HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: EC PROTECT MINORITY
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:37:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.223619.16631@dg-rtp.dg.com> hicks@dg-rtp.dg.com writes:
>In article <1992Dec7.203656.3339@anasazi.com>, best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
>|> In article <577.1657.uupcb@synapse.org> lucien.saumur@synapse.org (Lucien Saumur)  writes:
>|> >     In an article <ByossD.4qo@rice.edu>, byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc
>
>|> This is admittedly an interesting concept.  I think that we should 
>|> consider that our goal is to elect a president quickly, decisively,
>|> and in a way that legitimizes the election.  I do not favor this
>|> ranking of the candidates proposal for these reasons:
>|> 
>|> 1. It would encourage third party candidates to run.
>
>    [More deleted]
>
>Then what do you propose we should do about the abuse of power that
>seems rampant within both of the major parties? Perhaps this is off
>the subject, but what problem are we really trying to solve?

Yes, I think we are talking about two different issues.  I can understand
though that the prospect of mixing up the electoral process has the
seductive side effect of curbing the power of the major parties.  However,
we must think long term and that means, to  me, that simply changing the
rules of the election does nothing to make men (humans) behave better.
There will be abuses under direct election just as surely as there are
under the present system.

Keeping my nose in spite of my face,

Mike Best
Newsgroups: alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.politics.perot
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: EC PROTECT MINORITY R
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:01:05 GMT

In article <1gam9iINNglp@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>In article <1992Dec9.192846.29167@anasazi.com>, best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
>
>> Whether we liked Mecham or not, he was totally viscerated by the fact that
>> he appeared to have insufficient popular support to rule.  Now we have
>> runoff process but we should never have to use it as long as the two
>> party system is intact.
>
>The two-party system has simply become a vehicle by which an entrenched
>political class can perpetuate itself and large government without being
>too obviously a monopoly (one-party system).

You must be talking about the Congress.  We have had ample turnover in
the Executive branch.

>You argue that an N-party system without runoffs promotes odd results.
>Then when your opponent argues that the problem can easily be solved by
>runoffs, you respond that they are unnecessary under the two-party system.

True, N-party systems _can_ produce minority presidents.  If you go to a 
runoff system after this event to increase the seeming popular support
then you run the risk of delegitimizing the election by:

1.  Dragging the process out.
2.  Setting the stage for behind closed doors deals.  That is, in a runoff,
    party X agrees to support candidate Y in exchange for something such
    as a Supreme Court position, policy, etc.
3.  The rules of the game are changed because all you have to do is come in
    second in the "primary" and then make deals to win in the runoff.

>You seem to be insisting that we not throw the placenta out with the 
>bathwater.  

Cute but not accurate.  I am endeavoring to illustrate that changes such
as we are discussing are not without dangerous side effects on the balance
of power and constitutional precepts such as the state equality principle.

Mike Best
Newsgroups: alt.politics.usa.constitution
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Federalist Papers on Electoral College 
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 15:41:35 GMT

In article <Bz1qBr.C5H@rice.edu> byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:
>
>from feder15.txt:

This is interesting but in reality resembles little the current functionality
of the EC.  

>8301: The immediate election of the President is to be made by the States
>> note immediate
>
>13044: legislatures, the President by electors chosen for that purpose by
>>  advantage in dissmilar methods of elections for different branches
>  > let us then find some more suitable, and still different, method
> 
>13932:As the select assemblies for choosing the President, as well as
> the State legislatures who appoint the senators, will in general be
> composed of the most enlightened and respectable citizens,...
>   >  who gets to decide who's enlightened & respectable?

True enough, lets abolish the office of the elector (though historically
only 8 of 16000 (0.0005) have failed to vote appropriately).  This is
not a compelling argument to abolish the EC.

>14714:FEDERALIST No. 68:  The Mode of Electing the President
>14731:It was desirable that the sense of the people should operate in
> the choice of the person to whom so important a trust was to be
> confided. This end will be answered by committing the right of
> making it, not to any preestablished body, but to men chosen by the
> people for the special purpose, and at the particular conjuncture.
>
>>  It is certainly not done this way now.

Again, there is much that is different from the original plan.  
You are directing your argument toward something that does not exist.

>14811:  The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the
> office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not
> in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.
> Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may
> alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single
> State; ...
>
>    >  Who does "little arts of popularity" make us think of?

Bill Clinton.

Mike Best
From: gorney@picard.med.ge.com (Felix Gorney Mfg 4-6983)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Repost: Is this really a B paper?
Date: 14 Dec 92 11:19:38 GMT
Organization: GE Medical Systems, Magnetic Resonance
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


I beleive it was Madison, who was against the idea of a bill of rights. 
He correctly theorized that to spellout the rights we have, would limit us
to only those rights. While there have been a few additions to those mentioned
in the bill of Rights, more rights have been taken away, by judicial INaction.
If an activity can be taxed, and/or regulated, then it can be destroyed. 
Inherent in your right to liberty, is a right to travel. Yet, we must acquire
a permit from the state to move about without depending on others. The right
to own, and bear arms has been almost completely obliterated. Now, only 
dangerous violent criminals carry weapons. Therefore, we are not even allowed
the right to protect ourselves. The right to be secure in one's papers, and 
effects/posetions no longer exists, sinse many agebcies of the govt. can take
your property, and/or papers BEFORE any due process of law. Sinse this is the
case, we don't even have the right to own property anymore. Property can now be
seized in many cases without a warrant. Freedom of speech has also been hindered.Disorderly conduct is a catch-all charge police use when they don't like what 
someone is saying or doing. I have even heard of a case where a person was 
charged with INTENT to commit disorderly conduct. 

Violent criminals are given every conceivable break in defending themselves
against prosecution. Yet the victim has no rights whatsoever. The criminal 
justice system instead spends it's greatest resources prosecuting victimless
crimes, because this makes money for the system. Those who would challenge
the system itself, have the book thrown at them.

Let's also not forget, that the Federal govt. was not supposed to have any 
authority, except that granted by the constitution. Where the 700+ agencies
of the Federal govt. have gotten their authority is anyone's guess. Congress 
 has passed laws, and created agencies, and sets of regulations that have no
Constitutional authority to exist. i.e. the Federal Reserve, a centralized bank.
No one has ever challenged the Constitutioanality of any of this before the 
supreme court, nor will they be allowed to do so.This has a great affect on our
rights, because we are forced to volunteer to pay taxes to support all of this.

For the first 100 years of this country's existence, the Supreme Court upheald
our rights, and the Constitution. For the last 100 years, the Supreme court
has made a concious effort NOT to rule on Constitutional issues, or has ruled
to curtail our rights. 

Rights are given by God, and only secured, not granted by the Constitution.

Felix Gorney

gorney@picard.med.ge.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.misc
From: kjc7435@ultb.isc.rit.edu (K.J. Cater)
Subject: Info sought about the Communitarian movement
Originator: kjc7435@ultb
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:38:57 GMT

Anyone with info about this group please e-mail me.

Thanks,
K. Cater.

e-mail:"kjc7435@ritvax.isc.rit.edu".

Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.un
From: carlson@viking.sps.mot.com (Brett Carlson)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: sps
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:41:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.083554.586@meaddata.com> dlovely@meaddata.com (David  
Lovely) writes:> 
> You are a victim of mistaken facts!
> 
> In Somalia, as well as Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, etc.  The civil wars  
were all
> started by MARXISTS or involved MARXISTS.


What about in Uganda where the US had a different policy on solving the hunger  
problem??  we armed the hell out of Idi Amin and let him play warlord....

--brett
_____________________________________________________________________________
Brett Carlson
Network Architecture Research and Development
Motorola Semiconductor Products Sector
Tempe, AZ	
602/897-4091
Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.un
Subject: Model United Nations Conference in Europe
From: chao6@husc11.harvard.edu (James Chao)
Date: 19 Dec 92 15:42:35 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

To all those interested in international relations, politics, and the
United Nations: 

Harvard World Model United Nations (WorldMUN) is an international
conference that brings together university students and young
professionals from around the globe to siimulate the workings of the
United Nations.  The second annual WorldMUN conference will be held from
March 28, 1993, through March 31, 1993, at the Hotel Diplomat in Prague,
Czechoslovakia.  

Ten committees, representing the General Assembly, Economic and Social
Council, and Specialized Agencies of the United Nations, will discuss
issues from the actual UN agenda.  In addition to the formal debate of
resolutions, committee sessions will be augmented by presentations from
politicians, businessmen, scholars, and activists who have helped shape
the dramatic world events of recent years.

In this era of momentous political change, WorldMUN seeks to assess the
role of the United Nations in a new world order.  WorldMUN marks the first
truly international simulated United Nations where participants play the
roles of their own nation's ambassadors.  WorldMUN strives to teach
tomorrow's leaders about the United Nations and its methods of conflict
resolution.  It aims to foster skills in negotiation and debate, in order
that delegates may formulate resolutions on topics currently discussed in
the real United Nations.  These resolutions will be sent to the actual
United Nations committees.

WorldMUN 1993 will take place at the Hotel Diplomat in Prague,
Czechoslovakia.  The Hotel Diplomat is Prague's most modern conference
center.  Prague is both one of the most beautiful metropoles of Europe and
an ideal location for debating current world politics and the changing
role of the United Nations.

The Hotel diplomat is a luxury resort that offers restaurants, shops, a
night club, and fitness and spa equipment.  Delegates will stay at the
Hotel Diplomat for the reduced rate of 130DM/day double occupancy, which
includes two meals a day.

Delegate registration is $US60 per delegate.  For more information, please
reply to this e-mail address or write/fax:
Joshua A. Salomon, Secretary-General
Harvard World Model United Nations 1993
Suite 23, 1430 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138-3810
UNITED STATES

Telephone:  001-617-493-6995
Fax:  001-617-493-6995

James Chao
chao6@husc.harvard.edu
From: donachie@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.un
Subject: A UN military force?
Date: 13 Dec 92 15:58:39 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620


 
  One thought occurred to me in reading all the postings on Somaila, especially
the ones which metioned the lack of command infrastructure in the UN, and that
was that would the UN be more effective in its role if it had its own force.

  I had thought about this a little but had no definite plan.  But I felt that
a multinational military recruiting from any nation would provide the UN with a
better way of dealing with these peace-keeping requirements.

  It would also get around the problems of politicians not wanting to commit
their own people to foreign lands, where the chance of casulaties was present.

  Funding of courmay have to be raised to pay for this, but I think it would be
worth it in the long run.

  This is just an inital idea and I wanted to float it to get some feed back. 
I happy to read net replys but I am quite willing to receive mail on the
subject.  

  Many thanks.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.un
From: law30056@nusunix1.nus.sg (TAN KEN HWEE)
Subject: Re: A UN military force?
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:36:50 GMT

The idea is not new.  The UN Charter allows for such a military force
however negotiations that are supposed to be done pursuant to the
relevant articles either never took of or couldn't succeed.

Will check my UN Charter before I give a more detailed posting...

KenHwee Tan
National University of Singapore

Newsgroups: alt.politics.equality
From: hhelanto@vipunen.hut.fi (Henri R Helanto)
Subject: Re: The Swedenfinns seek official support from Finland
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 19 Dec 92 02:41:38 GMT

In <1992Dec17.150600.10220@jyu.fi> ryyti@jyu.fi (Jarmo Ryyti) writes:

>: As the peak of all swedish faschism Ms. Anita Gradin declared publicly
>: "Sweden is monolingual and remains monolingual", while still being as
>a minister. She is a prominent politician in Sweden, normally you hear
>such speeches in South-Africa and in Nazi-Germany but Sweden is no exeption.
> Her speeches however did not rise international publicity.
> Source for her statement is an issue of Etel{-Suomen Sanomat,
> a respectful newspaper in Finland,in the issue of the 11.12.92

	Damn! As far as I'm concerned, swedes should damn well
	study finnish like we're forced (yep, F-O-R-C-E-D!) to
	study swedish. 
	...Studying foreign languages (even though swedish is
	regarded as domestic language in Finland) is an important
	part of education and so many finns living in Sweden
	(and vice versa) _both_ countries should regard themselves
	as bilingual. Even if swedish and finnish are minority
	languages in the world...
	(I speak finnish, swedish, english, german and estonian
	and I don't think I'm especially multi-lingual yet...)

-Henri
-- 
Henri Helanto - SysOp
hhelanto@vipunen.hut.fi m40176m@puukko.hut.fi
Call MyBBS (+358-0-485067/485068/485968/485918/488139, 24h) !
Newsgroups: alt.politics.equality
From: ryyti@jyu.fi (Jarmo Ryyti)
Subject: The Swedenfinns seek official support from Finland
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:06:00 GMT

[ Article crossposted from soc.culture.nordic ]
[ Author was Jarmo Ryyti ]
[ Posted on Thu, 17 Dec 1992 06:57:11 GMT ]

: This is a translation from the latest issue of Ruotsinsuomalainen
 (Swedenfinn) of the 10.12.1992.
: 
: FOR THE MINORITY STATUS IS SEEKED SUPPORT FROM FINLAND 
: 
: For the aim of the Swedenfinns to attain an ethnic and lingual minority
: status is seeked now official support from Finland.
: 
: The issue is taken on the agenda of The Committee of the Immigration and
: Refugee issues set by Finland's cabinet, (Suomen valtioneuvoston asettama
: pakolais- ja siirtolaisasiain neuvosto), who gave the declaration of
: the minority status made by the swedenfinnish organisations for the Finnish
: governement last friday. (4.12.92) The Committee of the Immigration and
: Refugee issues for their part received the proclamation of the minority
  status during the Roots in Finland-festivities last august. 
: 
: According to the committee, Finland shall include the Swedenfinnish
  aim for the minority status into  the issues in official  negotiations
  between Finland and Sweden.
: 
: On the communication made by the committee is reminded prime minister Carl
: Bildt charactrazing the situation of the swedenfinns. Bild has given
  a statement that due to a long common history of the countries,
  finnish settlements in Sweden and great numbers of swedenfinns give
  a right to give a special status for the swedenfinns.
Sincerely yours,
jarmo ryyti

: 
: Ps.
: 
:Sorry for the translation. It was very difficult to translate,
 because of byreucratical text.

 You should notice that Carl Bildt is a concervative. During the social
 democratical time swedish governements aimed only to assimilate
 swedenfinns by all means.

: As the peak of all swedish faschism Ms. Anita Gradin declared publicly
: "Sweden is monolingual and remains monolingual", while still being as
a minister. She is a prominent politician in Sweden, normally you hear
such speeches in South-Africa and in Nazi-Germany but Sweden is no exeption.
 Her speeches however did not rise international publicity.
 Source for her statement is an issue of Etel{-Suomen Sanomat,
 a respectful newspaper in Finland,in the issue of the 11.12.92

Newsgroups: alt.politics.equality
From: e91petmo@odalix.ida.liu.se (Peter /\/\odin)
Subject: Re: The Swedenfinns seek official support from Finland
Organization: CIS Dept, Univ of Linkoping, Sweden
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:36:29 GMT

ryyti@jyu.fi (Jarmo Ryyti) writes:

>[ Article crossposted from soc.culture.nordic ]
>[ Author was Jarmo Ryyti ]
>[ Posted on Thu, 17 Dec 1992 06:57:11 GMT ]

>: This is a translation from the latest issue of Ruotsinsuomalainen
> (Swedenfinn) of the 10.12.1992.
>: 
>: FOR THE MINORITY STATUS IS SEEKED SUPPORT FROM FINLAND 
>: 
>: For the aim of the Swedenfinns to attain an ethnic and lingual minority
>: status is seeked now official support from Finland.
>: 
>: The issue is taken on the agenda of The Committee of the Immigration and
>: Refugee issues set by Finland's cabinet, (Suomen valtioneuvoston asettama
>: pakolais- ja siirtolaisasiain neuvosto), who gave the declaration of
>: the minority status made by the swedenfinnish organisations for the Finnish
>: governement last friday. (4.12.92) The Committee of the Immigration and
>: Refugee issues for their part received the proclamation of the minority
>  status during the Roots in Finland-festivities last august. 
>: 
>: According to the committee, Finland shall include the Swedenfinnish
>  aim for the minority status into  the issues in official  negotiations
>  between Finland and Sweden.
>: 
>: On the communication made by the committee is reminded prime minister Carl
>: Bildt charactrazing the situation of the swedenfinns. Bild has given
>  a statement that due to a long common history of the countries,
>  finnish settlements in Sweden and great numbers of swedenfinns give
>  a right to give a special status for the swedenfinns.
>Sincerely yours,
>jarmo ryyti

>: 
>: Ps.
>: 
>:Sorry for the translation. It was very difficult to translate,
> because of byreucratical text.

> You should notice that Carl Bildt is a concervative. During the social
> democratical time swedish governements aimed only to assimilate
> swedenfinns by all means.

>: As the peak of all swedish faschism Ms. Anita Gradin declared publicly
>: "Sweden is monolingual and remains monolingual", while still being as
>a minister. She is a prominent politician in Sweden, normally you hear
>such speeches in South-Africa and in Nazi-Germany but Sweden is no exeption.
> Her speeches however did not rise international publicity.
> Source for her statement is an issue of Etel{-Suomen Sanomat,
> a respectful newspaper in Finland,in the issue of the 11.12.92

What would this mean? Would Finnish become an official language? 
A Swede wants to know.


--
|=Peter Modin - Responses to: e91petmo@und.ida.liu.se===========|
|                             modin@lysator.liu.se              |
| Dept. of of Computer Science, Linkoping University, Sweden    |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|         /// /\                ___                             |
|        /// /  \  |\    /| |  /   \  /\                        |
|   \\\ /// /____\ | \  / | | |  ___ /__\                       |
|====\\X//=/======\|==\/==|=|==\___//====\======================|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.equality
From: bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden)
Subject: Re: The Swedenfinns seek official support from Finland
Organization: University of North Carolina
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 04:16:04 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.150600.10220@jyu.fi> ryyti@jyu.fi (Jarmo Ryyti) writes:
>[ Article crossposted from soc.culture.nordic ]
>[ Author was Jarmo Ryyti ]
>[ Posted on Thu, 17 Dec 1992 06:57:11 GMT ]
>
>: This is a translation from the latest issue of Ruotsinsuomalainen
> (Swedenfinn) of the 10.12.1992.
>: 
>: FOR THE MINORITY STATUS IS SEEKED SUPPORT FROM FINLAND 
>: 
>: For the aim of the Swedenfinns to attain an ethnic and lingual minority
>: status is seeked now official support from Finland.
>: 
>: The issue is taken on the agenda of The Committee of the Immigration and
>: Refugee issues set by Finland's cabinet, (Suomen valtioneuvoston asettama
>: pakolais- ja siirtolaisasiain neuvosto), who gave the declaration of
>: the minority status made by the swedenfinnish organisations for the Finnish
>: governement last friday. (4.12.92) The Committee of the Immigration and
>: Refugee issues for their part received the proclamation of the minority
>  status during the Roots in Finland-festivities last august. 
>: 
>: According to the committee, Finland shall include the Swedenfinnish
>  aim for the minority status into  the issues in official  negotiations
>  between Finland and Sweden.
>: 
>: On the communication made by the committee is reminded prime minister Carl
>: Bildt charactrazing the situation of the swedenfinns. Bild has given
>  a statement that due to a long common history of the countries,
>  finnish settlements in Sweden and great numbers of swedenfinns give
>  a right to give a special status for the swedenfinns.
>Sincerely yours,
>jarmo ryyti
>
>: 
>: Ps.
>: 
>:Sorry for the translation. It was very difficult to translate,
> because of byreucratical text.
>
> You should notice that Carl Bildt is a concervative. During the social
> democratical time swedish governements aimed only to assimilate
> swedenfinns by all means.
>
>: As the peak of all swedish faschism Ms. Anita Gradin declared publicly
>: "Sweden is monolingual and remains monolingual", while still being as
>a minister. She is a prominent politician in Sweden, normally you hear
>such speeches in South-Africa and in Nazi-Germany but Sweden is no exeption.
> Her speeches however did not rise international publicity.
> Source for her statement is an issue of Etel{-Suomen Sanomat,
> a respectful newspaper in Finland,in the issue of the 11.12.92
>

	First off I'd like to mention that I'm entirely ignorant of the
Swedish / finnish politics and culture.  But from your post I gather that
a Finnish minority is seeking special treatment (ie. bilingualism ... ) in
Sweden.  Ms. Gradin opposes such special treatment.  This doesn't sound
disilar to the situation in the USA with regard to Hispanic immigrants. 
Why the analogy to SA and Nazi-germ?

--JMB