HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rjohnson@shell.com (Roy Johnson)
Subject: Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
Organization: Houston, TX
	<1992Aug15.013321.7273@anasazi.com>
	<1992Aug16.230243.6917@news.columbia.edu>
Date: 18 Aug 92 09:44:04

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
   Granted, but this seems unduly harsh for those cases in which birth
   control fails.  Even if a method has a 95% success rate, the odds
   are that it will fail 40% of the time every 10 years.

You'd think they'd take the possibility of failure into account.

  The individual,
   even by taking responsiblity in using birth control (the distribution
   of which is opposed by the Republicans),

That's news to me.  Or do you mean *funding* distribution of birth
control (about which I've seen nothing either)?

   is not necessarily in control of her fate.

Who is ever 100% in control of their fate?  You pay your nickel, you take
your chances.
--
Roy Johnson, Shell Development Company (but speaking for myself)
"There's a big difference between being a lesbian and being a male!"
and "So I guess even a sex change couldn't solve all his problems."
			-- tabn3@isuvax.iastate.edu (Griffy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
From: jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle)
Subject: Re: Listing the good reasons to vote for Bush
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 22:31:40 GMT

In article <Bt5zrG.HC6@chinet.chi.il.us> katefans@chinet.chi.il.us (Chris'n'Vickie of Chicago) writes:
>In article <=!9mdbg.michel@netcom.com> michel@netcom.com (Steve Michel) writes:
>>Good post.
>>
>>Reminds me of what a friend said the other day: "George Bush said in 1988 
>>that if I voted for Dukakis, the economy would go to hell, crime would go up,
>>and the deficit would grow. Bush was right -- I voted for Dukakis and look what
>>happened."
>>
>HAHAHAHAHAHA!! Tell your friend he's got a fan in Chicago...
>
>Vickie
> 
I LOVE IT!

What I particularly love is Georgie Porgie blamine everything on everyone else!
Can't he take a little responsibility for things being what they are?  And if
he thinks for one minute that we're going to turn the third branch of govern-
ment over to him (he's taken over the SC), he's crazy, so, if he wants to be
re-elected, he'd better be talking about working with a democratic congress,
instead of blaming them.  He doesn't work and play well with others!


jennifer

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:40816 alt.politics.bush:2251 talk.abortion:32628
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 13:28:11 GMT

dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>>> chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:

>>>> Actually, I think it's neat that Bush and Quayle would be supportive of
>>>> their female offspring (or offoffspring in GHWB's case).  I wish that
>>>> they would remember that _every_ woman is _someone's_ daughter or
>>>> granddaughter; all equally deserving of their parents' and grandparents
>>>> support of their right to choose.

>>> You've never heard of the saying, "Do as I say, not as I do."?

>> Definitely!  Their statements regarding their (grand)daughters are just a tad
>> hypocritical; one would hope that they see the error of their ways and open
>> the door for _all_ women rather than close it for their (grand)daughters.

> I think it's pretty sexist of you to insinuate that all women think alike,
> and that all of them are pro-choice. 

This might be more accurate, DOD.

"> I think it's pretty sexist of you to insinuate that all women think "

I think it's pretty evident that your reading skills could use a major upgrade.
The topic of discussion was choice, and how it should available to all women;
not just (grand)daughters of senior members of the Executive Branch.

-- 
Chris Lyman  -  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  -  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
 "A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy." -- Benjamin Disraeli
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush (was Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:05:17 GMT

In article <4501@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
>:Is this the same George Herbert Walker Bush who said that he would stand by
>:his granddaughter if she were to have an abortion?  Wouldn't you want him to
>:be ragging on her parents to throw her out of the house?
>	Would YOU throw out your daughter if she told you she were
>pregnant assuming she's not married? What would you say about George
>BASH [sic] if he said he would excommunicate his granddaughter or
>daughter? This is the same George Bash, and he shows compassion for his
>children and grandchildren.

True, but Bush's policies aim at taking away choice from other people.
He seems to advocate a double standard by allowing his progeny to have
a choice that he would support, while simultaneously denying other
people's choices.

>	God didn't destroy Adam and Eve after they ate of the forbidden
>fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Why would you want
>George to destroy his family over one abortion?

Arguably, God set them up.


--
This is not a .signature
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39176 talk.abortion:31392 alt.politics.bush:1283
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush (was Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:57:50 GMT
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works

chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
> rone@girtab.usc.edu (Ron Echeverri) writes:

>>        HOUSTON (UPI) -- A Republican platform subcommittee overwhelming-
>> ly passed a plank calling for a constitutional amendment banning all abor-
>> tions, endorsing the policy of President Bush. The subcommittee on indivi-
>> dual rights, good homes and safe streets voted 17-3 Monday to approve the
>> plank, which is essentially the same as contained in the 1988 and 1984
>> platforms.

> Thank you very much. I'll make sure my vote goes to George Herbert
> Walker Bush.

Is this the same George Herbert Walker Bush who said that he would stand by
his granddaughter if she were to have an abortion?  Wouldn't you want him to
be ragging on her parents to throw her out of the house?

Actually, I think it's neat that Bush and Quayle would be supportive of their
female offspring (or offoffspring in GHWB's case).  I wish that they would
remember that _every_ woman is _someone's_ daughter or granddaughter; all 
equally deserving of their parents' and grandparents' support of their right
to choose.

-- 
Chris Lyman  -  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  -  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
 "A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy." -- Benjamin Disraeli
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:40910 alt.politics.elections:11099 alt.politics.clinton:2380 alt.politics.bush:2306
From: richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: why progressive tax rates (was Re: Clinton's
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:41:35 GMT
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas

In article <1992Aug19.142804.19593@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
[example deleted]
>
>Thus, our current capital gains tax REMOVES wealth from individuals
>who have no real gain. I buy my house, I sell it 10 years later with
>no real gain, and the government lifts $7000 from my pocket. This isn't
>taxation... it is theft! Of course, if I keep buying new houses
>at a higher price, the tax is deferred.... this is just a meddling in the
>market for the benefit of real estate agents. Once you put a large part
>of your equity in your house (which most americans do), you are bound
>by the tax laws to either stay invested to that level until you reach 57,
>or pay confiscatory taxes on phoney (inflation created) gains.
>
[more stuff deleted]
>
>If more people realized that this silliness in taxes unfairly hurts
>EVERYONE directly (not indirectly through impact on growth), they
>might argue for more rational taxing.
>
>When was the last time YOU saw the network news showing how the
>capital gains tax clobbers all homeowners (either directly or by
>locking them into home ownership)? When did they last point out that
>the taxes on gross interest, rather than real interest, hit the
>middle class hardest (since the middle class is less likely to have
>interest bearing savings accounts, etc)?
>
>The current capital gains tax and tax on interest would better 
>be called wealth taxes.

John, I agree that the situation with capital gains taxes seems unfair
and needs to be fixed somehow. However, the fairness issue inplies that
those who are wealthy enough to not work but live off investments, do
not pay a small tax rate than those who must work. Index the capital
gains tax for inflation if you like, but don't give some stock
speculator a break that I, a working person, can't get because I can't
take all of my income as capital gains.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39752 talk.abortion:31745 alt.politics.bush:1606
From: regard@sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
Date: 14 Aug 1992 13:16:09 -0700
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <Bsy8DI.4xG@news.cso.uiuc.edu> tbuckley@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Tim Buckley) writes:

>You are quite right.  However, I really was speaking from the viewpoint
>that most of us in this society hold. 

How can you tell?  The fact that you are posting in a group where your 
assumptions of discussion are disputed every *day* would seem to be suspect
to me.

> I think most of us are willing to
>make this assumption as in rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
>happiness.  Please note that the right to liberty or the pursuit of
>happiness are contingent on the right to life. 

How can you tell?  Frankly, I think you are making this up.  I don't think
liberty and happiness are contingent on a right to life.   I don't think that
'most' people believe in this heirarchical notion of rights, or we'd wouldn't
have blood shortages regularly at blood banks.  Nor would we be having people
dying of failed kidneys, lungs, hearts, etc., since 'spare' parts come up
all the time, but aren't donated.

>But from a logical standpoint the right to life must take precedence and
>always has in this society.

I think this is bogus.  It does not now, and hasn't in recent years.  What
term are you applying to your notion of 'society'?  We cannot and do not
force physical 'donation' to preserve life on this planet.

Adrienne Regard


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
From: dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Bush's abortion stance
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 22:32:58 GMT

In article <usglkrx.713832448@gsusgi1.gsu.edu> 
usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman) writes:

> Incidently, tothe press was asking Marlin Fitzwater about the statement
> the Barbara Bush made regarding abortion.  He said something about her
> being entitled to her opinion and then said that President Bush considers
> the platform plank justified.

Can you provide proof for these statements?

>Lori Kent Rothman


Doug Holtsinger
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Philandering George Bush
Date: 15 Aug 92 11:49:33 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Aug14.100156.5495@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:

> Just like the plumbers were prohibited by law from breaking into the
> Democratic National Commitee office...

Floyd Brown and Brent Bozell do not meet with the RNC or with the
official Bush campaign.  There is quite simply too much to lose by
doing so, and virtually nothing to gain.
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 07:34:25 EDT
From: <KRB104@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Bush lies like a rug!!!!

  On NBC News the other night, President Bush said that it is the Congress'
fault that the economy is in shambles.  That the Congress wants to spend, spend
spend and he, by his veto power has stopped "numerous" attempts by Congress
to spend money.  FACT:  George Bush has only vetoed ONE Congressional spending
package!!!  Numerous does not equal one in the new/old/future math system that
we work under.  With the media the way that it is, how can politicians lie
so poorly!  Ronald Reagan at least knew how to hide his mistruths, George
hasn't learned that.  The over/under on George's outright lies/half truths/ and
misrepresntations in tonight's speech is 7.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Republican (American?) Arrogance makes us laugh.
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 19 Aug 92 10:51:12 CDT


In article <1992Aug19.015027.11470@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, pdl2r@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter D. Lauren) writes:
> In article <92231.213054A735FJO@HASARA11.BITNET> <A735FJO@HASARA11.BITNET> writes:
> >"I know what is right for the world, and I know what is right for the USA
> >Outside the USA it is felt that the USA did not change a thing
> >in East Germany, USSR, etc.  It just happened and Bush was only a
> >spectator like everybody else. (If some person deserves some credit
> >than it is Gorbatsjov)
> 
> The thing is that Bush does not have a coherent  domestic policy and is
> prepared to do anything to get reelected.  Hence, the republicans try to
> hoodwink the American public into believing that Bush was a major player
> in bringing down communist dictatorship in Europe.  As a European, you
> were closer to the events and can see the republicans' claim for what it is -
> ridiculous propagander.  
> 
> As well as Gorbachev, credit should also go to Boris Yeltsin whom Bush
> snubbed until after the collapse of the Soviet communist party.

Since it's the one year aniversary of the failed coup, we should reminisce
about Bush's role.  Camp out in Kennibunkport and wait to see what happens.
Then call Yeltsin to congradulate him when it's over.  


-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism
From: whg@INEL.GOV (William H. Gray)
Subject: Re: Private Discrimination (was: Libertarians and big tits)
Reply-To: whg@INEL.GOV (William H. Gray)
Organization: Idaho National Engineering Lab
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 02:43:55 GMT

In article <thong.714251052@husc10>, thong@husc10.harvard.edu (Theodore Hong) writes:
|> 
|> You live in a small rural town that has two grocery stores.  Both store 
|> owners decide that they don't want to sell to people whose last name 
|> begins with an "E"; the rest of the population doesn't care (no one else's 
|> name begins with "E").  What do you do?
|> 
|> If you try to start your own grocery store, startup costs are high, and
|> the market probably won't support a third grocery store.  You don't have
|> a significant competitive advantage over the other two because your only
|> added customer is yourself (the locals aren't bigoted, but aren't activist
|> enough to boycott/whatever either).
|> 
|> So what's the "correct" answer in this case?

Ah ... change your name? :-)


========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip ===========

Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever,
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any
information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.  No specific reference constitutes or implies
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.  The views and
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39286 ca.politics:6714 ba.politics:4454
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Holocaust II in Serbia: Why Isn't Anyone Doing Anything?
Date: 13 Aug 92 06:51:54 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <183042@pyramid.pyramid.com> glambert@pyramid.com (George Lambert) writes:
>In article <zd4m6jj.phil@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
    >>In article <183014@pyramid.pyramid.com> glambert@pyramid.com
    >>(George Lambert) writes:
    >>>You have yet to answer the question: Who appointed the US as
    >>>Global Policeman?
    >>>
    >>Well, probably the entity (or non-entity) that say, appointed
    >>eco-fascist groups such as Greenpeace as world what-evers.
    >>
    >BZZZZZZT! Sorry, Phil, but with that non-sequiteur response,
    >you've proven your inability to respond to this question.
    >
    >Greenpeace is funded by contributions from individuals around
    >the world who concur with their goals and methods. It is not
    >a nation interfering in other nations' civil wars or
    >secessionist issues.

Sorry, the world is still round. So, I guess you have no quarrel with,
say, the Lincoln brigade? Or the Condor legion either, eh?

However, the issue is still WHO gives ANYONE/ANYTHING to right to
act as the world policemann?

Answer - nobody.

A soldier is a Greenpeace is a Soviet occupation army, eh?


-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:40940 alt.fan.dan-quayle:2777 alt.rush-limbaugh:3797 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4716 alt.politics.bush:2330 alt.politics.elections:11124
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Memorable speech quotes (what the hell)
Date: 21 Aug 92 01:55:28 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

I am typing while listening to the Convention now.

Dan "he seems a lot more confident now" Quayle:
"If Bill Clinton and Al Gore are moderates, then I'm a world-champion
speller."

George Bush forthcoming. :) 
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
August 31, 1992 - May 16, 1993	Duke football? What's that?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39310 misc.legal:15981 sci.crypt:2888 comp.org.eff.talk:5352 alt.privacy:1708 alt.society.civil-liberty:5533 comp.security.misc:982
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,sci.crypt,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,alt.society.civil-liberty,comp.security.misc
From: flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal)
Subject: Re: Using cryptography
Date: 13 Aug 92 14:06:24 GMT

clewis@bwdlh118.bnr.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
>    - In such a case now, the RCMP, CSIS or whomever would have to get
>      a search warrant, which could be used to require the sender or recipient
>      to supply the key.

However, there is an "intelligence" advantage in being able to snoop people
without having them know you're snooping.  If everyone has to send in the keys,
you don't know you're being snooped.  If you only have to send in the keys when
there's a search warrant, you know.

This is why it's slimy for your landlord or superintendent to let cops with
search warrants into your apartment.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:39354 talk.abortion:31498 alt.politics.bush:1374
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush (was Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
Date: 13 Aug 92 14:33:32 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman) writes:
:chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
:> rone@girtab.usc.edu (Ron Echeverri) writes:
:>>        HOUSTON (UPI) -- A Republican platform subcommittee overwhelming-
:>> ly passed a plank calling for a constitutional amendment banning all abor-
:>> tions, endorsing the policy of President Bush. The subcommittee on indivi-
:>> dual rights, good homes and safe streets voted 17-3 Monday to approve the
:>> plank, which is essentially the same as contained in the 1988 and 1984
:>> platforms.
:> Thank you very much. I'll make sure my vote goes to George Herbert
:> Walker Bush.
:Is this the same George Herbert Walker Bush who said that he would stand by
:his granddaughter if she were to have an abortion?  Wouldn't you want him to
:be ragging on her parents to throw her out of the house?
	Would YOU throw out your daughter if she told you she were
pregnant assuming she's not married? What would you say about George
BASH [sic] if he said he would excommunicate his granddaughter or
daughter? This is the same George Bash, and he shows compassion for his
children and grandchildren.
	God didn't destroy Adam and Eve after they ate of the forbidden
fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Why would you want
George to destroy his family over one abortion?

:Actually, I think it's neat that Bush and Quayle would be supportive of their
:female offspring (or offoffspring in GHWB's case).  I wish that they would
:remember that _every_ woman is _someone's_ daughter or granddaughter; all 
:equally deserving of their parents' and grandparents' support of their right
:to choose.
	You think it's NEAT? I think it's entirely NATURAL that a
husband love his wife, his children, and his grandchildren no matter
what they do wrong. Why would Bash's granddaughter come to HIM, knowing
full-well what his feelings were with regards to abortion? She wants his
love and support, not his vote necessarily.
	Massive hypothetical too: what if your daughter told you she had
been working as a prostitute in the drug-infested section of town? She
finally realized that what she did was wrong. What would you do? Throw
her out on the street? This is a lifestyle choice that your daughter
decided which may not agree with regarding how she should live her life.
And there are laws against prostitution. 

-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
August 31, 1992 - May 16, 1993	Duke football? What's that?
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:41274 alt.politics.elections:11281 alt.politics.bush:2503 alt.politics.clinton:2589