washington DC
Organization: University of New Hampshire
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 09:07:41 GMT

me: Mark Eckenwiler
ps: Paul Sand

me: I hope it hasn't escaped everyone's attention that Ipser posts from
    Singapore, which "enjoys" so freedom-loving a government that the
    Wall Street Journal was banned there a few years ago. I won't even
    bother recounting the story of my Singaporean college classmate who
    was arrested and held without charges for several months.

ps: Exactly what, I wonder, was supposed to be the point of the above
    paragraph? Other than to demonstrate Mark's grasp of the
    international scene, of course.

me: The point is whatever you want it to be, you hermeneutical wonder.

In that case, it's pointless. Thanks to Mark for clearing that up.
Oops, there's more:

me: If the fact that Ipser chose to relocate to a repressive regime in
    order to earn his keep -- posting all the while about the
    oppressiveness of government generally -- is of no significance to
    you, Paul, then just ignore me and live free. Or die.

Gee, ain't overheated rhetorical bluster fun? All to cover up a simple
ad hominem.

If Ed were an apologist for Singaporean tyranny, Mark might have a
point.

But Ed's not, so Mark doesn't.

-- 
-- Paul A. Sand           | I was going to buy a copy of _The Power of
-- Univ. of New Hampshire | Positive Thinking_ and then I thought: What
-- pas@kepler.unh.edu     | the hell good would that do?
			  |     (Ronnie Shakes)
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 22:32:59 -0400 
From: Thomas Omar Smith <ts2a+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
	<1992Sep28.171950.2038@nwnexus.WA.COM>

Excerpts from netnews.alt.fan.rush-limbaugh: 28-Sep-92 Re: rights and
responsibili.. Elf Sternberg@halcyon.co (728)

> In article <4eld68a00YV704lVt2@andrew.cmu.edu>
>       Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> >Recently posted by Rini Clarkberg:

> >> In article <Bv9LIx.qt@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> 
> >> I stand up for life too.   That's why when I look at the picture 
> >> on page 310 of The New Our Bodies, Ourselves and see the picture with 
> >> the caption:  "Woman dead on motel room floor.  Her death was due to
> >> an air embolism suffered during an illegal abortion," I want to cry.
> >

> >This is sort of like a murder - suicide.  The woman had no right to take
> >away her baby's life and died while trying.

> 	And, as a man you have a right to make that decision for her
> beforehand and pass judgement on her afterwards?

> 	Jerk.

> 			Elf !!!

As a human being, he has the right to express disgust at a murder.

Men and women both have the right to do that.  Why the murder is
committed is irrelevant.  Its still the unjust taking of an innocent
human life.

					Tom the non hacker
					Kemp in 96!
					"If patriotism is the last refuge
					of scoundrels,  Then environmentalism
					is the current refuge of totalitarians."
					Bob Jackson
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49470 talk.politics.drugs:6584
From: thf2@quads.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Re: All deficits are not created equal.
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 02:27:41 GMT

In article <3OCT199215413892@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.235319.4749@u.washington.edu>, sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes...
>>In article <1992Oct2.165944.10756@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> walker@superboy.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>>>
>
>>There is nothing inherently wrong with a deficit; it
>>depends upon how the deficit is funded and what the
>>money is spent on.
>
>Just a reminder. Every dollar paid in taxes (such as to service the
>debt) is a dollar which is not in the bank (or some other investment)
>making more income for the worker.

On the other hand, most dollars spent by the government is a dollar
in some sort of investment or is income for a worker.

>This notion that someone else should be trusted to spend (up to half)
>of our money (and more because of debt) -- is simply a con job.

The government hasn't come close to spending half of our money since
World War II.
-- 
ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu 
also at quibeaux@uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
ajax crypto-analyzer -- warning! remove all chicken bones first
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: debates
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 3 Oct 92 01:33:12 EST
 <Oct.2.07.33.37.1992.28640@romulus.rutgers.edu> <1992Oct2.150940.5172@news.columbia.edu>
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Oct2.150940.5172@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> In article <Oct.2.07.33.37.1992.28640@romulus.rutgers.edu> kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
>>In article <MARTIN.92Oct1171124@chimera.titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu> martin@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Tracy Martin) writes:
>>
>>> Both Bush and Clinton have invited Perot to participate in the
>>> Debates, if he declares that he is a candidate.  Have they extended
>>> this same invitation to the Liberatarian candidate?
>>
>>No.
>>
>>> Isn't he also on the ballet in all 50 states?
>>
>>Probably, but he doesn't have 3 1/2 billion bucks.
> 
> Or about 9% of the electorate.
> 
> Question for Libertarians out there:
> 
> If there were no libertarian party, who would you vote for?

	Ronald Reagan.

> 
> I'm curious how the lib vote would be split between the Dems and GOP.

	Neither party is offering a viable candidate this time.  Tsongas, yes. 
Kemp, yes.  Bush & Clinton, no.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: HYPOCRISY of Public School Prayer
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:02:37 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire



                       HYPOCRISY of Public School Prayer

               Bush, Reagan, and a LOT of SELF-RIGHTEOUS fundamentalist 
          "Christians" want to RE-IMPOSE prayer into the public 
          schools, as well as in certain government ceremonies, etc.. 

               But what did Jesus Christ HIMSELF say about people who 
          pray in public?  In Matthew 6:5 he called them HYPOCRITES!  
          
               He said in the next verse that people should pray 
          SILENTLY IN THEIR CLOSETS, in other words, IN PRIVATE.  (Or 
          if in public, they should do it IN THEIR HEADS, withOUT the 
          SHOWY bowed head and folded hands.) 

               Parents who want their kids to openly and verbally pray 
          in school can send them to PAROCHIAL schools, as well as to 
          Sunday school, withOUT forcing it on others. 



               UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this 
          IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED. 


                                   Robert E. McElwaine
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Oct 15th, 1932
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 4 Oct 92 01:53:39 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

        In the current FORBES (60 years ago today...), there is a passage
commenting on the errors of the pro-protectionist movement, and how
Smoot-Hawley had reduced trade to foreign nations dramatically.

	Let's all fax that to Clinton and Gore.
	
Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 13:57:45 GMT

In article <5OCT199219033406@utarlg.uta.edu>, b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen
Tice) writes:

|>I really had no reason to be against Clinton before this.

Come now! are you trying to pretend that you were an undecided who has suddenly
changed their mind because of some "startling" revalation?

Fact is you have been going for Perot for some time now.

|>I did have real concerns about anyone who's a war protester
|>being able to lead the country in the event of war, since 
|>you have to have people go and fight.

Bill Clinton was not a pacifist opposed to all wars. Just to that particular
war. Given the outcome he was quite right to oppose it since it was the biggest
disaster of US foreign policy this century.

Added to which Vietnam is today one of the few remaining unreconstructed
Communist countries. It is no accident that the other one (Cuba) was also
subject to attack by the USA. But for these actions the communist governments in
these places would have collapsed along with the rest.


|>But to find out while Bill Clinton was at Oxford in '69 that 
|>he went to *Moscow* and eastern Europe in the dead of winter, 
|>alone, and made efforts to change his citizenship to British,
|>-- I'll be dead against him personally -- if all this is true.

Err sorry old bean but the Kremlin is not the place to change your nationality
to British. I know that the KGB has infiltrated every level of British society
(as the US were fond of telling us in the fifties) but I think we would have
noticed if they stasrted handing out British passports from the Kremlin.

|>(aired on C-Span today). 

That is a source marginaly more credible than b-CPU and marginaly less credible
than alt.swedish.chefs.borg.borg.borg

--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Subject: George Bush, DNC Mole (was Re: Presidential Debates)
Organization: TECHNET, Singapore
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 03:26:04 GMT


Haven't you guys figured it out yet? George Bush:

  gave America its second largest tax increase in history;

  engaged in the largest spending spree since FDR;

  ushered in a 50% increase in federal regulation;

  doubled the deficit under the guise of balancing the budget;

  helped kill a major tax cut for the middle class.

The explanation is obvious: George Bush is a mole for the DNC!
There is no other logical explanation for someone who has so callously
disregarded the American's who elected him to office while destroying
the reputation of the Republican Party.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49423 talk.bizarre:32738 alt.politics.perot:1834
From: al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Henry Ross Perot -- anagrams
Date: 5 Oct 1992 01:41:48 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu



 Henry Ross Perot -- anagrams
*******************************
 1.  Shorty errs?  Nope!
 2.  He's ornery, Sport!
 3.  Spy on the errors.
 4.  Open yer shorts, R.!
 5.  The sorry person.
*******************************


-- 
=======================
"Endeavor to persevere"
=======================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.activism.d
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Choice for life (was Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 03:11:02 GMT


But when I talk to a pro-choice advocate, abortion seems to be the only
choice they want to discuss.  Here's a good choice for couples: abstinence
until they are fully ready for children.  I mean, in all the arguements that
concept always gets lost.  And some folks think you just beamed down from a UFO
when you bring it up.

Simon

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: brokow@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Mike Brokowski)
Subject: Re: Media coverage for Marrou/Lord (call these #'s!)
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
            <1992Oct5.171522.8500@u.washington.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:36:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.171522.8500@u.washington.edu> sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>
>Well, the newspapers, magazines, and electronic media are
>(mostly) private businesses.  
>[...]
>
>That's the way the market works (*snicker*).  If you don't
>like it (*hee hee*) then you can start your own newspaper
>(*yuk yuk*) or your own television network (*ho ho ho*).

Sure, why not?  However, just to make sure that this is clear,
Libertarians don't claim that the *only* way to get the things
you want is to start your own enterprise to do it.  It is
perfectly acceptable to try and convince others that they 
should act differently.  In fact, it may well be possible to
convince the news people that they could have a more exciting
race and therefore more news if they covered other candidates.

The poster's snide comments certainly don't highlight any
special irony in the LP's situation with respect to media
coverage and Libertarian views nor do they give any reason not
to inform the media that there is an interest in better 
coverage of the LP (and perhaps other) candidate.

>BTW, the best coverage I've seen so far of the Marrou
>candidacy has been on PBS, the only tv network
>which receives any federal funding (BWAAHAAHAAHAA!).

And?  Does this repudiate any Libertarian views?

BTW, I think C-SPAN's coverage has been good.

>| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
>| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |


  - Mike

/* Don't "throw away" your vote this year (and confirm your     */
/* helplessness) by voting for the clown who would be elected   */
/* *anyway*.  Vote for whomever you *want* to win; at least     */
/* then you've been honest with yourself.                       */

NOTE: Unfortunately, these opinions probably aren't shared by NU.
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 1 Oct 92 19:15:29 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1aaa0gINNq5a@fido.asd.sgi.com> cj@eno.wpd.sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes:

>---
>mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>|In <1992Sep28.215858.18233@nwnexus.WA.COM> jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle) writes:
>|>  Abortion can be a responsible solution to an unwanted pregnancy.
>|>  Abortion can be a responsible solution to an unwanted pregnancy.
>|>  Abortion can be a responsible solution to an unwanted pregnancy.

>|Try this on for size.
>|Euthanasia can be a responsible solution to an unwanted burdan.
>|Euthanasia can be a responsible solution to an unwanted burdan.
>|Euthanasia can be a responsible solution to an unwanted burdan.

CS:Yeah?  So what?  If I'm brain-dead, I'd certainly want my
CS:survivors to pull the plug.  If I'm ill with cancer, and have
CS:one month of excruciating pain left to me, I will certainly
CS:want the option of euthanizing myself (with some help if I
CS:need it).

CS:Did you have some kind of point?  You really ought to, if
CS:you're going to broadcast your posting to this many newsgroups.

I'm sorry if you thought that I was confining euthanasia to just those
with terminal medical problems.  I was also thinking of those with
terminal economic problems.

The first person posted that she felt that abortion was a viable
method for getting rid of a problem.

My response was intended to show that I felt that if it was alright
for her to kill those she felt would be a burden to her, I also wanted
the priveledge of killing those who had become a burden to me.

I was thinking of starting with everyone who has drawn a welfare check
for more than two years.

For me abortion is murder, this opinion is not widely held yet.

I apologize for not being clearer on my first post.

Have a good day.

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 01:47:16 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL

 
 Article 36193 (8 more) in misc.headlines:
 From: spencer@ocsmd.ocs.com (Spencer Hines)
 Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
 Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
 
 >It has been pointed out that in his personal life King did 
 wrong.  This may well be true.  I have done a little study, 
 and many of our founding fathers had personal weaknesses.  
 We do not honor them for what sins they avoided;  we honor 
 them because they expanded freedom in America.
 
 That's a good point and it has some weight.  However, the 
 personal sleeze in the lives of our founding fathers were 
 not recorded by electronic means and locked up by an act of 
 congress.  They have been clouded by time and happy talk.
 
 The King stuff has never been aired and is still fresh and 
 the public is being denied the opportunity to draw their own 
 conclusions.
 
 js
From: falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot:  If He Runs, I Will Support Him... and hope for the best
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:14:17 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <Sep.30.15.06.01.1992.2746@romulus.rutgers.edu>, kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
> In article <1992Sep29.104603.1400@cnsvax.uwec.edu> falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
> 
>>   So what do you suggest, voting for a fraud?
>>                           voting for a democratic "dictatorship"?
> 
> Who's the fraud and who represents a "democratic dictatorship", and
> why?

  IMO, Theodore:

  Bush is the fraud, and Clinton would represent the "dictatorship" that only
the courts could stop.

  If you support one of these two, then you don't agree with me.

  Of course, you could think that they are BOTH frauds ...

						Mike Falkner
From: strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: RUN Ross RUN
Date: 2 Oct 1992 01:51:15 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

>Goddamn.  I wanna put that "Run Ross Run" bumper sticker on the front
>of a Mack truck.  "Sprint Ross Sprint?"

>waiting for stratocaster....

(I'm blushing.)

Hi Suze.  Nice of you to remember me.  Actually I'm voting
Libertarian this year. ;-)

Stratocaster

-- 
	   Steve Davis (I'm a student, not a spokesperson!)
      strat@cis.ksu.edu - Kansas State University - Manhattan KS
				   
       PC's?  Blech.  Who wants a politically correct computer?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49512 talk.abortion:40548
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Choice for life (was Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:46:01 GMT
Organization: AT&T

mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>Simon E. Booth) writes:
>> 
>> But when I talk to a pro-choice advocate, abortion seems to be the only
>> choice they want to discuss.  Here's a good choice for couples: abstinence
>> until they are fully ready for children.  I mean, in all the arguements that
>> concept always gets lost.  And some folks think you just beamed down from a
>> UFO when you bring it up.
>> 
>Actually, I doubt that any civilization advanced enough to build a UFO would
>ignore the social and pleasurable aspecs of intercourse.  Sex is part of the
>ongoing relationship between two people.  Without it, relationships wouldn't
>happen and last over time.  Who would care if they did?

No, no, no! According to Barbara Bush last night on Larry King, "we must
teach our children that sex is DEATH!"

---
Joe Knapp    jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: call 1-800-925-1300 if you want Perot to run
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 00:08:23 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.223142.21776@netcom.com> beast@netcom.com (Master) writes:
>In article <1ad7iaINN7ce@eagle.natinst.com> chrisb@natinst.com (Chris Bartz) writes:
>>
>>If I really wanted Ross Perot to run I'd call the number hundreds of times.
>>Why not - he's paying for the call.  It doesn't take much effort to dial
>>a number, wait for a machine to answer, and then hang-up.  I'd be willing
>
>Why not just use your computer as an auto-dialer?  You could register 300
>calls an hour! 

Doesn't Perot have multiple lines and an auto-dialer?  Hmm.....

--
"I was trying to figure out which of my friends were hedgehogs, and which
were foxes...."
"Shakespeare wrote _King Lear_, NOT _King Leo_...."
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou