HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Firearms Rights
Keywords: bias
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:11:57 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.054759.1093@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:

>       For what reason? Are you _that_ confident you'll wind up on
>top of the big armed free-for-all that the NRA seems to think is the
>ideal? 

Uh, no.  The NRA does not consider a big armed free-for-all to be ideal by 
any means.  They support firearms rights for a number of reasons, but the 
idea that the NRA wants a constant, blazing gun battle is an HCI sponsored 
myth.  You have been lied to.

>I don't know of the NRA wanting to find ways of avoiding using
>guns, other than to proclaim how law-abiding they are. 

It is not in the NRA's charter to find ways of avoiding using firearms.  
Their charter is to promote shooting sports.  Of late, thanks to the 
activity of anti-civil-liberties types, it has become necessary to spend far 
more time and effort than they would like fighting to defend a fundamental 
civil liberty.

>After all, in a
>confrontation, the advantage will be to whomever draws their gun
>first.

You are mis-informed.  The advantage in a confrontation is to whomever has 
the clearer mind.

>       I am very disappointed that the NRA does not push for
>nonlethal weapons, like Mace and stun guns, to be more available, not
>to mention defense measures like bulletproof vests.

They do.  But they do not have HCI's unlimited resources and must limit 
their activity to mission-critical issues.  Mace and stun guns are banned in 
Washington DC and other high-crime areas.  It seems that the bad guys like 
to use them on police because they are less likely to get a sever sentance 
when they disable cops by non-lethal means.

>       Personally, I'd prefer wearing a bulletproof vest and a helmet
>to wielding a gun.

That is your choice.  Please do not work to force it on others.

>20z>uunet!sequent!ether!stevef    . . .        The only fair tax is no tax!

>       No tax? How is law enforcement to be funded? Or it to support
>itself by collecting fines? Anyone for speed traps?

By voluntary contributions.  If enough people what law enforcement to exist, 
there will be sufficient support.
-=-=-
T. Archer  PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu
University of Tennessee
"Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking." -- Unknown
-=-=-
Xref: sparky alt.activism.d:2436 alt.rush-limbaugh:2958 talk.politics.misc:35327
From: mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Media bias
Keywords: bias
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:59:36 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gelato.mips.com

Chip Switzer writes:
|> alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain) writes:
|> 
|> >	If the media is out of touch with the audiance, then market forces
|> >would heavily favor a more balanced source of information.
|> 
|> Why do you think Rush Limbaugh is so popular?  He gives people an
|> alterante view of the news and quite often reports things that were
|> never even covered by the rest of the media.  Market forces would only 
|> work if there were a substantial number of journalists who could fill
|> the void.  Unfortunaltely, journalism is still a magnet for liberals.
|> 
Assuming this is true, and I don't see any data to support it, why do you
think journalim is a magent for liberals?  My son graduated from UT Austin
last year with a BSJ, and had a hard time finding any other liberals in his
classes.
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions)
Subject: Re: Media bias
Keywords: bias
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 02:19:59 GMT

rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero) writes:

>>ever since they have been measured, and 4) the average global temperature
>>has been rising since it has been observed, over 100 years.
>>
>
>BZZZZZZZT!  Sorry, this last one is really disputed.

It really bugs me when someone makes such a comment, especially from an
uninformed position.

>  There is *NO* measure
>of global average temperature that shows a rise in temperature to any
>statistically significant level.  The temperature records for most cities
>are contaminated by urban  heat island effects (most cities have grown
>considerably over the last 100+ years).  The measurement "network" is not
>even close to being uniform in spatial or time sampling, and "true"
>global measures (such as satellite measured IR flux) are complicated
>by the lack of stable, fully calibrated sensors.

As I said in a recent post, check out Science, February 2, 1990 and
January 18, 1991 for a graph depicting data gathered by the University
of Anglia and the UK Meterological Office. Whether the increase observed
is "statistically significant" or not is a matter of debate.

>It has been estimated that it would take another 100+ years to get a 
>statistically valid measure of global warming using atmospheric temperature
>measurements.  It might take 10-25 years to do the same with mean ocean
>temperature measurements using acoustic tomography.  

Such estimates are in question and are debated by atmospheric scientists.
This is a point of disagreement. Most atmospheric scientists do not agree
completely with your assertions. The problem is that if we continue to
only "take measurements of the temperature", the situation could get
bad enough that it will take decades, even centuries to turn it around.
-- 
Zack Sessions
sessions@seq.uncwil.edu
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
"Good health is merely the slowest form of dying."
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Pro-government media bias (was Re: Media bias)
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 06:51:38 GMT

ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser) writes:
>In article <1992Jul19.011105.1309@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu> jrm@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu writes:
>>	And not driving a car will reduce auto accidents, not swimming
>>	will reduce drowning deaths and not going to work will reduce
>>	the spread of nasty flu viruses. 

>But you don't see activists clamoring for the government to "do something"
>about auto accidents, drownings, or the common cold. (Perhaps they just
>haven't gotten around to it? In Florida, the Safety Nazis are banning bungee
>jumping!)

"If any product had one tenth the hazards of sex, the streets would be 
filled with outraged liberals demanding government restrictions."

-- 
If you can't say anything nice, you probably don't have many friends.
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d
From: mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang)
Subject: Re: Russian Environmental Problems
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 17:38:47 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.213756.14781@mont.cs.missouri.edu> dbeachle@csn.org (Dave Beachley) writes:
>I'm trying to find information on the sad state of the environment
>in what was the Soviet Union.  I am interested in all areas of 
>pollutants/contaminants, and all areas of the former Soviet Union.
>Specifically, the Aral Sea crisis, radiation from the Chernobyl
>accident and from other nuclear sites, chemical waste and nuclear
>waste...the list is very long, so any info you might have would
>be appreciated.
>
>Thanks much,
>Yash Holbrook <yholbroo@nyx.cs.du.edu> and c/o <dbeachle.csn.org>

Read _Ecocide in the USSR_ by Murray Feshbach and Alfred Friendly, Jr.
It covers all the topics mentioned above and more.

-- 
Michael Wang
mmwang@adobe.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Media bias
Keywords: bias
Date: 23 Jul 92 03:15:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington

jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:

>Also, listen carefully to the abortion debate.
>Remember that the "labels" of choice for each of the sides are
>Pro-Choice and Pro-Life.  What you will hear the media call them most of
>the time is Pro-Choice and Anti-Abortion.  Subtle, but the connotations
>are certainly not beyond the average journalism student.

Sorry, you must be listening to some different media that I am. I always
hear them referred to in the media as pro-choice and pro-life.

While we're on the subject, I'll say that the label chosen by the pro-life
group is pretty stupid. I am not not pro-life. I enjoy my life. I enjoy
living. I am against the death penalty as I feel that it is governmental
violence. However, I am also pro-choice. I feel that it is a woman's right
to choose whether or not to have an abortion and I do not feel that the
government has the right to restrict that choice. And I am not pro-abortion.
When faced with such a decision, I am not sure what decision I would come
to, but I would not simply decide on the abortion simply because I have
the choice.

-- 
Zack Sessions
sessions@seq.uncwil.edu
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
"Good health is merely the slowest form of dying."
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: Media bias
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 00:23:21 GMT

While reading article <JMC.92Jul23163240@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, I noticed that
jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU said the following:
 >I fear that to make $100 million from a movie about JFK, there has
 >to be a conspiracy of some kind.  Suppose you invented a left wing
 >conspiracy, with pseudo-revelations about how Khrushchev plotted
 >JFK's murder.  Well maybe we could make it the less popular
 >Brezhnev even though he didn't overthrow Khrushchev till a year
 >later.  Yes, that makes an even bigger plot.  All you have to

Nah -- too many people would think it was just a remake of _The Manchurian
Candidate_.
-- 
| William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed above
| Internet: kucharsk@solbourne.com   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, not those
| Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Longmont, CO"
Xref: sparky alt.activism.d:2484 alt.rush-limbaugh:3046 talk.politics.misc:35816
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Media bias
Keywords: bias
Date: 23 Jul 92 01:32:43 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <4026@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:

>	I can't tell the difference between the networks either. To me
>that's pretty bad. It's sorta like having every fast-food restaurant
>mimic McDonald's. You get sick and tired of it after a while. (At least
>I do.)
>
 Their is one ray of hope for conservatives. Local stations. The networks
appear to be losing ground much like worldwide socialism has.
 Last night ABC (before apologizing for the leftist nightline "secret war
on iran story") ran a story on President Bush. They quoted him as saying
we have had a long mild recession and that we are positioned for a good re-
covery. They then followed this with Alan Greenspan being questioned by
the congressional panel. They quoted him as saying that it will be a long
time till unemployment goes down. ABC then said that President Bush can
only campaign on his long term prospects for improving the economy.
 One of our local stations later that night KTLA, then covered the same
story. They had a much longer quote from bush attacking congress and also
stating that we are positioned for a good recovery. They then quoted Alan
Greenspan reciting his prepared speech in which he stated that we are 
coming out of the recession and the situation looks real good. And he  
then said that unemployment will probably lag and go down by end of next
year.
 Here is a prime example of ABC network news biasing Mr. Greenspan's
overall view of the economy and attacking bush with it. It was so obvious
that I actually laughed out loud when I realized what ABC had done.
Why KTLA showed the story without bias has me surprised. Note - They
also showed unbiased news on Mr. Bill Clinton. Maybe they forgot the
liberal spin or are trying to position themselves as moderates. Hope
they dont get blacklisted for this.

 Steve Tyree - "Networks are trying to target an audience. That audience
                is primarily composed of couch potatoes."
                                             Could of been Dan Quayle !
             - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Global Warming, again (was Re: Media bias)
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Jul24.021833.18081@seq.uncwil.edu>
	<Jul24.174330.45454@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>
	<1992Jul24.224817.9152@ctr.columbia.edu>
	<JMC.92Jul24163816@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Jul25.221331.18729@seq.uncwil.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: 25 Jul 92 16:10:19

Most of what Zack Sessions quotes from is indeed something I wrote,
but the part about the Urban Heat Island is not.  I fear that
some adversary will expose as imposture what he will take to be
a false claim that I did research at Cornell.  He'll brandish
letters from various departments saying they never heard of me.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain)
Subject: Re: Media bias
Keywords: bias
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 20:29:33 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.190252.16079@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>Well I did get a chuckle from reading this.  Hopefully that's what you 
>intended.  I'm really at a loss to try to convince anybody that the
>media is far more left than the rest of the country (which would be 
>irrelevant if it were not painfully obvious from watching/reading the
>news).  I have to conclude that you either have your head in the sand
>or that you just assume that because the news reports things the way you
>personally see them, that they must be mainstream.

	I have no faith at all that my views are mainstream in any society,
but I still think that the liberal media is a conservative boogie man. The
media, particularly network news, is hotly competitive, and if the media
were off base, there would be a valuable opertunity for one of the major
networks to shift to the right and grab a chunk of the audience. This has
not happened, nor will it.

	As a casual viewer, I can't tell the difference between any of the
networks. Why? because the networks have all gone to great lengths to tune
their broadcasts to a single mass audience. The news covers local human 
interest because thats what the public wants to see. 

	The American public is not stupid, much to the chagrin of Rush
and the dittoheads. The media, be it news or entertainment, is purely
a commodity, and is marketed just like any other. If there is a liberal
media, then it's because there is some kind of controlling force that
makes it so, driving out conservative influences -- Without that force,
the media would simply gravitate to what sells.

	I don't believe in a Liberal Media Conspirisy, so I conclude that
the public is getting what the public wants. What I do believe is that
the public is not as conservative as Rush and the Dittoheads would like,
just like they're not as liberal as Jerry Brown would like. This being the
case, it doesn't surprise me that both sides are claiming persecution from
the media.
-- 
Anybody who agrees with me deserves what they get.

					Alex Crain
					UMBC Academic Computing Services
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d
From: burke@tss.com (Jim Burke)
Subject: Re: "Keep Your Pollution!" (Article)
Reply-To: burke@tss.com (Jim Burke)
Organization: Teknekron Software Systems. Inc.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:20:12 GMT

I won't bother to quote from Maneka Gandhi's article but I would make the
following comments.

Thirty years ago, India could not feed itself.  There was hunger and
starvation.  India has a long history with the west resulting from
British rule and it is understandable that there is residual resentment
toward the west.  However, today India feeds itself and even produces
a surplus for export due to agricultural technologies developed in the
west.  It is difficult to see how a third world country of over 1 billion
people would have accomplished this alone.  The west has provided a lot
of aid to India over the last three decades.  Yes, the west has problems.
But to blame all the problems of India on the west is to deny India's own
responsibility for its problems.  Cultural practices combined with gross
overpopulation are the biggest reasons for India's problems, not the west.
-- 

	Jim Burke	"Life is uncertain - eat dessert first!"
	Teknekron Software Systems		... burke@tss.com
  	phone:(415) 617-2432			... uunet!tekbspa!burke
Xref: sparky alt.activism.d:2437 alt.rush-limbaugh:2964 talk.politics.misc:35331
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Media bias
Keywords: bias
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:48:11 GMT
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Distribution: usa
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain) writes:
>jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>>Why do you think Rush Limbaugh is so popular? 
>	Just a guess, but maybe for the same reason that Larry King is
>so popular? Must be the far right politics that they both preech, huh?
	How long has Larry been on the radio? At least maybe 10 years,
right? Larry used to be the #1 radio talk show in the country, but now
it's Rush who is #1. (I have listened to Larry on occasion and find him
quite rude to guests. Rush isn't that bad, but when he gets on a good
debate with someone who disagrees with him, it can get very entertaining
and educational.)

>>  Unfortunaltely, journalism is still a magnet for liberals.
>	Yup. It's not the liberals fault that they're just more talented
>then conservatives, though. If conservatives could spell better, then
>maybe there would be more conservative writers.
	I can't help but say that you're no National Champion in
Spelling yourself. I don't like to point out typos on all the posts I've
read from you, but you already can't spell one word on your above reply.
("Unfortunately" is Chip's error.) I won't call me the best speller in
the world, but if you want to keep criticizing Dan "it was a silent e"
Quayle for something like misspelling (no matter how stupid that
incident was), then clean your own spelling in your posts.

>	Seriously: Why are reporters/editors so "liberal". Were they 
>brainwashed? Are conservatives really just morons? Maybe Elvis comes
>down in a spaceship and touches journalists on the forehead, pushing
>them leftward.
	Damn! You've figured out the Elvis corrollary to the Liberal
Conspiracy Theory! Well, back to the mafia! :)
	Seriously, do you really expect me to answer why reporters and
editors are so liberal? You probably could ask them all, but I'd like to
say that all those with conservative political philosophies got
themselves REAL jobs. :-D (That's why the press loves to play the
recent "class envy" drum: the heartless [Republican] rich people don't
care about any of the world's problems, so they should be taxed back
down to our level! That'll teach 'em!)	

>	This is better then the JFK assasination - maybe you can get
>some right wing director to make it into a hit movie?
	That could be an idea, but I think you'd be afraid that we'd
paint JFK into someone who SHOULD be assassinated. We'd never get any
funding for that. On the other hand, if you made a movie mocking Ronald
Reagan as a stupid buffoon who SHOULD be assassinated, you probably
would get $1M+ for "special effects." :)

-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions)
Subject: Re: Global Warming, again (was Re: Media bias)
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 03:19:42 GMT

rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero) writes:

>The spin on urban heat islands is *not* that they are what is contributing
>to global warming.  The percentage of urban land as a total of either
>land area or total surface area is very small.  

Some proponents of global warming feel that heat islands do indeed
contribute to the situation as they are much hotter than surrounding
areas. Unnatural heat. I never claimed that I agreed with such claims,
I merely mentioned that some proponents feel that way.

>What is a problem is that a large percentage of temperature records,
>particularly those with a long history or length of record, come from
>urban areas that have increased in size and urban heat island effect over
>the last 150 years.  These temperature records are not indicating global
>effects, but local effects.  These temperature records CONTAMINATE
>any calculations of global temperatures that do not correct for the
>urban heat island effect.  And it wasn't until about 1 year ago that
>anyone tried to analyze the effect.

Certainly, temperature records in and around heat islands contaminate
calculations of global temperatures. And the people who gathered that
data knew this. They aren't stupid. They adjusted their figures to
take heat islands into account. Also, the East Anglia figures also include
measurements taken at sea.
-- 
Zack Sessions
sessions@seq.uncwil.edu
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
"Good health is merely the slowest form of dying."
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d
From: cbp@gmhgate.gmh.edu (Christopher Preston)
Subject: Re: CLINTON: More "Dirty Laundry" (4)
Organization: Grady Memorial Hospital
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 22:28:55 GMT

In article <3921@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> lancelot@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:
>
>
>and of course there's the obvious latent (?) homosexual attraction 
>between George and Dan ("toy boy") Quayle. What other possible reason
>can there be for having him on the ticket?

Someone to make him look halfway intelligent by comparison, perhaps?

>-- 
>Brett Breitwieser                     KC6UPU, Grid CM86XX
>The Crown Project                     lancelot@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
>425 Ninth Ave.                        ..netcom!cruzio!lancelot
>Santa Cruz, CA 95062-3715             Fido: 1:216/509
>Julian Jaynes:"...hypnosis can cause this extra enabling because it 
>engages the general bicameral paradigm which allows a more absolute 
>control over behavior than is possible with consciousness."                    


cbp
-- 
Christopher Preston     | I represent no opinions but my own.
Datacommunications      | 
Grady Memorial Hospital | "Let them eat pork rinds" - G. Bush
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,talk.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Whole Foods and Coors -- The Thrilling Second Episode
Followup-To: alt.activism.d,talk.environment
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Distribution: usa
Date: 22 Jul 92 12:54:33

And of course boycott Whole Foods, because they boycott Coors.

This last may not be much of a threat.  I wonder how much intersection
there is between political conservativism and preference for organic
foods.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc