HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Bob Novak, Incompetent Pundit
Date: 19 Dec 1992 17:01:05 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) says:

>nbh@netcom.com (N.B. Hedd) writes:
>>Hey, Bob--you're a fool!
>>                                    ... Finally, on the eve
>>of the election, Novak grudgingly predicted during a round-table
>>discussion with other pundits that Clinton would
>>"eke out" a victory by no more than 30 electoral votes, a number
>>that was only 170 votes short of the truth (an error of 700%);
>>for comparison, the smallest margin any other pundit predicted
>>during this discussion was 150 votes.
>
>He did a lot better than John Sununu and John McGlaughlin, each of
>whom right before the election predicted a narrow victory for Bush!?!?
>Since Sununu had a job in the Executive Branch, as did McGlaughlin's
>wife, this myopia can be attributed to a misguided loyalty.
>Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com

Oh yeah, remember all those Dukakis supporters who predicted a win 
for him (when actually he only carried one state.) Not to mention
all those people who were proclaiming Fritz Mondale the new president
right up till his defeat as well as practically everyone in the Carter 
administration celebrating a second term. My point is this, who in their
right mind is going to say "Well there is no point in anyone voting for the
candidate I support so don't even bother going to the polls." 
 What's even worse is Democratic Senator Wyche Fowler STILL wont accept
his defeat and has groups trying to boycott his own home state to protest
his loss, talk about a sore looser.
-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   /   / __  /  /     |         Wally Blume         | Earth:
  /   / _ / /  / /_/  |      Internet address:      |    Mostly harmless.     
 /_/_/ /_/ /  / __/   | cd651@cleveland.freenet.edu |-HH Guide to the Galaxy
From: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Bob Dole, Sore Loser
Date: 19 Dec 1992 16:28:57 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, nbh@netcom.com (N.B. Hedd) says:

>And make no mistake about it, Bush DID lose--indeed, if you
>flip around Dole's logic, then Bush REALLY didn't have a mandate,
>other than to pack and get the hell out of town. I mean, nearly
>70% of Americans who voted voted for someone besides Bush. Talk
>about no mandate. The way I read this mandate it goes: "The
>Republicans had better kick the Christian loons out of their party
>or we aren't EVER letting them get back in the White House".

 Yeah, yeah, yeah... Keep in mind that 60% of americans voted against
Hillary...er...uh I mean Bill Clinton.                         ^^^^^^^

>No mandate my ass. Hey, Dole--surely you're aware that the only
>president to do worse in this century than Bush was Taft? Carter
>did better. NIXON did better. FORD did better. And as a matter
>of fact, both Mondale and Dukakis did better than Bush. Bush got
>37.5%, which is roughly the proportion of mean-spirited right-wing
>lunatics to the saner base population. 

  So where was this "saner base population" for the last 12 years?
If Carter was so great why was he booted? What about good ole' Fritz
Mondale and Mike 'I'll solve the drug problem like I solved my wife's
drinking problem' Dukakis?

  In another post you tell us how great the polls are and it is foolish
to doubt them. What about all those exit polls that showed 20% of 
Clinton voters were voting AGAINST Bush rather than in support of 
Clinton's plans. Sounds Like only 23% of the population really like this
fool.


-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   /   / __  /  /     |         Wally Blume         | Earth:
  /   / _ / /  / /_/  |      Internet address:      |    Mostly harmless.     
 /_/_/ /_/ /  / __/   | cd651@cleveland.freenet.edu |-HH Guide to the Galaxy
From: ssn@nail.msk.su (Mikle Rzuanin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Information about Russia:Politics,Economy,Markets,Business news.Daily or Weekly!
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 11:02:22 +0200
Distribution: world
Organization: NEWS NETWORK SERVICE, Ltd
Reply-To: ssn@nail.msk.su
Keywords: information, Russia, Politics, Economy, Markets, Business

                      Moscow, Russia
                  NETWORK  NEWS  SERVICE

      You want to enter one of the biggest markets of the world ?
      You are looking for a reliable partner on the territory  of
  the former USSR?
      You want to receive information faster than ruble  depreci-
  ates ?
      You dream of extending of your business operations to CIS ?

                    WE ARE EAGER TO HELP YOU!

       We can provide you with the reliable information about  the
   situation in Russia and other states - CIS  members'  economies,
   legislation and markets.

       Now it's very difficult to choose business information  you
   are interested in. Great number of business editions and agenci-
   es on economics propose to cunsomers more information than it's
   possibble to adopt.
       We'll save your time and  money.  Combination  of   original
   information and digest of the main editions -  is  incontestable
   advantage of SSN.
       SSN is a computer network news service. We  will  send  our
   issues directly to your computer.


       *POLITICS and ECONOMY - governmental decisions,  new  laws,
   trade agreements, reformation of Russian economy
       *STOCK and COMMODITY MARKETS - haggles results,  retail  and
   wholesale prices on row materials and production of  agriculture
   as well as on most important consumer goods.
       *FINANCIONAL and MONETARY POLICY - state and commecial  banks,
   hard currency rates, investments, insuranse, policy of taxation.
       *BUSINESS NEWS - meetings, events, presentations, informati-
   ons about state and commercial enterprises.

       You can receive our issues daily, three times  a  week  and
   weekly. The plot of the file you are interested in can be exten-
   ded. We'll add to it all nessesary information.
       Our Service can make market  analysis in CIS. WE'll  consult
   you about exports and imports,  Russian  laws, credit ability of
   your partner.
       We'll  find  office  space for you. Visit support -it's also
   one of our services.

                         JUST RING US UP!

        For more information call SSN-SILICON: tel/fax (095) 268-0933
             E-mail(Relcom)postmaster@nail.msk.su.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Death of America
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:33:09 GMT

In article <14DEC199213585663@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott) writes:
>< you notice the candle is black >
>< with an 8 stamped on the side, >
>< its flame starts to splutter   >  
>
>Perhaps, I can help clarify. Talk.politics.misc is like being out on
>the street compared to t.p.theory, which is more academic, and could
>be likened to a coffee house for the intelligentsia, ie Gordon Fitch
>and co. You can get a good logical argument over in t.p.t if you're
>willing to affect the raised-pinko style. T.p.misc though often as not
>ends up in a brawl. 

ahh. that explains why Mr. Gary L "i never met a logical argument
i couldn't ignore" Dare was so quick to remove t.p.t from the
"Death of Canada" thread. i wondered why that happened...

>I can't overemphasize that a lot of folks are here for entertainment,
>most(?) really do care, some just want to jerk your chain, others have
>axes to wield, with an assortment of real psychos, and a collection
>of fledgling lawyers, politicians, and journalist polishing up their
>skills.

sounds like family dinner back home.


keep up the good work, General.
--
charles
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Politicians
From: sl1yn@petersboro.enet.dec.com (869483 Denys Larry)
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:36:30 MDT
Reply-To: sl1yn@petersboro.enet.dec.com (869483 Denys Larry)
Distribution: world
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1gjn2jINNdri@spool.mu.edu>, jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Jason Hanson) writes:

|>Are there any newsgroups or mailing lists for those of us who are political
|>candidates?  Please reply through E-Mail.


  How about:
	alt.professional.liars
	alt.I.wanna.be.a.scumbag
	alt.I.would.rather.live.off.other.people.s.taxes.than do.real.work
	alt.I.like.dying.my.hair.a.different.color.every.day.like Clinton
	alt.I.wanna.be.able.to.hire.grateful.bimbos.for.government.jobs
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs
From: jap@cbnews.cb.att.com (james.a.parker)
Subject: Re: Bleeding-Heart Libertarianism (was Legalizing drugs)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:08:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.215349.18380@pony.Ingres.COM> garrett@Ingres.COM writes:
>In article <1992Dec12.064033.10089@genie.slhs.udel.edu>, starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)  writes...
>>Assuming that there would be no State intervention, criminal cases would be
>>treated as intentional torts, with restitution to be made to the victims,
>>plus court costs, plus a deterrent factor.  
>
>This might work for theft, but it wouldn't work for murder. If someone
>murdered a member of my family there would be only one way to pay
>restitution, with his/her life. How would the death penalty work under
>this system? Also, if the murder victim didn't have a family, how would
>this work? Finally, how would imprisonment work under this system? 

The death penalty is somewhat orthogonal to the issue.  I would suggest life
imprisonment (in a private prison, of course) with the murderer required to
work, and the proceeds (above survival level) going to the victim's
representatives.  Of course if the prisoner refuses to work...

As for no family for the murdered, rights would certainly be held by creditors,
life insurance companies (probably a standard clause), etc.

Prisons would probably be far less used, used only in the cases of persons who
are either a continuing threat to others or refuse to pay restitution.  Each
justice agency would likely have a minimal prison owned or contracted with;
however, if a prisoner wished to contract with another, "better" prison, s/he
could do so if s/he had something to offer not due to the victims.

                                   James Parker
                                   jap@cb1focus.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,misc.legal,soc.motss
From: Jim.Shirreffs
Subject: Re: Gay Child Molesters (Re: Youth Info Needed)
Organization: JJ Software
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 00:18:48 GMT

I am having a hard time following this thread, could someone explain to 
me what NAMBLA stands for, also who is Roy Radow and just what do the 
gay youth support groups do? 

Well as long as I am here; There was a post suggesting that gays are to hets
as canaries are to coal mines. Obviously this person was VERY upset
over the AIDS epidemic. I syspathize with him. I do not agree with
the tone of the responce he got from c++. I'm not going to join the
"Flame war" but show a little compassion, it's almost Christmas!

jim shirreffs

i speak for myself and only myself
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:39:11 GMT

In article <BzFHJF.BqG@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> gtao@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Greg ) writes:
>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>>The landing would have been the height of US popularity in Somalia,
>>and would have been a fair opportunity for the Pentagon to get some
>>good PR (what better than Marines coming to save starving children?),
>>or to set up a situation when the press may get out of hand and
>>embarrass themselves.  There would be an excuse to corral them up and
>>shut them up in case there's another hot war.
>
>A little cynical, are we?  I mean, if ANYbody has gotten good at
>controlling opinions, it's the MEDIA.  It's really sad to see just
>how powerful the media's influence has become.  I'm beginning to
>wonder what groups have the most pull in the media. 

The cynicism is justified from US actions from, say, Vietnam onwards.
Check out _Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda during the Gulf
War_ by John MacArthur (the publisher of Harper's) for a good case
study (though Mr. MacArthur gets a little shrill at times).  I also
picked up a book yesterday by John Quigley, _The Ruses of War_, about
how the US foreign policy establishment has manipulated popular
opinion through the media to justify interventions.  It seems an
apropos book at this time.

The group that has the most pull in the media is actually "official
sources."  Most of the news about our government doesn't come from
investigative reporting, but from sources within the government itself
("an unnamed official in the State Department" and so on).  Most
"leaks" are quite intentional, whether to maniupulate public opinion
or to fire a volley in one of the factional battles going on in D.C.
at the moment.  Walter Karp has a good article on this in a collection
of his essays, _Buried Alive: Essays on Our Endangered Republic_.  The
article probably appeared in some issue of Harper's, which may be
easier to find.  I can get you the citation if you want.

>
>Seriously, I'm sure that even IF the Pentagon did let the press know 
>the whereabouts of the landing, that's no excuse for recklessness on 
>the part of the media.  I'd be willing to bet that they were advised
>against doing just the sort of thing they did.

The media was told about where and when the landing was going to take
place.  This was reported in most newspapers a few days afterwards,
and is a case of "official sources."  They were not given advice on
how to greet the troops.




--
The insane fear of socialism throws the bourgeois headlong into the
arms of despotism.
			-- Tocqueville, 1852
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:37:31 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <102261@netnews.upenn.edu>, pezzillo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Amy J. Pezzillo) writes:
> In article <71739@cup.portal.com> Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:
# #Here's another one...
# #
# #"The gay science of genes and brains" Economist Dec 5, 1992
# #
# #Researchers in the field doubt the oft-repeated figure that one in
# #ten men is gay; they think that people whose sex lives are
# #exclusively homosexual make up about 4% of the adult men and less
# #than 2% of adult women.
# #
# #Don't give us the "that data can't possibly be valid" crap unless you're
# #willing to admit that the 10 percent figure is certainly baloney if
# #4 percent might be wrong. There are no surveys that show 10 percent, most
# #show much smaller numbers. If it's so darned unimportant, then why
# #keep repeating an obviously erronous and politically motivated 10 percent?
# #
# #Why not just admit it's 2-4 percent, and get on with it?
# 
# Well, if I may just make one small correction:  Whether or not it's
# accurate, there IS a  survey which shows 10%.  Where do you think the
# figure came from, thin air?  The 10% figure was the conclusion of the
# survey by Kinsey and associates in the 1950's.
# 
# One reason for the big discrepancy in figures may be that the 10%
# figure is describing homosexual *behavior* (Kinsey counted those who
# had had most or all of their sexual contact with members of the same
# gender as homosexual), while the other surveys seem to be counting
# only those who *identify* as homosexual.  There are many people who have had
# homosexual experiences who do not identify themselves as homosexual.

The French survey didn't used identification as homosexual, but
sexual acts with another member of the same sex.  Ditto for the
British survey.

Kinsey's work is clearly quite damaged by his inclusion of so many
current and former prisoners.

# ajp


-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex
From: gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy)
Subject: Re: No solid proof to support ( was: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 04:55:56 GMT

In article <13656@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
#I can't find such a statement in the article.  Quote?

Try page 410, the fifth sentence of the paper.

"As with all self-reported data, there are problems with reliability,
but studies in this particularly sensitive area have also met
political opposition." 

#Even if every one of those 7% who
#refused to participate were homosexuals, it doesn't get the number up
#to 10% -- not even close.

Clayton math. 4.1 percent plus 7 percent "doesn't get the number up to
10 percent -- not even close".

Clayton, whys is 11.1 percent not even close to 10 percent?

#I see.  You want to believe it, it's an article of faith, surveys
#that show otherwise are all wrong, etc.

No. The *SURVEY* you are quoting claims that the percentage of
homosexuals in London is 12 percent, and in Paris it is 19 percent! 

If a persons "personal experiance" is from a big city, you get big
numbers. 

Clayton, honest question: How much of the two surveys have you
actually *READ*?

--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:64480 ca.politics:10377 ba.politics:7759 soc.motss:52603
From: jviv@usmi01.midland.chevron.com (John Viveiros)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Pat Robertson's bigoted remarks at the convention...
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:50:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Chevron

>> No one in the official in the Republican party on the national level
>> sticks up for David Duke.  He is denounced every time his name comes up.
>> Why do you keep bringing Duke into it?
>> 
>Well he (Duke) must think that he is welcome there.  If not in actuality
>than in spirit... I know I wouldn't be there if everyone denounced me.
>
I have heard a very conservative friend of mine state that he thought
that Duke had a good message, but people were unfortunately objecting to
the messenger.  He gave me the impression that Duke's ideas (whatever
they may be) were welcomed by his fellow Republicans.  Not everyone I'm
sure, but at least one I know of.

-- 
John Viveiros     (jviv@chevron.com)
Chevron USA        Standard disclaimer applies
Midland TX 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:64288 soc.motss:52339 alt.sex:39571
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex
Subject: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:16:46 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA


See "AIDS and sexual behavior in France" in the December 3, 1992
_Nature_.  The survey questioned 20,055 people aged 18-69.  The
survey asked about "at least one occurrence of intercourse with
a person of the same sex during their lifetime", in the past 5 
years, and in the past year.  The percentages reported were:

           men       women
lifetime   4.1%      2.6%
past 5 yrs 1.4%      0.4%
past year  1.1%      0.3%

This is higher than the 3.3% number for men cited by Masters, Johnson,
& Kolodny, but roughly in line with the 2.4% homosexual/bisexual
identification from exit polling in this year's election.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: "nigel allen" <nigel.allen@canrem.com>
Subject: Teacher Attrition: AFT President Shanker Responds to urvey
Reply-To: "nigel allen" <nigel.allen@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: talk
Date: 12 Dec 92 20:49:09 EST


Here is a press release from the American Federation of Teachers.

 AFT President Shanker Responds to Metropolitan Life Survey
 To: National Desk, Education and Labor writers
 Contact: Mary Ellen Shearer of the American Federation of Teachers,
          202-879-4596

   WASHINGTON, Dec. 10  -- American Federation of Teachers 
President Albert Shanker issued this statement today upon
the release of the Metropolitan Life survey, "The Second Year: New
Teachers' Expectations and Ideals":

   "This survey reveals that after two years of teaching, nearly half
of teachers are considering leaving their profession.  Until we
address the problem of 'revolving door teachers', we will never reach
our national education goals.
   "There is no other profession where large numbers of people are
thinking of leaving after two years.  Teachers' workloads are
staggering.  They deal with everything from students' standardized
test scores to their family and emotional problems.
   "We know the conditions that cause teachers to leave -- lack of
support and resources, low pay.  Until we provide teachers with the
means to teach their students, American education will never reach
world class standards."

   The AFT represents 796,000 teachers, paraprofessionals and school-
related employees, higher education faculty and staff, nurses and
health professionals, and public sector employees.
 -30-
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: howiegbk@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Jr Howard Mea Turner)
Subject: Re: Space program necessary
Summary: What the hell is this doing here? 
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:57:30 GMT

In article <17DEC199215301538@zeus.tamu.edu> srf6200@zeus.tamu.edu (Steven Rush Fennell) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.172656.27110@technology.com>, judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin) writes...
>> 	Can any of you think of any moral or philosophical justification
>>	for using huge amounts of taxpayer money to fund the "space
>>	program" at all?  Not counting, of course, it provides high-
>>	pay, high-tech jobs for a bunch of us.
>> 
>>		Judy
>> 
>
>Well, we can all sit here on Earth and stagnate I guess.  I would say that 
>without some edge of society, or frontier, we will begin to wallow in our own 
>filth (unless we turn to zero pop. growth).  How much more is there to learn 
>on this planet?  Do we abandon technology and turn inwards as a species?  I 
>prefer to stay with the cutting edge...even if it means paying a few dollars 
>more in taxes.  And BTW, the space program consumes about 1% of the federal 
>budget - it was around 4% I believe in the '60s.  Not exactly what I would 
>call a huge amount of money relatively speaking, compared to welfare or 
>defense. 
>
>The space shuttle costs a little under 1 billion dollars per mission, and it 
>takes up about half of NASA's budget.  NASA is already investigating the next 
>generation launch vehicle, which should hopefully cost less per mission that 
>the shuttle (or there's really no justification).  This is necessary in any 
>event because the shuttle's are nearing their projected mission design life 
>maximum.
>
>Steve Fennell
>srf6200@zeus.tamu.edu


	Has Rush discussed this lately?  If not, leave it off this newsgroup.
It was very interesting, but when I want stuff like that, I will read some
other newsgroup.

Thanks,
Howard

P.S.  We really don't need a moderator, so let's keep it straight ourselves.
 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,ca.politics,ba.politics