HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Untruths about Rush (WAS Re: Rush Limbaugh 'O wau no me ka ha'a ha'a
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:36:15 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <92281.220604KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu (Kurt Ludwick) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.043302.16723@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) says:
>
>>        This would seem to be about par for someone who deplores
>>feminism as having made opportunities for unattractive women. He even
>>calls feminists "feminazis," and snickers about why they are so
>>pro-abortion when they are all lesbians.
>
>This is not true.  A feminazi is defined as a RADICAL feminist whose purpose
>is to see that as many abortions as possible take place.  

This sounds like a mythical beast.  I can't think of anyone who advocates 
the specific position you just stated.

>By no means does
>he call all feminists feminazis, or lesbians.  

No, he just blurs the distinction long after he makes his little defensive 
point.

>In fact, he agrees with the
>more mainstream feminist ideas, such as equal rights, equal opportunity, and
>equal pay for equal work (which he has called common sense).

He argues against women in combat -- so much for equal opportunity.

>Is Rush a feminist?  You be the judge.

No.  But I think Rush is effeminate.  That jolly man cuddling his little 
puppy on TV.

Does anybody know if Rush served in Korea or Viet Nam?  If so -- good 
for him.  If he avoided the draft by being in college, then he's a hypocrite 
everytime he mentions Clinton in this regard.  Heck, he's a hypocrite 
anyway for not bringing up Dan Quayle on the exact same issue.


-- 
Scott W. Roby           *This sentence no verb.*      "No Matter where you go..
Phys.& Astr.Dept.    ///// / /  /  *|*  \  \ \ \\\\\      there you are!"
Univ.of Delaware    ((((( ( (  (  * + *  )  ) ) )))))   -> Buckaroo Banzai
roby@brahms.udel.edu \\\\\ \ \  \  *|*  /  / / /////   *Standard Disclaimer*
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Subject: Re: In Suzanne's Defense
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 19:56:06 GMT

In article <nyikos.718559317@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

#Of course not.  I've been one for the last 25 years.  Of course, you
#are one of the people who gloat over how I was "stupid" enough to "fall
#into" another Trap (an in-joke, really), but that does not make me any
#less an intellectual, nor any less a pro-lifer.

No, PH, you're not an "intellectual pro-lifer."

Your arguments do not appeal to the intellect, they appeal to
emotions and often to a sophomoric sense of humor.

#For further info, see my post, "The Genesis of this whole silly SAT flap."

Indeed.  No one could read that particular whine and still harbor
the belief that you are anything other than an idiot.

[Nyikos' intellectual argument deleted, bozo and all]

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: The use of fat black ass to describe Chaney is unsupported
Keywords: You expect me to mark my deletions?  Dream on... 
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:37:53 GMT

nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:

> The last post in the series pulled Chris Lyman neck-and-neck with Margolis:
> as of September 22, both were one big step or several small steps from
> my de facto killfile.

Who will get there first?  I haven't felt such suspense since the seventh
game of last year's World Series.

> Interesting how Chris also told me recently to follow my own advice and
> lighten up.  It's always the guilty party that wants to let bygones be
> bygones, is it not?

And of what am I guilty, Peter?  Enquiring minds want to know!  (I suspect
that I'm guilty of having more fun than people should be allowed to have
at Peter's expense.)

> However, I am not the kind of person who likes to hold a grudge.  After
> encountering greater hypocrisy from Storga and Cochran than either him
> or Margolis, I am willing to give the latter two a clean slate if they
> cease and desist from their sporadic efforts to label me a liar.

I've never explicitly called you a liar, Peter, although that could change.
About the only thing I'd care to do with my clean slate is offer up my proof
that 2 = 1.


	            x = y		Given.
	          x^2 = xy		Multiplication of equals by equals
	    x^2 - y^2 = xy - y^2	Subtraction of equals on both sides
	(x + y)(x -y) = y(x - y)	Factoring
	        x + y = y		Elimination of equal factors
	           2y = y		Because x = y
	            2 = 1		Elimination of equal factors


Silly high school trick, yes, but lots of laughs at parties, lunch meetings,
weddings, bar mitzvahs, etc.  Can you spot the hole, Peter?

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
    In America, any boy may become president and I suppose that's just one
    of the risks he takes. -- Adlai Stevenson
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Article to read
Date: 15 Oct 92 12:49:28 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
>>In talk.abortion, usglkrx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Lori K. Rothman) writes:

]#$sterilization.  Should the parent of a mentally retarded child
]#$have the right to sterilize their child, without his/her consent?

]Were I a believer in hell, I might assert that your asbestos suit would
]be useless there too. [Not that I'd accuse you of being headed there
]despite your inflammable words.]

Esp is it were Dante's hell, as it was quite frigid there, although
the insulation should provide some protection. :)

Of course, this assumes the actuality of a mythical place....

]But I'll go easy on you this time, and ask you at what IQ you'd place the
]cutoff point.

What's your IQ? No, seriously, it would be a case by case basis, with
a set criteria such as unable to take care of one's self, unable to
understand what's going on in life, or the consequences thereof, etc.
Why must everything be so draw a line in the sand for you? It goes along
the lines of "I'll know it when I see it." It is a subjective call.

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
Subject: Constitutional Questions, and liberalisms....
Date: 7 Oct 92 21:38:04 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper

steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak) writes:
] > = (Rich Lund) writes:
] >: = (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] 
] >: I have been politiely asked in email to 'dumb down'
] >: my posts for the folks in alt.fan.dan-qualye
] >: and alt.fan.rush-limbaugh....
] 
] >What the hell are you ragging on Dan and Rush for and including 
] >your mindless liberal crap in talk.politics.guns?
]
[ some deletions may have occured during transit. ]
] 
] Boy, did you blow it.  Have fun in the imminent discussions of ordnance
] between you and drieux.  Heh heh.
] 
] And geez, calm down.  I can almost feel your spittle spraying in that
] last paragraph of yours.


Well to be truthful steven, I really like to talk to
the boys with those BigBluedBarrels....

It makes me just Shiver all over....

Trivia Question Time:

Who was it who decided that the citizenry should not
be allowed to OWN FULLY AUTOMATIC BELT FED crew serviced systems.

Who be these 'concervatives' who gave away our 
intermediary nuclear weapon systems rather than
'surplusing' them out as was done with the M-1 Garands.

And yes... I love the bit about the 'freedom fighters'
some day he and I will just have to sit down and discuss
the difference between a irish cocktail and the dull
drival of the standard party line molotov cocktail,
and the utility of same in the Armed Struggle phase
of the liberation of AmeriKKKa from the Enemy threat....

God, and we can talk about tactics for avoiding 
secret police surveillance... and all the other
important things that go into forming an underground unit.

Then we can talk about the utility of the currently
operable Gay Undergound as a functioning 'BackBone Cabal'
for just such operations....

Now where were we about those Ikky yukky liberal types....

ciao
drieux

ps: a right to bear arms is constitutionally guranteed right.
So also is a woman's right NOT to bear arms, legs, feetsies,
or WarmCuteFuzzies merely as some AntiChristianDogma has been
generated to the opposite....

When they come for my constitution, they can
have it when they rip it from MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!!!



-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Entropy, Its not Just a Good Idea,
IT's The LAW!!!!!
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.religion.computers
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Dangerous Correlationship with Liberalism...
Followup-To: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:30:59 GMT

llama@pooh.cc.utexas.edu (sine nomine) writes:
] Ray Swartz (Oh, that guy again) (rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu) wrote:
] : 	This sentence is made up of words.  Words generally have standard
] : meanings.  These meanings can be found in the dictionary.  I could not find
] : "WarmCuteFuzzies" or "AntiChristianDogma" or even "BigBluedBarrels" in the
] : dictionary.  Therefore, they are not words.
] 
] uh, you might wanna read some ee cummings. or john dos passos. right
] now, i'm in the midst of the latter's u.s.a. trilogy. part of the
] richness of the books is dos passos' use of language, particularly the
] way he often coins new words by shoving several words together. it
] gives the prose a different feel, and often increases the
] effectiveness of a given passage.
] 
] so get over yourself already, dear.

I am afraid that I must AGREE with Ray here...

excuse me, but isn't john dos passos one of the
proscribed writers for having sided with the 
wrong groups against the Correect Interpretation?

Besides, as we all know, the failure of Liberalism has
been its willingness to accept neo_logisms as useful
tokens in the language, such as:

{in no particular order}

radar

microwave

unix

ANSI_STANDARD

PosixCompliant

Xwindow

GUI

When clearly it is obviously the case that those are merely
'made up words' that have no real meaning, and are a part
of the process of devaluing language!!!!!

ciao
drieux



-- 
Modern Day Problems:

ME? engage in Hyperbole?
I have rarely been more than a first Order Function!!!!
From: tanj@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Ren and Stimpy's Love Child)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Face it: Chaney has stupidity molecules frolicking all over his brain.
Date: 12 Oct 92 16:40:53 GMT
Organization: Hecate's Sandbox

In article <1992Oct5.174509.11188@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Steve Chaney : Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0) writes:
>Lessee... So far, the pro-choicers have:
>1) Insulted nationalities and religions ([...] and "Ren & Stimpy's Love Child"
>  insulting Catholics).

Excuse me?  Isn't this the one where you looked like a complete moron
because a) Tom Lehrer (who wrote the _Vatican Rag_ that you got all snooty
about) IS Catholic and b) Lots of Catholic retreats happily sing the song
as the loving (and funny) spoof it was written to be?

Uh huh.  Nice try but no cigar, cupcake.  (Smooch)

--Teddi
----------------Another Catholic School Survivor (12 years!)-----------------
And I suppose "New Math" is a slanderous insult to mathemeticians (snort)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Feminists For Life...Huh?
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 04:10:46 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Oct12.222726.9561@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu 
(Doug Holtsinger) writes an impassioned defense of himself.  

That's nice, DOD.  Now get someone who has a reputation for 
occasionally telling the truth to vouch for you.  I don't
believe anything that you say.

Susan


Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Stranger than fiction: Simon Le Booth
Date: 14 Oct 92 02:33:42 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <5801@catnip.berkeley.ca.us> tanj@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Ren and Stimpy's Love Child) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.201031.16338@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>[Story ideas: bludgeoning, tear-gassing pro-choicers, on-the-spot executions
>> by police, a "New Order"]
>
>Let me get this straight, Simon... this book you're writing... you consider
>this a *utopia*?
>
>>I enjoyed [_Handmaid's Tale_], although I didn't like the slam against
>>religion.
>
>Fascinating.  If it didn't slam religion, would you have enjoyed it as a
>pleasant little book about a society you'd like to live in?
>
>>You're worried about meeting a science fiction author in person??
>>Orwell (Eric Blair) worte 1984 and no one was afraid of him.
>
>Orwell wrote a dystopia.  He was sounding an alarm against fascism and
>brutality.  You seem to be championing it.  If you consider a stronger
>version of _Handmaid's Tale_ to be a Happy Happy Joy Joy future, I'm
>willing to bet that the pages of your copy of _1984_ are welded shut
>with the dried remnants of your twisted, pro-fascism come.  You probably
>went into unbearable orgasm during the Room 101 scene where that Enemy of
>the State Winston gets his head trapped in the rat torture cage.  Seek help.
>
Well, actually my aim is very similar to Orwell's-- I plan to depict this
New Order Party being elected by the people out of desparation.  The people
are so sick of one type of extremeism, they accept another form of it
without even noticing.  Extremism breeds extremism from the other side.
I plan to demonstrate that such system might come to power if Liberal
extremism runs unchecked.  Ever read about how Hitler was elected??
Germany was in a state of anarchy, the Nazis were seen as the only alternative.
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Choice for life (was Re: Walking down to the student center
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 13 Oct 92 19:16:14 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <1992Oct13.021524.1140@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bmcbean@nyx.cs.du.edu (Brian McBean) writes:
>In article <1992Oct10.044307.28561@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.ut
>a.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct6.145154.4804@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.e
>u (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>>>In article <1992Oct6.064548.23641@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.u
>sa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>>>
>>>>Ok folks, read this carefully: I am not promoting some sort of Orwelli
>n
>>>>"sex police", I am merely asking what's wrong with a little responsibi
>ity??
>>>This begs the question that protected sex followed by abortion as a bac
>up
>>>procedure is irresponsible behavior. I do not believe this to be the ca
>e.
>>>If you are going to assert that it is, you should argue for it it.
>>>
>>>-Ekr
>>
>>What I was saying is that abstinence would obviously prevent unwanted
>>pregnancy, while protected sex would greatly reduce the risk.
>>Theorectically, responsible behavior would greatly reduce the need for
>>an abortion.
>>
>So if everybody has sex with condoms/other contraception, then
>abortions are ok in your opinion?  That's interesting!
>
Abortions are never ok, in my opinion.

Simon
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Mississippi Doctors want Supreme Court to end 24-hour delay
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:33:28 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon



Here's a quote from yesterday's NYT:


  One woman said callers had contacted her employer as well 
  as her home. Another, an 18-year-old college freshman from
  Jackson, said a caller had told her she was a "baby killer",
  informed her parents of her plans and thrown her household
  into chaos.

  "These people don't know me," she said. "They have no right
  to make my life miserable. I'm not ready to have a child,
  and I can't afford one. They need to stick to their own
  life and leave everyone else alone."
 


It sounds as if the pro-forcers are doing more than just 
talking to women on the sidewalk.  

The article also says that women aren't necessarily having 
fewer abortions because of the law - many of them are
going out of state.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:31:41 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14a by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In  <1992Oct16.195611.7878@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>In article <1992Oct16.023558.8935@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
>smgarvin@nyx.cs.du.edu (susan garvin) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct15.235241.14221@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
>>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>
>>>And you think I'm being silly????      Oh- I'm looking fora modem softwa
>>e
>>>package with the right terminal emulation to allow actual editing of pos
>>ings,
>>>so eventually this problem will be solved.
>>
>>This is my favorite Boothism so far - somehow, the right software
>>will make Booth stop being silly.
>>
>Above message should read :I am, in the process of gettiinal the right
>modem software to enable better online editing.  The orgi
>
>Simon

Are you *sure* that's what it should read?  :-)
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Xref: sparky talk.abortion:43175 talk.politics.guns:22261 alt.conspiracy:11357 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5554 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7021 talk.bizarre:34473
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why Keith reads Drieux
Keywords: simple solutions
Date: 17 Oct 92 01:18:51 GMT
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

Dear Miss Drieux,

Some of these people seem to have trouble understanding what drieux
posts.  Could you help them?

Susan

In article <Bw8oBy.1y8@phage.cshl.org> pjm@isis (Pat Monardo) writes:
#In article <1992Oct16.221742.13417@noao.edu> forgach@noao.edu (Suzanne Forgach) writes:
##From article <1992Oct10.230432.13152@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, by kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran):
### In article <BvsFow.IyB@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu writes:
####
####	So, drieux, why do you post?
####Ray Swartz
### 
### Becuase, while we mere mortals fail to comphrend the majority of the wisdom
### in Druiex's posts, there is an occasional glimmer of awareness.
### 
### Because, while we are but earthworms who have not the right to move upon
### the same earth as Druiex, he continues to give us the Truth[tm].  He
### continues to show us the errors of our ways.
##
##The joke's on you, Keith.  
##Drieux posts for laughs, just to see who takes him seriously.
##
#
#Could someone compile a Drieux Lexicon, together with a
#Beginner's Guide to Reading Drieux? it could possibly evolve into
#the official Usenet Posting Language (UPL), with Standard
#Dictionary and Library of Standard Idioms.
From: mcbeanb@brandonu.ca
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:49:14 GMT
Organization: Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

In article <9478@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM>, 
mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
> In <1992Oct6.061730.13587@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
> 
>>And by all accepted and legal definitions the fetus is not a person.
> 
> This may be true, but it is not an immutable law.  It can and will be
> changed.

I guess we all better just quit debating then, Mark's gonna change all the
laws for us, like it or not.
 
>>Really?  Gosh, I'm so surprised.  Seriously though, you're going to have
>>to convince me if you want me to support your position.
> 
> That's what I am trying to do.

You aren't trying very hard in this particular piece, are you?

Brian McBean  -  McBeanB@BrandonU.Ca
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: That Responsibility Thing, Take 2
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:12:35 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14a by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <6005@news.duke.edu>  lanier@acpub.duke.edu (Dustin Lanier) writes:
>
>Ok, lets say its a sailboat.  A nice rigger that can chop through the waves
>with little problem ... the visitor happens to be a world class sailor!
>So the two of you go for a sail and pass an island with purple martians on
>it!  And about that time the Swedish Bikini team drops in! Wouldn't that be
>great!

(I first read it as purple martinis.  That would be even better.  :-)

>Now lets say you were hungry so you decided to stop on this island.  And after
>wandering around for a while you find a McDonald's,

I'd rather starve to death.

>and the discussion gets silly,

Well - we certainly wouldn't want *that* to happen!

:-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,sci.math,talk.bizarre
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: More Certainty
Followup-To: soc.singles,alt.sex,talk.abortion
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:10:23 GMT

kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
] In article <1992Oct7.185512.5981@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
] >
] >Einstein thought he was correct.  Heisenberg thought he was correct.
] 
] Heisenberg was *UNCERTAIN*, you pompous ass.

Far More Importantly:

What did Schrodinger do when his wife said to put out the cat?

ciao
drieux


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Don't Just Rock the Vote
Kick OUT THE JAMS!