HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 29 Aug 1992 09:02:00 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Poll Time

rtf:

It depends on what you think might be inferred from "some" restrictions.
If you answer, "illegal all the time," it appears that you make no
exception to save the mother's life--a rather extreme position.  One
would expect to find a miniscule part of the population holding this
view.

"For any reason," however, is also an *extreme* position, including
sex selection, birth control--a position that has *never* appeared in
such numbers before.

The GSS survey numbers averaged over 1972-1983 show these numbers:


Abortion should be legal under:

any circumstances             22%
certain circumstances         68%
no circumstances               9%


Now, ten years later, we have a 49/38/10 situation.  Which means that
there has been a massive shift into an extremist camp--and it wasn't
the right to lifers.  Extremist anti-abortion opinion has increased
only by 1 percent.  But extremist pro-abortion opinion has moved up
*27* points (again, assuming we take the recent information to be
valid.)

Both *any* reason and *no* reason were once considered problematic.
Now it appears that a near-majority has accepted abortion even in
situations for which we condemn other nations (such as sex-selection).

Yes, there is a culture war.  It is never a good sign when a nation's
people take extreme positions (whichever way they may fall).  That way
lies both fascism and communism, in their purest forms.

If these numbers are accurate, we are in for a bloody civil war.
And the economy will be nothing more than a blip on the radar screen
of politics.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:06:00 EDT
From:         Travis Kidd <TKIDD@CLEMSON.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: aside reference to income tax

On Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:47:05 -0400 SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET said:
>  *** Resending note of 08/31/92 15:28
>
>  >I hate to think of all males as potential rapists, but, then again, I
>  >can't totally refute the claim either.  I wish I could.
>  >But then again, we all are potential bank robbers, potential income-tax
>  >cheaters, potential murderers.  Of course, some women are potential
>  >rapists.
>
>  Are you sure that "income tax cheaters" should be listed among criminals.
>  I thought it was the income tax *system* that was illegal (unconstitutional).
>
>  ---Robert

I don't know that it is...do you have more info?
-Travis
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:49:21 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: falling off the culturally elite pedestal with a thud...

anneliese:

Depends.  If you read Zen and the Art in the 60s or 70s and consider it
a manual for living, you are among the cultural elite.  If you read it
recently and thought it odd, you are not.

If you read Bright Lights, Big City, Less Than Zero, or Slaves of
New York, and liked them, you are a gold-star member of the cultural
elite.  Just thought you might like to know.

If you read Ellis's latest, American Psycho, and liked it, you are
a cultural elite wannabe.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 11:50:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Holidays

have fun dunstan.
of course i'll miss you. in fact, i don't know what will happen to me :)

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:06:33 CDT
From:         "The Truth (some assembly required)" <T9AA@SDSUMUS.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Teenage rave.

>hey, what is "rave" music??

>-linda

Rave music is ultra-dance music. Deee-lite is probably the closest
"rave" style has come to top-40, although Stone Roses, 808 State,
the Happy Mondays and the Shamen have had some American success.

Put a generic 120 beats-per-minute drum behind anything off U2's
_Achtung Baby_ and you have the essense of Rave music, but not
of the actual rave.

Take a whole bunch of people, preferably in their teens, and
get them really really cranked on MDMA (street names: "ecstacy"
"E") and smart drugs and start playing the most intense music
that could have any relation to disco. These people will be
wearing an odd combination of hippy, mod, punk and hip-hop gear
and think (according to what I've read in Mondo 2000) that they
can dance their way to world peace.

IMHO, the exact opposite of multiculturalism, attracting the same
types.

Dave
t9aa@sdsumus.bitnet
That's the way I make it, make it mine
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 07:54:16 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: the oily slope of foreign policy

From:         the valley of the fuzz-tone guitar <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>

> Now, the question still persists - what motivated the need for the U.S. to
> have a controlling presence in the region, both before, during, and after
> the war?  Certainly, oil is an important consideration, but it's hardly the
> raison d'etre of U.S. foreign policy.  What about U.S. arms sales in the
> region?  Isn't this a business that Bush would like to see protected?  Might
> the U.S. want a base for some projected military action against other middle
> east residents, like Iran?  Or perhaps, as Noam Chomsky suggests, it's
> simply a matter of disciplining a puppet who doesn't want to be controlled
> anymore?  Now, think carefully.  Where does oil *really* fit into all this?

"U.S. arms sales in the region":  If there was no oil, there wouldn't
      be any money to but the arms in the first place.

"...matter of disciplining a puppet...":  Why would we want a puppet
      there in the first place.  Could it be........because of oil?

It seems to me oil was a major contributor directly AND indirectly.

> Gary W. Olson

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:11:24 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Make My Day (Jamie)
              26 Aug 1992 17:36:21 -0400 from <SPRG0002@TULSAJC>

From:         "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>

> Just for grins, here is the Oklahoma "Make My Day" law.

First Sue Clark answers a post and now Robert did something
actually useful.  It must be a miracle.  :-)

> 21 @ 1289.25.  Unlawful entry of dwelling-Physical or deadly force
> against intruder-Affirmative defense and immunity from civil liability

> A.  The Legislature hereby recognizes that the citizens of the State of
>     Oklahoma have a right to expect absolute safety within their own
>     homes.
> B.  Any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of
>     physical force, including but not limited to deadly force, against

What does "..but not limited to deadly force mean"??  Is there
any force beyond a deadly force???

> Example:  I am pointing a gun at the intruder.  He grasps the barrel and
>           says "give me the gun sucker".  I notice a slight tug ( physical
>           force ).  BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG.  My current
>           bedside firearm only holds 8 rounds.  After cleaning the firearm
>           I dutifully call the police.

WRONG!  Weren't you listening to Andy when he was explaining the
difference between shoot to kill/wound and shoot to.....er....
what was it? shoot to prevent harm or something like that.  See,
it is like this.  After the first or second BANG, there is no more
(reasonable) danger of the intruder harming you, so it believe
you would be charged with attempted murder.

> ---Robert

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 13:28:02 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Rape as violence or sex.
              31 Aug 1992 14:16:00 EDT from <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU>

Richard:

You can think or read whatever you like, but your comments are common
among people who think they can understand something they have never
experienced.  No book can explain rape.  No fancy psychological
theory can override the experiential fact that rapists and rape
victims know that rape and sex have very little to do with each other.

I'm not going to talk about this any more.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 11:51:00 EDT
From:         rf35 <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: morals
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

> *** Resending note of 08/28/92 10:11
>
>
> >Ok, how about a show of hands here.  Who thinks that its MORE selfish
> >to hoist your morals on others?

        Sorry, in defense of Robert, et. al, this qualifies as a "com-
plex question."  The phrase 'your morals' presupposes that there are no
moral facts of the matter.  I am certain that Robert and company would
be fully prepared to deny this presumption.  I, too, believe that there
are moral facts.  One relevant moral fact is that no person has a right
to use another person's body without her consent, and this fact implies
that abortions are permissible, and that they ought not to be restricted
by the government.

        If abortion is murder (which I understand to be 'wrongful killing,')
then it is perfectly legitimate to punish those who have an abortion.  I
have yet to see an argument which demonstrates that abortion is murder--just
assertions from 'properly functioning people' who find no need for logical
discourse.  But I am willing to accept that a sound argument supporting the
conclusion that abortion is murder would not also be able to support the
conclusion that people who are involved in aborting a fetus ought to be
punished.

        Andy (Freeman, I believe) has provided reasons for rejecting the
reference to moral claims in politics by using a restricted sense of the
term 'moral' and in saying that the cost-benefit analysis that ought to
be used in political discussion is not a 'moral' decision.  Morality is
grounded on some other thing.  I take it that my dispute with Andy is
purely linguistic.  I would say that Andy's methodology is a suggestion for
determining what the moral facts of the matter are--a plausible suggestion,
though I do have some objections with respect to details.  Under this broader
conception, I do not see that Andy has provided any grounds against grounding
political decisions on moral facts.

                                        Richard A. Fyfe
                                        rf35@umail.umd.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 12:51:24 MST
From:         Roger <CARROLL@SCC.BITNET>
Subject:      Politics in the 48th State

Since things are kind of dull on the list today, thought I'd bring you
up-to-date on political happenings in Arizona.

John McCain (of "Keating 5" fame) is running for re-election.  Not much to
speak of as opposition candidates on the Democratic side.  But now, good
old former Governor Evan Mecham (of "pickaninny" fame, and the guy who
rescinded the Martin Luther King holiday in Arizona) has decided to run
for McCain's seat as an independent.

Pundits think Mecham has a hard-core base of 5 - 10%, maybe more, which
would primarily be pulled away from McCain's core of support.  Those same
analysts felt McCain was a "shoe-in" before, but with Mecham now in the
race the Demos have a chance.

Should be interesting.
                                                   ---roger
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 11:54:07 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Rape as violence or sex.

>But then again, we all are potential bank robbers, potential income-tax
>cheaters, potential murderers.  Of course, some women are potential
>rapists.

While there is a meaning of "potential" for which that is true, the
resulting sentence doesn't add much light to the discussion.

I'm not a potential bank robber, rapist, or murderer in any useful
sense of the word potential.  (We'll see how much longer govt retains
enough respect before I say anything about taxes.)  Anyone who insists
otherwise is either clueless or dishonest.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: diviney@milton.u.washington.edu (Pat Diviney)
Subject: Re:      demo platform revisited
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:24:32 GMT

In article <01GO8SWJACMAB4SQFP@WVNVMS.WVNET.EDU> KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU writes:
>I don't have a Republican Platform, but wish I did.  From the few exerpts
>(excerpts?  sp??) I've seen, it's lots more fun than this one.  But longer.

I have heard somewhere that since the so-called "religious right" co-opted
the platform committee and wrote a rather extreme set of positions into the
platform, most of the so-called "mainstream" candidates feel the need to
distance themselves from it.  According to what I've heard, the latter group
have tried to, in effect, hide the platform.  This might account for the
difficulty of obtaining a copy.  Just a possibility.


Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:24:00 EDT
From:         the valley of the fuzz-tone guitar <SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: two questions

Kerry K. asks:
>1)  Does anyone know of an ftp site (ugh -- I still have to use the bitnet
>gateway trick) that has the texts of the Republican and Democratic
>platforms?  I just hate to use snail-mail when I can use a confusing and
>exasperating computerized method . . .

Check out world.std.com.  In directory /obi/USElection/President/Clinton
is a collection of various Clinton speechs, Gore speechs, and other assorted
stuff, including plat_1.txt and plat_2.txt, which I believe is the Demo
platform itself (I didn't extract the files to look at 'em).  Also in this
directory is Clinton's acceptance speech, Gore's acceptance speech, speechs
of various other convention speakers, speech texts on various subjects
(foreign policy, nam, so forth).  The file names are pretty descriptive,
so you shouldn't have much problem with browsing.

There's no similar directory for Bush (though there is for Perot, interestingly
enough).  Bush does have a directory elsewhere ( /obi/George.Bush ), but it
only contains one file, on Desert Shield.  In other words, it's a microcosm
of his entire Presidency...:) )

Seriously, I have not heard of any ftp residence for Bush's speechs and such.
I'll make mention of it if I see one.

>Kerry

Gary W. Olson                 "The great and direct end of government is
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU   liberty.  Secure our liberties and privileges,
69 days and counting down...   and the end of government is answered.  If this
                               be not effectively done, government is an evil."
           - Patrick Henry, Speech against the U.S. Constitution, June 25, 1788
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 09:00:09 SET
From:         Hansjoerg Klein <HKL@CERNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: some clues for Hansjorg: how to sign off

thanks for the very nice, sarcastic, but helpfull message to tell
me how to sign off. You know, I started with good thinking, but
cannot cope with the floods of mails and cannot participate in
exclusive US problems, rape, riots, abortion, elections, etc.
It is interesting but we in Europe have different problems and
need to worry as well.
So, my hard word was only to get someone to react and I take it
back since it did hurt some feelings.
so long Hansjoerg
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 13:18:11 EDT
From:         Evelyn Duncan <R3EJD@AKRONVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Clarification Request
              31 Aug 1992 15:19:02 GMT from <jwales@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

I wonder if Travis was just restating the statment someone made about
abortion by substituting "rape" for "abortion" and "woman" for "fetus."

Evelyn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 22 Aug 1992 16:11:46 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Say What??!?

>   I just signed up for this list yesterday and I've been trying to figure
>   out what the heck Pat Buchanan meant when he said, "We want to take
>   back our culture."  Does anyone know? If this is familiar territory,
>   please e-mail me directly. Now I'm NOT calling Mr. Buchanan the N word,
>   but it did sound suspiciously like something I heard in a newsreel from
>   Berlin circa 1939.

Discussion rule #37; any references to Hitler, Nazis, etc are good
indictors that nothing useful will be said in the rest of the discussion.

The US is almost always involved in a number of culture wars; that's
been true for over 200 years.

Buchanan is merely suggesting that certain parties might want to get
involved, because they're in a culture war even though they're not
fighting.

It is something of a US tradition for various groups to try to force
their culture onto other people.  The thing that amazes me is that so
many people deny that they themselves do it.  I suppose that's because
they'd like to think that only "the wrong people" do it.  Maybe
they're right about that.

-andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:29:18 -0400
From:         "Robert sprg0002@tulsajc.bitnet" <SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET>
Subject:      re: income tax

 Travis,

 What Satanist was responsible for perpetrating the lie that wages are
 somehow income, when in fact they are an equal exchange with no profit
 derived by anyone.

 Whatever became of the Constitutional provision for taxes being
 apportioned?

 Where is the IRS mentioned in the Constitution?

 Where is the Constitutionally required "Gold or silver coin" with which
 we are required to pay our State taxes?

 ---Robert

 "Abortion has saved us from looking at a lot of childish art"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:36:59 -0400
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
Subject:      Patriotism

 *** Resending note of 09/03/92 15:25

 SPRG0002 writes, in reference to an interpretation of his previous statement:
 >  >mandatory military service for every young person?  you ARE a sick pup.

 >  There is a very definite chord of a
 >  vehemently anti-patriotic attitude throughout your whining.  Are we to
 >  understand that you find military (or other) service for your country
 >  somehow distasteful?  Are you enjoying the benefits of freedom at the
 >  expense of our dead patriots?

 >>That is the typical conservative idea of patriotism--that patriotism can only
 >>be measured by bloodshed, that killing people just-like-yourself just because
 >>some demented, psychopath Pentagon gangsters in Washington "ordered" it is a
 >>virtue, that total blind obedience to one's "superiors" ..........

 You haven't been paying attention.  I do not, nor have I ever, advocated blind
 obedience to superiors or to government.  Responsibility sometimes requires
 sacrifice.  The way you describe it, it sounds more like anarchy.

 I'm glad that you are so appreciative of those that have died in order to
 secure your right to complain.

 ---Robert
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, 28 Aug 1992 15:34:58 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      shoah, what is politics?, and i'll enter the stupidest contest

hello, all:
wow, politics posting is a big thang these days, i guess, to judge by the
number of things in this mailbox today.  couple things i wanted to say,
though....
"the holocaust" with a capital h (or all caps, as some of us prefer) is a
literal translation of the word many jews use to describe the events
carried out by nazi germany.  to use it to describe anything else is in
very poor taste and is considered extremely offensive to many people.

the abortion name-calling and posting is getting a little out of hand.  there
*are* other issues, y'know.  it would seem appropriate to me to discuss the
(and here's the key word) *political* implication of the criminalization
of abortion, or of the *political* implications of its being outlawed.
even the *political* implication of what to do with the unaborted children,
the *political* implication of defining when exactly a life begins, the
*political* implication of the enfranchisement of children (after all, we keep
calling them citizens...should we let 'em vote?  what age do you want, say, 6?)
...all of these have a place here.  discussions of morals and whether or not
this action qualifies as murder possibly belongs elsewhere.  say, the
christia list.  maybe some sort of morals list.  possibly a philosophy list.
it just seems to me that precious little of a particularly political bent is
cropping up in these discussions.

i'd like to enter in the running for "stupidest list member", please.
my qualifications are obvious:  aside from always having The Most Irrelevant
Posts, please keep in mind that i have actually re-subbed to this list
on three separate occasions and that i actually care about what other people
think about various issues.  also, i would like to point out that i actually
own a copy of the first "living in a box" album and occasionally still listen
to marillion records.  i often leave my windows unlocked, i like white castles
(tm), and have seen "the wall" more than 52 times.  i will also not deny the
charge that i sometimes hurry home so as not to miss "head of the class" on
the local independent affiliate.  oh, and i come from a family that bought
a yugo once.  there:  i let my record speak for itself.  remember, come
election day:  anneliese lorson for List Moron.  she's counting on you (but not
   past the number twenty).

                         * * *anneliese "those advanced degrees...they're all
                              an elaborate front" l.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:14:39 -0400
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET

 From KAT
 *** Resending note of 08/26/92 11:47
 >What you keep failing to understand is that to an Indian, his
 >heritage might also come before his American Citizenship.
 >Now, why would you want to reserve that right for you and then
 >deny it to others?

 What you keep failing to understand is that * I AM AN INDIAN * !

 ---Robert
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:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:20:57 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      republican platform

Hi, y'all:
I called the local Republican Party headquarters to ask about platforms.
They should be available in the next few weeks.  I can hardly wait -- I see
a whole new generation of sig quotes :)

Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU