HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 13:33:02 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Disarmament
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

        It's been amusing to see the various "peace movements" that campaigned
for freezes and unilateral disarmament become very quite as first Reagan then
Bush effectively reduced the number of warheads here and in the XSSR by 2/3.

        News of continued cuts in nuclear arms is not met with ever-louder
cries of joy, but with silence and then *complaints*.

        DISARM-L lives a life of quiet desperation, not willing to give credit
to either President Reagan or Bush, and hoping for some kind of bad news to
arise.

        The latest attempt to badmouth START II is to say it ignores
submarine launched missiles.

        And?  Sub launched missiles are not first strike weapons.  They are
less accurate and the subs are subject to communication blackouts.  START I and
II have been targeting the most dangerous weapons: MIRVed land based missiles.

        Back in the 80s I was a supporter of the notion that many of these
movements were Soviet inspired and partially staffed with Soviet sympathizers.
This notion was proven true when the British "Women's Movement" was found to be
led by Soviet spies.

        In the wake of such allegations the freeze movement and unlateral
disarmament movement have evaporated.  All that is left are those critical of
the US, and willing to ignore the facts of disarmament to bash the US for any
reason.  There are no more mass marches in Europe (I should say Western, since
there never were any in Eastern Europe or the XSSR...) no more chants of
"better red than dead".  Yet there are still those unwilling to give credit
where credit is due.  Unwilling to grant the US (and Gorbachev's XSSR) the
respect they deserve for retiring the nuclear war clock.

        You have to look beyond stated objectives.  People aren't always what
they seem.  Let's all give thanks that Reagan and Bush and Gorby and Yelstin
have had the courage to say no to irresponsible ideas.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:55:00 EST
From:         "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.OIT.UNC.EDU>
Subject: RE: Uncl: Re: Uncl: ActUp/RI joins Colorado Boycott
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM.CC.UCF.EDU>

> You know, it took me a few months...I kept wondering who it was that Robert
> reminded me of...then, he said the following and it hit me:
>
>
> >I happen to be in the group that does not like my drinking water
> >fluoridated, that makes me a minority.
>
>
> "That's right, Mandrake.  Flouridation.  They're trying to deprive me of
> my precious bodily fluids, Mandrake...they take them out and replace them
> with flouride.  How?  Drinking water.  Don't let them use flouridation...
> it'll take away our precious bodily fluids."
>
> Yep, that's Robert.  Same thing would probably happen with equivalent power,
> too.
>
>
> Easy to guess the reference; anyone (without looking at all your video guides)
> know the actor?

Let me try this again (last time my computer went belly-up on me :-(.)

It was Sterling Hayden, in one of the best roles of his career.

"We must not allow Communist infiltration, Communist subversion,
Communist propoganda, and the international Communist conspiracy,
to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids!"

Sellers wasn't bad, either, as the president:

"Gentlemen, you can't fight here!  This is the War Room!!"

As far as the characterization goes, though, I would think the
Keenan Wynn character was closer to the mark:

"You know whatI think?  I think you're some kind of deviated prevert.
I think that General Ripper found out about your preversion, and that
you were organizing some kind of mutiny of preverts.  Now move!"

And, of course, the priceless:

"You know what'll happen if you don't get the President on the
phone?  You're going to have to answer to the Coca-Cola people."

Great movie.

Best,
Peter

> -T.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 10:24:00 EST
From:         "Peter J. Schledorn" <UNCPJS@UNC.OIT.UNC.EDU>
Subject:      Rights and phony rights--one last try
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM.CC.UCF.EDU>

> >A doctor who performs abortions for white women but not
> >for black women is restricting their right to get an abortion.  A lung
> >specialist who performs no abortions at all is not.
>
> And, what about the abortionist who won't serve people who can't
> pay?

As I said, the abortionist has the right to fair pay for services
rendered.  If some people can't afford those services, it's a problem,
but it's not a problem with discrimination.

> >The offence here is the denial of the opportunity to participate fully
> >in the life of our economy and society to certain arbitrarily chosen
> >members of that society.
>
> Nope, that's not the offense.  Peter doesn't object to certain
> criteria at all - we're merely quibbling over acceptable criteria.
> Peter thinks that some criteria is unacceptable.  Oh, he'll let people
> use them "in private", but he defines "private" so as to exclude their
> use.

Wrong.  The only acceptable reason for refusing service is when
providing service would violate the rights of the provider.  Andy
thinks that there's a "right" to discriminate based on race, sex
or whatever.  I say there isn't.

> >There is no right to act like a bigot in public.
>
> Ah, but there is.  Many private acts are done publically.  Consider
> Peter's consenting targets of affection.  He insists that he's well
> within his rights to discriminate on any basis he sees fit, yet many
> of the resulting acts may well be done in public without a squawk from
> him.

Andy, you've taken balderdash to new heights.  Andy wants to "prove"
that restaurant owners should be able to discriminate in public in the
same way that they have the unquestioned right to discriminate when
they invite people to their homes for dinner.  In order to "do" this,
he reduces all sex acts to acts of prostitution.

As for private acts done in public--of course private decisions can
result in acts done in public.  But Andy seems to be equating the right
to decide who you'll hold hands with in public with the "right" to
throw all blacks out of a store.

BTW, one's own body is private, too, wherever it happens to be.

> >Maybe someday Andy will learn that a campaign for the right to act like
> >a bigot makes a pretty sorry campaign.
>
> Someday Peter may learn that he doesn't have any more rights than a
> bigot, that the precedents cut both ways.

The problem is, I know that I have the same rights as a bigot--it's the
bigot who doesn't know that.  But even if he doesn't know that, I'm
going to insist upon him acting that way.

Best,
Peter

> -andy
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 12:32:22 EST
From:         Daniel David Benson <bensonda@STUDENT.MSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: estimating: yet another message
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              93 11:34 am

>
> >From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
>
> >>--KAT (more thinking--less repetition--longer school hours--
> >>       longer school year--no summer vacation rather shorter
> >>       more frequent vacations--smaller classes--higher paid
> >>       teachers--shorter work days for teachers)
> >
> >
> >kat, i agree w/all these pts. except.....how can you have longer school
> >hours but shorter work days for teachers???
>
> By hiring more teachers.
>
> Jamie
>
 By hiring more teachers. That's fine and dandy. Certainly I agree with this
idea along with the longer school year, etc. But how do you expect these
improvements to be implemented? I can't see this being funded, given our
budgetary position in most states and the federal government.

-Dan B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 11:34:01 EST
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: freedom from discrimination

>From:         "rufus t. firefly" <U9AA%SDSUMUS.BITNET@VM1.NODAK.EDU>

>    if freedom from discrimination is a right, how then do we make
>sure that people can exercise that right? let's look at what happens
>if we act on this statement.
>
>   it appears that discrimination can come from two sources; the law,
>and people. if you are speaking of discrimination based on inequality
>before the law, i would agree with you that this should be eliminated.
>but are would going to dig into people's minds to make sure that they
>don't discriminate? do we need thought police to stop racist/sexist/etc
>attitudes?

I give up. Do we?
Do we need thought police to stop murderous attitudes? Or would
it be sufficient to have thoughtless police to stop murder?

>   "outrageous lies"? peter, if i and a black person apply for a job,
>and both of us are equally qualified, affirmative action dictates that
>the black person gets the job.

This is simply false. Unless Firefly is using "affirmative action"
in some Humpty Dumptyish way. (Fictional characters all know each
other, right? Valentine and Rufus T. Firefly and Humpty Dumpty
meet regularly for, um, well probably a tea party. At least so
I have been assuming.)

I leave the enjoyable task of puncturing Rufus's misconceptions
about affirmative action to Peter. Tag.

>even if the black person is somewhat
>less qualified, the black person still gets the job. would you please
>tell me how this is not a special right, denied to whites?

Suppose something like this happens. It is not a special right.
Suppose people with high SAT scores get into Stanford, while
people with low SAT scores do not. Do people with high SAT
scores have a special right, denied to low scorers?

No. (I didn't want to keep you in suspense.)

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:02:34 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Cross controversy?
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>On Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:54:00 EST Travis Kidd said:
>>How is putting up a cross considered hate speech?
>
>It depends upon the group putting it up; I doubt that if the Salvation
>Army put up a cross, the action would be considered hate speech.
>>-Travis
>Evelyn

        Which is why hate crimes will always (hopefully) be struck down.  You
can't pove what people are thinking.

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 07:29:54 EST
From:         jc-s <GE777009@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Colorado

>Rather than evil and hate, 'tis logic and common sense which has been
>thrust into our unprepared bastion of souls in search of foundation, a
>hardened core of logicians, philosophers and sundry other misfits unable
>to see the forest for the trees, unable to perceive an absolute truth
>were it stuck in their eye.

You know, its early and all, but i think the logic czar should be
called in on this one.  If the truth were a thing, like, say, a sharp
stick, like Robert would have you believe, and it was stuck IN your
eye, it would be hard to see it.  It would be hard to reconcile the
fact that this very sharp and pointy object that was thrust in your
eye by someone who claims to know what truth is, is, in fact, truth.
Now, if i were like Robert, and i chose to jam a sharp pointy
stick in my eye, that would be truth, because i had done it, and
i had made it true to me.  But what do you call it when someone
shoves their verson of truth in your eye and blinds you with it?

Assault and Battery?


>The truth of righteousness will not find rest for the night in a city
>of self-serving, self-indulging and self-inflated, self-worshippers.
>Not to fear, for righteousness will prevail and the temporary obstacle
>of worldly beings will be swept away as readily as flying wind from the
>anus in a tornado.

Ah, that's right. its called Righteousness. I had forgotten.


Jenna who has never actually seen an anus in a tornado, but i'm sure
its quite a sight.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:59:38 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: freedom from discrimination
              7 Jan 1993 13:19:52 -0400 from <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>

From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>

>        As an example:

>        A couple of years ago two black police sergeants were promoted to
> leutenant over 14 white police persons who had scored higher on the exam.

There *could* be more to this than meets the eyes.  I contend that
a black officer would do a better job in a black neighborhood
even if he scored lower than a white officer.

> Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:14:58 MET
From:         Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
Organization: Institute of Computer Science, Jagellonian University Cracow
Subject:      Re: Stability (Was: Re: why gold - NOT)
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              at Jan 7, 93 8:23 pm

Stephan Melin pisze:
>> What one really needs is stability and no
>> inflation or deflation.

Agreed. But i think deflation is still better than inflation.

>> Why is deflation bad?
>> For most businesses, when they start to grow they need more money than they
>> have, so they have to lend money (and pay interest of course). But with
>> deflation money would become very expensive, because it would be profitable
>> just to keep the money (so this would be an absoulutely no risk way to make
>> a profit), whereas lending money always is a risk. Since the price of money
>> is also market driven and there is only very little supply the prices would
>> be very high. This would prevent these businesses from growing and therefore
>> the whole economy.

There are several logical errors in such thinking:

1) The price of loan is inflation+small_fee, so the inflation does NOT
   influence the REAL interest. And the loan expenses (small_fee) does not
   prevent businesses from growing, now. It wouldn't prevent them from growing
   in case of inflation.

   Accelerated inflation can affect the growth temporarily, but it cannot
   last forever.

2) Gold money supply (this is the discussed source of deflation) grows at
   2-4% annually. If there is no growth at all, inflation will appear and
   it will be still wiser to lend money for profit, that to store them

3) Growth comes from saving&investment not from money-making, Money can only
   help in one way: stable money help take wise saving decisions. Unstable
   money prevents saving because it's too risky. Inflation prevents saving
   because it's better to spend now. And unstable inflation is the most
   harmful of all.

Caius
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, 5 Jan 1993 15:39:26 -0500
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      the quota thing -- how real is it?
Comments: To: politics@ohstvma.bitnet

Hi again :)
Brett's comment about quotas in a recent post got me to wondering -- just
how real are quotas?  You see, I've participated in a number of job
searches -- both as the searcher and as a searchee -- and I can't think of
a single instance of an individual being hired to fulfill a racial/gender
quota.  In all cases, posts were being filled in 90%+ white male
departments in public institutions and many noises were made about
affirmative action.  In all but one case, white males were hired; in all
but one case (not the same one :)), the candidate with the strongest
qualifications got the job.

I know this is only one person's experience in a limited number of settings
-- so I'm asking others out there with more knowledge than I:  how "real"
are quotas?  How often do poorly-qualified folks get hired to fill quotas?
Just how big a problem is it?

Kerry
who suspects it does happen sometimes, but is beginning to think the q word
is becoming another red flag.  Or is it red herring?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Jimmy -Jimbo- Wales)
Subject: Re: philosopher cards - starter set
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:24:15 GMT

Hmm... philosophers on a baseball team?


...you left off the famous team owner -- Ayn Rand.

--Jimbo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 11:02:54 EST
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: DC

>From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
>
>>Of course, it is a city of well over 500,000 people and I believe that there
>>are more people in DC than there are in Montana.  And right now, they
>>don't have any voice in congress.
>>Jonathan
>
>        If DC gets statehood, I think we'll see a large number of cities
>separate from their present states and apply for statehood.

They may apply, but they will be denied.

Appropriately, in my opinion.

Large U.S. cities, with the exception of Washington, already have
representatives in Congress. Washington has none. That doesn't
seem very democratic.

By the way, I don't think D.C. itself CAN get statehood, not without
a constitutional amendment. I think Congress will have to pull a kind
of trick. It will have to shrink the Capital down to a very small,
non-residential area. The rest of Washington it can make into
a state.
Silly, isn't it?

>        Anyone for 10 Senators from the former city of New York?

Ulp. Uh, no thanks.

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 9 Jan 1993 18:09:55 MET
From:         Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
Organization: Institute of Computer Science, Jagellonian University Cracow
Subject:      Re: Privatizations and standard of living
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              Jan 8, 93 2:31 pm

Tim Johnson pisze:
>>
>> >Other example: some sectors on the economies in Eastern Europe (Poland,
>> >Hungary, Czekoslovakia) have been massivily privatized in 1989/90, and
>> >they are performing surprisingly well. (It wasn't a surprise to me, in fact)
>> >Caius
>>
>>   Why are y'all playing so naive and simplistic over this?
>> Do you really, honestly believe that the economic successes
>> and failures are strongly and directly correlated to privatization
>> vs socialization?  Or do you think that maybe social structures,
>> corruption, natural resources, culture conditions, and economic
>> competition or bullying from neighbors might also play a role.

I have an opportunity to compare two different economic systems in the same
country ( conditions, you stated, slighly changed) and can tell you that
private is simply better.

It is not a belief, it's a FACT.


Caius.

PS. Look around and have some reading about the effects of the price controls
imposed by the Roman Emperor Diocletian, you will see it's not a contemporary
issue.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 13:47:00 CST
From:         TI0PSR1@NIU.BITNET
Subject:      Sodamn, Bush, no cynicism monopoly

Dan,

You are right.

Perhaps the most the most amazing thing that Sodamn Insane and Bush
have worked out is the whole Clinton-avoiding-the-draft thing.

Now, Sodamn - who has previously been a real angel - can now turn to
various evil acts AFTER Clinton is in ... just to embarass Clinton.
Once again, the evil republicans have rigged everything.

What will Clinton do if there is an unprecedented protest in the
armed forces ?  Go on TV and COMMAND kids to go attract bullets over-
seas ?  The command and his pretty hair will clash !
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 07:04:06 EST
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Uncl: Re: Uncl: Re: Addiction as Disease

On Fri, 8 Jan 1993 13:58:54 -0500 <SPRG0002@TULSAJC> said:

>It sends the same message as those gnashingly abrasive tv commercials
>that start out with: "It's not your fault...."

>Now it isn't my intention to totally dispose of the genetic complication
>of some addiction.  At the same time, I take exception to these types of
>comments/tactics that avoid the personal responsibility aspect.

Which reminds me of a recent exchange (again :-).

Both homosexuals and heterosexuals believe that one has to
be honest with his partner.

A heterosexual with AIDS infects his/her partner and the
problem is dishonesty.

But when a homosexuals with AIDS infects his/her partner
we condemn the homosexuality.

I wonder why we are shifting the blame and avoiding "personal
responsibility" here.  I guess it must be convenient.

--KAT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:41:08 -0400
From:         The Integral Differential <DEMON@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: it's a wonderful life
Comments: To: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU

>>        Being black harms no one around you.  Smokers can't say the same
 thing.
>>
>Ahem.... As I was saying, the only studies of second hand smoke of which
>I'm aware deal with people confined with a smoker over long periods of
>time.

        Since the proprietors can't control the amount of smoke, nor the
duration/frequency of exposure, the only prudent thing to do is not allow
smoking at all.


>  The effects on the spouse of a two-pack-a-day smoker over 20 years
>can't be extrapolated (or interpolated?) to the casual exposure of
>several hours a week.  If you live and work in a smoke free environment,
>the effects of second hand smoke in restaurants, malls, on the street,
>etc. should be negligible.

        "Should be".  Are you willing to bet a large amount of insurance money
on it?

>Unless you (and the EPA) have better data on the effects second hand smoke
>in spacious areas for brief periods at infrequent intervals, my assertion
>still stands: Signs that says "No Smoking" might really say "Whites Only".

        I think you're over-reacting.

        If you can prove that second-hand smoke is harmless then you can claim
opression :).

Brett'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU