HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: williamf@umbc8.umbc.edu (TheBigBopper)
Subject: Re: Robert Bork
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 21:46:17 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.190035.9617@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <bill.722541213@castor> bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge) writes:
>>wft@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Tell) writes:
>>>The left-wing nuts (and I use the term "nuts" without reservation) were
>>>out in force in 1987 against Bork because they knew he is probably the
>>>most brilliant legal mind and a conservative to boot.  He wasn't acceptable
>>>to the quiche-eating New York Times/Washington Post crowd.
>>
>>I may have my names confused, but wasn't Bork the guy who dismissed
>>the Watergate special prosecuter at Nixon's bequest?
>
>Yes.  After his two immediate predecessors resigned rather than carry out the
>firing.
>
 Plus, one was Elliot Richardson whom I think has a better and more fairer
 reputation than Bork ever did, and William Rehnquist who returned to serve
 with distinction and honor in Reagan's administration.  Bork, OTOH, didn't
 have the guts to stand up to Nixon and will never live that down.  His rep-
 utation is formed largely on his writings on the concept of "Original doctrine"
 WRT the constitution, and its largely been rejected by the electorate in this
 election as a non-issue. 
      Stay Easy__
        William
__
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
   con-ser-va-tive: adj. 1. tending to preserve established institutions,
   etc; opposed to change 2. -n a conservative person 3. -n a redneck, a
   racist, a bigot 4. any of Duke, Helms, Buchanan, Thurmond, Limbaugh. 
   5. use:  a faggot-loving, gun control freak, equal rights for crips
   and non-whites, pro-abortion, anti-hang the niggers, almost-pinko is not
   a conservative.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: saarinen@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Sirpa Saarinen)
Subject: Re: FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 16:21:33 GMT

mahunt@eos.ncsu.edu (MARK ALLAN HUNT) writes:


>I think the subject line says it all !!!!!!

>Send flames to alt.to.bad.the.country.will.be.fucked.up.for.four.more.years

>Second thought KILL CLINTON,KILL CLITON,KILL CLINTON !!!!!!!

>Appealing to your subconcious.

Considering the latest revelations of the State dept. inquiry into people's
passport files, I can only say that I am very pleased to get rid of Bush
et al. Aren't you at all worried and offended about how Bush screwed you? 

Another four years of a Bush Banana Republic administration and we would
be looking for democratic advisors from South America and PRC.

Sirpa Saarinen
saarinen@csrd.uiuc.edu

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: nuke@wam.umd.edu (root)
Subject: Re: FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 07:54:14 GMT

In article wstuartj@lucky.ecn.purdue.edu (W Stuart Jones) writes:

>>>>Send flames to alt.to.bad.the.country.will.be.fucked.up.for.four.more.years
>>>>Second thought KILL CLINTON,KILL CLITON,KILL CLINTON !!!!!!!
>>>>Appealing to your subconcious.
>>>
>For the record, I didn't vote for Clinton, but I still want this idiot arrested
>>for posting this trash.  And I hope no one thinks all Republicans think this
>>way.  Heck, I'd be the first one to report him if I could!
>
>You can report him!!!!!! send mail about him to postmaster@eos.ncsu.edu
>If enough people send the postmaster mail he might do something to this idiot!

I wish I could say this without sounding like I was defending the guy...
Let's not toss this guy in for questioning, or interrogations of any sort.

He's an idiot, fine.  I think the sysadmin and any service agents out there 
have *lots* more to do with their time than sitting on the couch with mama
(HUNT!!!) to wait for markie mark to come home.  

Not to mention the eagerness for police action is a might scary, guys.  
Hummm.  Okay, if you thought this guy was serious... sure, you have a point.
Otherwise, you are basically saying "Ooooh goodie, somebody is a real bonehead,
let's try to get him in lots of trouble, tee hee heee."  As if this guy isn't
going to do this to himself all by himself!   Geez.  

In the meantime, let's *all* bake cookies for the sec. serv. folks who will
waste their time on this.  :(  *They* deserve better.

Thanks for listening,
Take care...

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:10:14 GMT

mahunt@eos.ncsu.edu (MARK ALLAN HUNT) bangs his head on the keyboard:
           ^^^^

Another idiot from North Carolina State!  What do they put in the water there?

> I think the subject line says it all !!!!!!

I think Mrs. Clinton has more to say about it than you, Mark.

> Send flames to alt.to.bad.the.country.will.be.fucked.up.for.four.more.years
                                                                   ^^^^

You mean that after 12 years of Republicans in the White House, our nation
isn't a bright and shining beakon[1] to the rest of the world???

[1] the Dan Quayle spelling

> Second thought KILL CLINTON,KILL CLITON,KILL CLINTON !!!!!!!

Should've quit while you were ahead, Mark.  Be sure to bake some cookies
for the Secret Service when they start keeping an eye on you, ok?

> Appealing to your subconcious.

Yeah, about as appealing as day-old buggers.  We eagerly await your newbie
disclaimer, "It was a JOKE!!!"  Fuck off and evolve, and stop annoying the
grown-ups with your flatulent sound effects.

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  / standard disclaimers
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's
character, give him power."  -- Abraham Lincoln
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:17361 alt.politics.democrats.d:615 alt.politics.elections:24042 ba.politics:7213 co.politics:2151 ne.politics:3036 nj.politics:760 or.politics:673 ny.politics:280 talk.politics.misc:60603
From: bondc@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Clay M. Bond)
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton: Marriage == Slavery?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 10:23:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.223548.29283@news.acns.nwu.edu> dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier) writes:

>You mean that clue that says I have to accept the agenda of the left-wing
                                                                 ^^^^^^^^^
>loonies without question, otherwise I'm just not enlightened and should
 ^^^^^^^
Since you either can't read, or just didn't, let's try this one
more time:

>>And instead of throwing around meaningless labels that only the
>>mindless use, try getting a clue.

This time the meaningless labels were pointed out to you.

>probably crawl back into my cave?  That clue?  That same clue the sociology
>profs want me to get?  Sorry that isn't clue, that is just being trendy.

Responsibility is not trendy.  And no matter how much you'd like
to think that the world revolves around you, you are responsible
for the state of the society, and every group within the society.
This society with responsibility is known as  "civilization".

>I don't like trendy.  Trendy seems to circumvent conscious thought and
>pondering.

Ah yes.  Well, "trendy" is another of your meaningless labels
that only the mindless use, and only to label something in order
to discount it.

>I was at one time one of the trendy Demo-redistributors, and have
>since changed my ways

Yes, yes, yes, and then you found Jesus, hallelujah, and now
you've seen the light.  Right.  No doubt you even think of
yourself as some sort of "free-thinker", perhaps even unique.

>after the hypocrisy of what I was being asked to swallow
>slapped me in the face.  Hard.

If you are under the impression that hypocrisy only exists in
what you refer to as "trendy", then 19 year-old was a hasty
choice.  15 year-old is more accurate here.

The real hypocrisy is that you give all these excuses, nasty
little excuses with nasty sneering little labels your nasty
little mind has embraced, when you merely refuse to take
responsibility for the society in which you live.  You are not
chic, nor unique, nor a free thinker; you are only another
representative of the most common: irresponsible, barbaric,
self-centered, determined to get as much for yourself at the
expense of everyone else as you can, and worst of all, proud
of yourself.

If you want to give the impression of being some kind of thinker,
free or not, then you must put something in your articles that is
meaningful, instead of sneering at others.

-- 
"There is no gate, no lock, no bolt that you can set upon
 the freedom of my mind."
			   -- Virginia Woolf
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,or.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
From: polant@cps.msu.edu (Bradley N Polant)
Subject: Re: Prayers in school (Was: What is a Conservative?)
Originator: polant@cpsin3.cps.msu.edu
Reply-To: polant@cpsin3.cps.msu.edu (Bradley N Polant)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Michigan State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 16:11:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.172857.14372@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>In article <1992Nov13.040800.7656@ncsu.edu> wglee@eceris.ece.ncsu.edu (William Gary Lee) writes:
>>In article <BxKCIz.C1C@ns1.nodak.edu> jorgense@plains.NoDak.edu (Lee A. Jorgensen) writes:
>>
>>   some text deleted ...
>>>
>>>FORCED?????   I don't think that the push for prayer in schools would FORCE
>>>students to pray.  It's more of a quiet-type time.  BUT you can pray if you
>>>want.
>>>
>>
>>
>>RIIIIGHT! I can just imagine the loving gathering....
>>
>>	'Now class, lets all set in a circle and join hands
>>	while Rush Jr. leads us in the Lord's Prayer...that is
>>	all except for little Mohammed, who doesn't believe in
>>	our true Saviour and hence will never enter Heaven.'
>>
>>I'm sure that prayer in schools would *really* be voluntary and would
>>help us to be a more moral and loving nation; that it would
>>show our children that acceptance and understanding will make the
>>world a better place.
>>
>>
>>	Gary Lee
>
>That's the problem with you liberal wacos, you don't believe that anyone 
>will ever do the right think without passing a law mandating that they do 
>or do not do the right thing.
>
>How about if I allege (as you have done above) that all homosexuals will 
>in fact try to put moves on straight soldiers in the military, and that 
>for that reason we should keep gays out of the military?  This is 
>exactly what you have done in your argument above.
>
>This is so disgusting.  Because you are convinced (without any evidence, 
>it's nice to know) that people will misuse their rights, instead of 
>dealing with the misuse of that right, you remove their rights.
>
>Ted
>
>-- 
>            
>
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
From: skywalke@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: READ
Date: 23 Nov 1992 22:24:58 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Atomic Biophysics H.H.M.I.
NNTP-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu

Could we drop the FUCK CLINTON subject line please ?

thanks,
tim
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Robert Bork
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:00:35 GMT

In article <bill.722541213@castor> bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge) writes:
>wft@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Tell) writes:
>
>
>>The left-wing nuts (and I use the term "nuts" without reservation) were
>>out in force in 1987 against Bork because they knew he is probably the
>>most brilliant legal mind and a conservative to boot.  He wasn't acceptable
>>to the quiche-eating New York Times/Washington Post crowd.
>
>
>I may have my names confused, but wasn't Bork the guy who dismissed
>the Watergate special prosecuter at Nixon's bequest?

Yes.  After his two immediate predecessors resigned rather than carry out the
firing.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: mmaggio@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael J Anthony Maggio)
Subject: PC help please
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 07:43:46 GMT

I apologize for any bad feelings that I may have put into your minds
about me... I was put into a spot and needed to defend myself...
Well anyways, to my point... I have heard of PC but what is it???
I know a PC is a computer but it has been used politically also...
I just would like some help to clear me up on this topic.

Thank you.
MJM

Tryin' to understand politics...

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:17414 alt.politics.bush:13950 news.sysadmin:1481
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Annoying Computer Junk Mail
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:12:06 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <1992Nov16.232545.8503@ncsu.edu> dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>Has anyone been receiving automated computer junk mail
>from a site called 'Campaign92.org'?   I've been trying to
>contact the sysadmins at that site to stop sending me
>their crap, but they've ignored me.  I must have gotten on
>their mailing list through my postings to a.p.c and
>a.p.b.  Has anyone been able to contact these clowns?
>
Did you get an e-mail questionaire on user attitudes towards the political
discussions on the net??  I got one.  I never sent anything to anyone
requesting it.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black)
Subject: Re: FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:44:12 GMT
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <Bxz4oG.IAz@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mmaggio@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael J Anthony Maggio) writes:
>
>>Send flames to alt.to.bad.the.country.will.be.fucked.up.for.four.more.years
>
>>Second thought KILL CLINTON,KILL CLITON,KILL CLINTON !!!!!!!
>
>>Appealing to your subconcious.
>
>I agree...and everyone in my fine town agrees...

    Everyone in Champaign-Urbana agrees, huh?  Speak for yourself, you
moronic twit.  Don't you have a term paper to scrawl or something?

-- 
   ******************************************************************
     Howard Black                             cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu
     Department of Chemistry                  Eastern Illinois Univ.
From: bondc@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Clay M. Bond)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Kosher Kitchen in the White House
Date: 16 Nov 92 10:47:42 GMT
Organization: Indiana University

In article <1588800056@igc.apc.org> Steve Freedkin <sfreedkin@igc.apc.org> writes:

>I don't know what perspective the author of replies #1 and #2 come
>from, but someone who advocates "killing the homophobic Jews" had better
>take another look at that "-phobic" suffix.  

If you don't *know*, then perhaps you should have tried to find
out before you posted, eh?  Apparently you missed our little
friend's cute little articles about how "homosexuals" were to be
put in the front lines of battle, were to look for land mines,
and were to be raped (by the big, bad testosterone-poisoned
soldiers, no doubt) respectively.

>tolerance.  Call me "hate-ophobic," but I don't like your tone, friend.

Ironic, that, since my point was analagous to yours.  It's much
the way I felt after our cute little friend posted the above,
then asked about his kosher kitchens.  You'd better talk to our
little Jewish gay-basher about his cute little murder and rape
fantasies.  I, for one, am tired of it, and will put up with it
no more.  I bash back.

And if you did see our little friend's articles, but did not
react to them while you did mine, then you're no better than he.



-- 
"There is no gate, no lock, no bolt that you can set upon
 the freedom of my mind."
			   -- Virginia Woolf
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: dysart@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mitchell D Dysart)
Subject: Re: Robert Bork
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:31:54 GMT

In article <bill.722541213@castor> bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge) writes:
>
>I may have my names confused, but wasn't Bork the guy who dismissed
>the Watergate special prosecuter at Nixon's bequest?

 Absolutely correct!  Thank goodness Bork was _not_ confirmed.  As a matter
of fact, he probably should have been disbarred after the Saturday Night
Massacre fiasco of Watergate.  Legal scholar indeed!  Bork is as much a
legal scholar as Hitler was a political scholar.
From: cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black)
Subject: Re: FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON,FUCK CLINTON
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 14:57:25 GMT
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <1enma7INNnlr@agate.berkeley.edu> wft@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Tell) writes:
>
>And if the Democrats really respected intelligence, Robert Bork would have
>been confirmed to the Supreme Court in 1987.

    Not that this group needs a new thread, but...

    No one contested Bork's intellect during the confirmation hearings.
What shot him down, and what originally got him nominated, was his agenda.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that intelligence is the only
prerequisite for being a Supreme Court Justice.  NOT.

-- 
   ******************************************************************
     Howard Black                             cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu
     Department of Chemistry                  Eastern Illinois Univ. 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: gsmith@clio.uucp (Gene W. Smith)
Subject: Re: Homosexuals in the military
Keywords: homosexuals
Organization: IWR, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 18:15:49 GMT

In article <matrix.721260216@sol> matrix@sol.acs.unt.edu (Goodman
Byron) writes:

>Well, for those of you that voted for him the first thing on his agenda will
>probably to allow homosexuals in the military.  This country is going to be
>screwed after four years.

Some guys in the USMC may be screwed, but hardly the whole country.

>Folks I dont think you understand what this is going to be like.  It
>will be worse the the Carter administration.

I'm shaking with terror.

>We homosexuals are permitted to serve with hetrosexuals is the day our
>military loses the rank of world power.

Since homosexuals have always been serving along with heterosexuals,
I guess we never *were* a world power.

>I'm in the Marine Corps and if anyone says that the majority of the
>soldiers want fags in your wrong.  wInfact your dead wrong.

Don't believe all the macho rhetoric your hear.  One thing about the
Marine Corps reputation that you may *not* know is that it is widely
held that they have a special penchant taking it up the ass.  And no,
I am not making that up just to be offensive, though the thought of
offending you doesn't worry me much.

By the way, you wouldn't have been allowed into one of the most famous
and perhaps most effective "special forces" division in the ancient
world, because you are straight.

>When you hit the beach you dont want to worry about someone grabbing
>your ass.

Nobody is going to grab your ass just then, they would be too worried
about getting their own shot off.  With your charming personality,
I doubt you have much to worry about anyway.  In fact, I wonder if
you get any action, gay or straight?

>You people did a real good job of getting him in.  After the liberals
>get done with America, it will not be a country of prosparity.  We
>will be a socialistic society.

One thing I hope Clinton does is carry through on his plans to reduce
the military.  It is obvious to me that me must have a surplus of moronic,
useless jarheads just now.

>Some people would argue but they didnt have 12 year old carry guns.
>And I say to you that is a bunch of BS.  8, 9 , 10 ,11 and 12 year
>olds fought in the War for Independence, the War of 1812, the Civil
>War and years, even WWII.

Well, if Hilter did it I guess it must be OK.







-- 
     Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/IWR/Ruprecht-Karls University 
               gsmith@kalliope.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
From: scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn)
Subject: Re: Why the fuck does everyone scream discrimination when they don't w
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 00:19:24 GMT

     Wow. California really *has* lowered the entrance requirements for state 
universities. Glad I got out in time. Check out that Bush-style command of 
thought continuity. Now I know why Pomona is known as the lesser Poly.

                                       Steve
///
-- 
    Steve Casburn (scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
    They gave me differential calculus, and I said "Hit me again"
    So they gave me integral calculus, and I said "Hit me again"
    Now I have vector calculus, and...I'm starting to lose consciousness...
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:17423 talk.politics.misc:60776 alt.rush-limbaugh:9986
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Date: 18 Nov 92 22:01:06 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

labelle@hfglobe.intel.com (George La Belle) writes:
/borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden) writes:
/>We don't have an overpopulation problem yet.  We could have one someday, in
/	We sure do!
/
/>fact we will if things don't get under control, but we're not at a crisis
/>point yet.  Just go out to Wyoming or Montana, and you'll see that there's
/>still plenty of room.  People are crowded together because they choose to
/	Tired old argument. It takes 10 acres of farmland to sustain
/	each person. So you'd eat those areas up fast, if there was
/	a population boom. Also, isn't having a little open space
/	part of our environment? Pretty short sided, if you ask me.
/
/>economic necessity, that is, the jobs are there.)  I acknowledge the need to
/>control population growth, but I will fiercely oppose population control by
/>force, until it becomes absolutely, absolutely necessary. 
/	Just like global warming, huh? Wait 'till it happens, then try to
/	do something about it (when it's too late). Real dumb!
/
/	I take it, then, no matter who makes the kids, or how many, we
/	have to allow it to happen unchecked and all pay for it,
/	'till we start starving???
/
/	Unbelievable! :-(

Just wondering, are you willing to die for your cause? What solutions do
you propose to ameliorate the situation? Why not just kill people,
that'll be the way to "decrease the surplus population." Why not just
kill yourself and your entire family? Forced abortions like China? I'm
interested to know how the solutions you propose will ameliorate the
crisis.
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
	THANK GOD IT'S BASKETBALL SEASON!!!!!
I don't have to have a 4.0 GPA to succeed in life because I'm 
good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton