------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Paradise Lost Date: Fri May 13 09:54:41 CDT 1994 Message number: 1 Reply to message number: unavailable This sub is for the discussion of our apathetic culture. We cannot live in paradise without effort, and society will only continue to degenerate ... a pathetic mockery of what it could be. Why isn't America the land of opportunity anymore; or is it? What can we do to make our nation great again? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Clinton's Radio Address Date: Tue Nov 14 10:48:27 CST 1995 Message number: 2 Reply to message number: 1 DR> That being said, I think we both agree who is most at fault. Even though t DR> Democrats have done similar things in the past, I don't like games like thi DR> as a matter of principle. True. I wish everyone concerned would quit playing games and attend to running the country. DR> I believe both sides are at fault to some degree; Clinton for not botherin DR> to meet with them until last night (even if only to shut Dole and Gingrich DR> up, taking away one of their "weapons") and Dole and Gingrich for playing a DR> game of chicken. DR> This is true too, but taking away one of their weapons is all that would be accomplished. Clinton said several times that they had not yet sent him a budget so he didn't have anything to talk about. Maybe he is tired of playing games too. Now that they have steadfastly refused to do their job and there is actually a train wreck, they have several "temporary" bills to get them through the wreck and there is something to talk about. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Froggy Subject: Re: Clinton's Radio Address Date: Wed Nov 15 15:58:11 CST 1995 Message number: 3 Reply to message number: 2 DR> That being said, I think we both agree who is most at fault. Even though t DR> Democrats have done similar things in the past, I don't like games like thi DR> as a matter of principle. F> True. I wish everyone concerned would quit playing games and atte F> to running the country. The reaction has been interesting and varied from the Minnesota gang. Paul Wellstone: Co-autored (?) a bill that would stop paying the Senators and Representatives while the government was shut down. Needless to say, the bill went nowehere. Has kept all his staff on-duty. Rod Grams: Like Wellstone, considers all his staff "essential" and has sent no one home. Bill Luther: Sent *all his staff home (in Minnesota and Washington) and is even answering his own phones. Seems like overkill to me; With none of his staff isn't around, how can he expect to do his job and help get the budget out the door? Others: Some Reps have sent a few staffers home, some have sent all but a few home. Most have kept their full staffs on duty, considering them "essential". I like Wellstone's idea, though perhaps a 50% reduction in pay during the shutdown would be enough. The idea is to give them incentive to work on the budget, not break their family's budget (a complete pay freeze would hardly faze the millionaires and would only hurt the less wealthy Congressmen). Also, forcing them to send 40% of their staff home during the seige would be a cruel kind of justice (enough people around to let them do their job, but just enough of a cut to kick them in the ass). F> playing games too. Now that they have steadfastly refused to do their job a F> there is actually a train wreck, they have several "temporary" bills to get F> them through the wreck and there is something to talk about. What were they working on this Spring? The Contract on America. What happened to the budget ... isn't this more important? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Clinton's Radio Address Date: Wed Nov 15 17:23:08 CST 1995 Message number: 4 Reply to message number: 3 DR> What were they working on this Spring? DR> DR> The Contract on America. DR> DR> What happened to the budget ... isn't this more important? They don't seem to think so, but one thing is for certain -- if Legislative and Executive don't reach agreement and pass a budget bill, there will surely be a train wreck. These new repubs are business people. Do you suppose they run their businesses like this. I think they were confident that Clinton was going to cave and they could shove all their agenda up his nose. From what I heard on the evening news, it sounds like it mey be the CONGRESS who blinks first. DR> I like Wellstone's idea, though perhaps a 50% reduction in pay during the DR> shutdown would be enough. The idea is to give them incentive to work on the DR> budget, not break their family's budget (a complete pay freeze would hardly What about leaving their salaries but taking away all their percs? Free haircuts, limo rides, etc. cost the taxpayers a lot of money (and are a pet peeve of mine). A lot of government workers can't get their hair cut right now either. Or buy Christmas gifts. DR> The reaction has been interesting and varied from the Minnesota gang. DR> This is interesting info. Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Froggy Subject: Re: The Budget Battle Date: Thu Nov 16 12:01:46 CST 1995 Message number: 5 Reply to message number: 4 FYI: The more I read about the budget battle, the more I am coming to realize that, for once, Clinton is nearly blameless. DR> What happened to the budget ... isn't this more important? F> F> They don't seem to think so, but one thing is for certain -- if F> Legislative and Executive don't reach agreement and pass a budget bill, ther F> will surely be a train wreck. Why do we even *need a bill to allow the government to temporarily borrow money? Because the Republicans are over a month late in passing their budget bill. The Republicans have a majority in the House and Senate and have been unable to come to an agreement over the budget. So to deflect criticism from themselves, they have found a way to shift the media's attention from the Republican House vs. Republican Senate to the Republican Congress vs. the Democratic President. Pure bullshit. The Republicans have not even sent the President a budget yet, which is 100% their responsibility. This is the real reason the government is shut down. More liberal media bias my ass. The press has become a trough for sound bytes and brinksmanship. All they do is parrot the talking heads and refuse to investigate or think for themselves. Even the normally insightful Molly Ivins seems to have missed the point this time ... F> From what I heard on the evening news, it sounds like it mey be the CONGRESS F> who blinks first. As it should be. But they're getting what they want, no matter how bad the poll numbers are. They're shifting the spotlight from Republican vs. Republican to Democrat vs. Republican ... and to paraphrase Limbaugh, their willing accomplices in the media are playing along. F> What about leaving their salaries but taking away all their percs? F> Free haircuts, limo rides, etc. cost the taxpayers a lot of money (and are a F> pet peeve of mine). A lot of government workers can't get their hair cut F> right now either. Or buy Christmas gifts. At this point, I'm beginning to think none of it makes any difference. Time to head down to Washington and beat some sense into Clinton ... if no one else is going to defend him, he's damned well better do it himself. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TREKER To: Froggy Subject: Re: The American System Date: Sat Nov 18 05:06:11 CST 1995 Message number: 6 Reply to message number: -25 F> disability and even with money and advantages has seen more of other aspects Is the disability you're referring to his height (4' 10")? Is so, how is this an impediment to his being able to carry out the responsibilities of his office (Labor Secretary)? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TREKER To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: The American System Date: Sat Nov 18 05:10:26 CST 1995 Message number: 7 Reply to message number: -24 DR> Semantics :) It's just plain bad. Out of most government agencies/policies DR> the Federal Reserve consistently is one of the most insidious and DR> counterproductive. The Fed's persistent artificial massaging of the nation's interest rates, for example, is certainly suspicious and disturbing, though I wouldn't necessarily term it 'insidious'. Insidious suggests they're out to do some intentional harm. Just the same, whatever their motivations, what would you suggest as an alternative to the Federal Reserve, if that's what you are hinting at? The institution has been around, I believe, since FDR. Therefore, since it hasn't been around all that long, perhaps there is, in fact, a better alternative. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TREKER To: Froggy Subject: Re: The American System Date: Sat Nov 18 05:14:44 CST 1995 Message number: 8 Reply to message number: -20 F> Now I am REALLY suspicious. I smell a system that was put in place F> to benefit only a select few. It was put in place to lend more thorough, thus effective, control and organization to the nation's money supply. It's a great theory, but like most governmental theories, it simply hasn't been properly implemented and maintained. Also, it is not necessarily a good thing for any one individual, though I consider Greenspan a very talented man, to have so much authority, given that the Reserve is a 'board'. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TREKER To: Froggy Subject: Re: Newt Date: Sat Nov 18 05:21:29 CST 1995 Message number: 9 Reply to message number: -19 F> I see that you have been properly brainwashed, Limbaugh fashion too F> It is acceptable and proper to change your mind about things. Barry Goldwat I have seen you in action on another board, and I see that your willingness to insult people ('brainwashed', 'Limbaugh fashion'?) hasn't abated. Do you take it as well as you dish it out? We'll see. F> will again. Because of the Medicare cuts they are going to have to quit the F> jobs and take their sick elderly parents out of nursing homes and take care F> them themselves. My college sons have not yet received their GSL checks and F> are at risk of having to drop out of college, as many students did in 1980 F> when Reagan also froze the GSL checks. This is not "saving taxpayer's money 'sick elderly parents...'. 'drop out of college'? I'm overwhelmed at your optimistic outlook on the future. We haven't even passed the damn budget bill yet and your already contemplating the end of the world. Are you a Democrat? You certainly talk, or complain, like one. Loved your shot at Ronnie, by the way. Easy targets certainly make for great entertainment, don't they. How about a quip about his Alzheimer's. Can we count on you for that one? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TREKER To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Clinton's Radio Address Date: Sat Nov 18 05:25:37 CST 1995 Message number: 10 Reply to message number: 0 DR> I believe both sides are at fault to some degree; Clinton for not botherin DR> to meet with them until last night (even if only to shut Dole and Gingrich DR> up, taking away one of their "weapons") and Dole and Gingrich for playing a DR> game of chicken. The rhetoric has become boring. The Democrats play their games, the 'Pubs play theirs. Bottome line? Simple. The GOP should stay focused, ignore the press and the Democrats, and zero in on their budget plan. Let the government stay down, and out. It only means Clinton won't be doing his favorite thing - Spending someone else's money. The GOP should hold out, take the heat, lose the senior vote if that's what's in the cards, and stay true to their promise of balancing the budget, even if it means a little 'pain'. Clinton didn't mind using that 'pain' bit when he thought he'd get his way. Someone's always to going to get hurt, but is pain now preferable to pain later? Ask your kids how *they* feel about that one! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TREKER To: Froggy Subject: Re: Clinton's Radio Address Date: Sat Nov 18 05:28:12 CST 1995 Message number: 11 Reply to message number: 1 F> would be accomplished. Clinton said several times that they had not yet sen F> him a budget so he didn't have anything to talk about. Maybe he is tired of The truth, which is generally hard to find in this deceitful president, is that what he *meant* to say is 'they had not yet sent me a budget that would let me spend enough money'. He'll never get the GOP to buckle in. He'll either sign their version, or close to it, or he'll be the first president go a year and half, up until he leaves office in 1/97 (and he *will*), without a budget. It's that simple. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JAIZMAIN To: Treker Subject: Re: The American System Date: Sat Nov 18 11:19:16 CST 1995 Message number: 12 Reply to message number: 7 T> It was put in place to lend more thorough, thus effective, control and T> organization to the nation's money supply. It's a great theory, but like mo T> governmental theories, it simply hasn't been properly implemented and T> maintained. This only applies if you think the Fed has not done its job. Certainly it, having no direct subservience to any beurocratic agency other than the Executive, has been able to freely exercise a great amount of control over all people on this planet. Perhaps you disagree, things are stabilizing? Jaizmain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: The Corporation Date: Fri Nov 24 17:15:27 CST 1995 Message number: 13 Reply to message number: unavailable The Corporate Machines 11/6/95 by Jay Hanson Nowadays, everyone knows that corporations control our political system and subjugate our citizens. But before the Civil War of 1861, citizens controlled the corporations. Up to that time, corporations were chartered for a specific limited purpose (for example, building a toll road or canal) and for a specific, limited period of time (usually 20 or 30 years). Each corporation was chartered to achieve a specific social goal that a legislature decided was in the public interest. At the end of the corporation's life time, its assets were distributed among the shareholders and the corporation ceased to exist. The number of owners was limited by the charter; the amount of capital they could aggregate was also limited. The owners were personally responsible for any liabilities or debts the company incurred, including wages owed to workers. Often profits were specifically limited in the charter. Corporations were not established merely to "make a profit." Early Americans feared corporations as a threat to democracy and freedom. They feared that the owners (shareholders) would amass great wealth, control jobs and production, buy the newspapers, dominate the courts and control elections. (one-dollar-one-vote) After the Civil War, during the 1870s and 1880s, owners and managers of corporations pressed relentlessly to expand their powers, and the courts gave them what they wanted. Perhaps the most important change occurred when the U.S. Supreme Court granted corporations the full constitutional protections of individual citizens. Congress had written the 14th Amendment to protect the rights of freed slaves, but in 1886 this was expanded when the courts declared that no state shall deprive a corporation ". . . of life, liberty or property without due process of law." "There was no history, logic or reason given to support that view," U. S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas was to write 60 years later. But it was done anyway. By applying the 14th Amendment to corporations, the court struck down hundreds of local, state and federal laws that were enacted to protect people from corporate harm. By the early 20th century, courts had limited the liability of shareholders; corporations had been given perpetual life times; the number of owners was no longer restricted; the capital they could control was infinite. Some corporations were even given the power of eminent domain (the right to take another's private property with minimal compensation to be determined by the courts). Of course, a corporation cannot be jailed. It cannot even be fined in any real sense; when a fine is imposed, it is the shareholders who must pay it. In effect, the U. S. Supreme Court bestowed natural rights on un-natural creatures, amoral beasts that were created to serve selfish men. Now corporations had life and liberty (but no morals), and the fears of the early Americans were soon realized. Large corporations are autonomous technical structures (machines) that follow the logic inherent in their design. Corporate machines ingest natural materials (including people) in one end, and excrete un-natural products and waste (including worn-out people) out the other. These machines have no innate morals to keep them from seducing our politicians, subverting our democratic processes or lying in order to maximize profit. Moreover, they are only nominally controlled by laws, because the people who make our laws are in turn controlled by these same machines. Today in America, we live under the de facto plutocracy of the corporate machines (one-dollar-one-vote). Corporate machines, in an orgy of corporate profit, have completely destroyed American Democracy and now destroy the very basis of our lives -- both physically and morally. These machines leave our children to face an ugly future of fighting each other over the un-profitable leftovers! The only arguments that we can muster against this relentless destruction are religious and ethical: the obligation of stewardship for all of God's creation and the extension of brotherhood to future generations. But corporate machines have no religion or morals -- and we have no chance. jhanson@ilhawaii.net --------- References: TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS: Citizenship and the Charter of Incorporation by Richard Grossman and Frank T. Adams, 1993 For one copy send $5.00 to: Charter, Inc. / CSPP, P.O. Box 806, Cambridge, MA 02140 See Also: RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #449 Environmental Research Foundation P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403 Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net Back issues available by E-mail; to get instructions, send a message with the word INFO in it to INFO@rachel.clark.net; back issues are also available via anonymous ftp from ftp.std.com/periodicals/rachel and from gopher.std.com. Permission to repost, reprint or quote is hereby granted. Subscribe: send E-mail to rachel-weekly-request@world.std.com with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It's free. Will we be able to salvage our political system without violence? Here is one candid opinion from an executive with the influential public-relations firm of Hill & Knowlton: "The big corporations, our clients, are scared shitless of the environmental movement," Mankiewicz confided. "They sense that there's a majority out there and that the emotions are all on the other side -- if they can be heard. I think the corporations are wrong about that. I think the companies will have to give in only at insignificant levels. Because the companies are too strong, they're the establishment. The environmentalists are going to have to be like the mob in the square in Romania before they prevail." From: WHO WILL TELL THE PEOPLE: The Betrayal of American Democracy, by George Greider, 1992 jhanson@ilhawaii.net **************************************************************** The is from the BRAIN FOOD mailing list. To join this free list: send "subscribe BRAIN FOOD" to jhanson@ilhawaii.net Please copy and reprint or crosspost this article as much as you can and be sure to include the BRAIN FOOD invitation in the article. This article is archived at: gopher://csf.colorado.edu/11/environment/authors/Hanson.Jay ftp://csf.colorado.edu/environment/authors/Hanson.Jay/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: Death and Taxes Date: Tue Nov 28 15:12:05 CST 1995 Message number: 14 Reply to message number: unavailable From: Erik Hare To: minnesota politics list Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 09:35:41 -0600 (CST) Subject: The Four Plagues I don't know if it was in any local papers, but on Sunday the Kenosha Wisconsin daily paper ran a syndicated column that was based on some scholoarly research into American household expenditures over the last 100 years. They found the following four had increased dramatically in the last 20-30 years: 1) Housing costs -- a combination of high interest rates, high labor costs, and rising expectations have collided to create a dearth of 'affordable' housing. 2) Transportation costs -- gas is cheaper, but cars are far more expensive and we are driving a lot more. (see my webpage, http://freenet.msp.mn.us/people/hare/ ) 3) Health Care costs -- Yes, Newtie, there IS a health care crisis. 4) Children costs -- From day care to college, the 'boomette' has a big impact, along with two working parents. This study also showed that taxes have not increased significantly as a percentage of a family's expenditures. So, if you want to help the American worker, you have to address these issues and not the other periferal ones like taxes and abortion and flag burning and other crapola. Erik ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Mailer Daemon Subject: Re: Death and Taxes Date: Tue Nov 28 15:43:35 CST 1995 Message number: 15 Reply to message number: 14 MD> 1) Housing costs -- a combination of high interest rates, high labor MD> costs, and rising expectations have collided to create a dearth of MD> 'affordable' housing. ... and of course the suburbanites who equate low-income housing with lower property values, crime and lawlessness. How many decisions are made in the name of property values at the local community level? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Death and Taxes Date: Wed Nov 29 02:59:49 CST 1995 Message number: 16 Reply to message number: 15 MD> 1) Housing costs -- a combination of high interest rates, high labor MD> costs, and rising expectations have collided to create a dearth of MD> 'affordable' housing. DR> DR> ... and of course the suburbanites who equate low-income housing with DR> lower property values, crime and lawlessness. How many decisions are made i DR> the name of property values at the local community level? Expectations are part of the problem too. I saw a thingy on TV yesterday where someone was building "low-income" houses that would market at about $96,000. Are they out of their minds? The mortgage for this would be about $1200/month, way out of the range of low-income people. Some people just don't understand that there are actually a lot of people in this country who have a VERY low income or no income at all. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CAPTAIN TEEBO To: All Subject: .. Date: Tue Dec 19 14:51:06 CST 1995 Message number: 17 Reply to message number: unavailable oi to the world, the streets run red.. let earth recieve god's gift.. The whole community is going to pot (more like crack actually), anybody have some specific ideas of why? Maybe people just aren't happy anymore, maybe the visions of old are falling apart, people see hopelessness.. it all goes holistic.. What can we do to improve the shit hole we live in? Moving obviously isn't the answer, the hell-nation follows you where ever you try to run.. (can't hide, no sir..) If we don't start doing something soon, fast, now, this whole little earthy village is going to explode. (If it hasn't already) Suggestions? Pray more, pray Jesus will come down and save us? Howabout something for the meantime? Personally, I'm going to goto sleep and wish I had a fag handy.. and a lighter for that matter.. And I don't even like cigarettes... Self destructive mood, maybe? Anyways, g'night people.. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Captain Teebo Subject: Re: Community Date: Thu Dec 21 15:57:42 CST 1995 Message number: 18 Reply to message number: 17 CT> The whole community is going to pot (more like crack actually), anybody hav CT> some specific ideas of why? Maybe people just aren't happy anymore, maybe CT> visions of old are falling apart, people see hopelessness.. A lot of that is true. I think a major cause is that the "good jobs" aren't there the way they used to be anymore. There's not as much opportunity to go around, and many people are getting the short end of it. So what's the "solution" to fix the deteriorating communities in this country? Perhaps most importanyl, a sense of shared struggle needs to arise in people in the suburbs, cities and farms ... because what affects one part affects us all. People are too individualisticly naive right now ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CAPTAIN TEEBO To: DAEDALUS RISING Subject: Re: Community Date: Tue Dec 26 16:06:55 CST 1995 Message number: 19 Reply to message number: unavailable DR> So what's the "solution" to fix the deteriorating communities in this DR> country? Perhaps most importanyl, a sense of shared struggle needs to DR> arise in people in the suburbs, cities and farms ... because what DR> affects one part affects us all. People are too individualisticly DR> naive right now ... So I guess the next logical step would be to ask what would bring people a sense of community? Perhaps more activities of individuals grouping together and doing things in public to see others of a like mind. On the short scale at first, then maybe it would catch on. Unfortunatly I can't think of many things that would do this. Demonstrations, free concerts, protests, even a pirate radio station now and then to let people know that there are others out there that think like them. (It's so much easier to do something when you know your not the only one.) Like Biafra said, "...until we change ourselves first, from the inside out..." *teebo ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Captain Teebo Subject: Re: Community Date: Tue Dec 26 21:54:26 CST 1995 Message number: 20 Reply to message number: 19 CT> So I guess the next logical step would be to ask what would bring people a CT> sense of community? Perhaps more activities of individuals grouping togeth CT> and doing things in public to see others of a like mind. On the short scal This is why wars are so popular, isn't it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Captain Teebo Subject: Re: Community Date: Wed Dec 27 05:51:07 CST 1995 Message number: 21 Reply to message number: 19 CT> So I guess the next logical step would be to ask what would bring people a CT> sense of community? Good question, and I really have no idea. I think the first step is to talk to your neighbors and get to know them ... maybe have a barbecue in the summer, inviting everyone from the block over to some sort of a pot-luck thing. But it all depends upon who your neighbors are, I guess ... I wouldn't want to get to know my neigbors better than I already do, because a few have done some inexusably disgisting things in the past. So I'm sort of a hypocrite when it comes to espousing the virtues of "community". Inver Grove Heights is a live-and-let-live place, and most people here like it that way. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: All Subject: Saving Date: Thu Dec 28 15:01:42 CST 1995 Message number: 22 Reply to message number: unavailable National Native News announced today that the Hopi reservation is considering releasing prisoners from their tribal prison. They have been able to keep all of their staff except 2 secretaries because they are essential employees. But they are running out of operating money to buy little things like food and gasoline. These are normally provided from funding from the BIA, but Congress, in its wisdom, has chosen to not fund it. Tribal prison officials say that they are currently releasing less violent prisoners to make the food last longer, but with the holiday coming up, they expect more prisoners and are rapidly running out of necessities. If they do not get funding they are going to have to release them all. NICE GOING, NEWT!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Froggy Subject: Re: Saving Date: Sat Dec 30 05:10:28 CST 1995 Message number: 23 Reply to message number: 22 F> National Native News announced today that the Hopi reservation is F> considering releasing prisoners from their tribal prison. They have been ab F> to keep all of their staff except 2 secretaries because they are essential F> employees. But they are running out of operating money to buy little things State and Federal budget cuts have hit home for me, too. I signed up for my classes at Inver Hills, and went to buy books yesterday. I found out that one of my classes had been cancelled at the last minute (class starts Tuesday). So I'm sort of screwed, needing the science/lab class as a requirement. It seems they cancelled the classes because of budget cuts; they can't afford to keep a class open unless it's almost fully pakced with students. I expect more of the same next quarter ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Saving Date: Sat Dec 30 08:10:53 CST 1995 Message number: 24 Reply to message number: 23 F> National Native News announced today that the Hopi reservation is F> considering releasing prisoners from their tribal prison. They have been ab F> to keep all of their staff except 2 secretaries because they are essential F> employees. But they are running out of operating money to buy little things DR> DR> It seems they cancelled the classes because of budget cuts; they can't DR> afford to keep a class open unless it's almost fully pakced with students. DR> expect more of the same next quarter ... This is the kind of stuff we need to keep track of. I saw an idiot waman on TV a few nights ago, blithering that *WE* are the only ones being hurt by this. She couldn't get into the Smithsonian on her vacation (Awwwww!!). SOmeone else made a comment that government employees would soon be missing rent and mortgage payments. Do you know if anyone is keeping a record of this? Maybe even to set up a temp. conference in here and to only post losses because of the shut-down so that we can see more about what is really going on. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Froggy Subject: Re: Saving Date: Sun Dec 31 06:54:00 CST 1995 Message number: 25 Reply to message number: 24 F> be missing rent and mortgage payments. Do you know if anyone is keeping a F> record of this? Maybe even to set up a temp. conference in here and to only F> post losses because of the shut-down so that we can see more about what is F> really going on. Sort of pointless to setup a conference for it ... if anyone has a story to share, feel free to reply to it here. I'll probably knock off a few letters when I get a chance to the boys in Washington and St. Paul about it, though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Saving Date: Sun Dec 31 07:10:00 CST 1995 Message number: 26 Reply to message number: 25 DR> Sort of pointless to setup a conference for it ... if anyone has a story t DR> share, feel free to reply to it here. DR> Will you flag or otherwise make them so that we can retrieve them easily? I think that there is going to be a lot of pain and I want to keep track of it for, among other things, election purposes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: AT&T's Family Date: Tue Jan 09 08:36:55 CST 1996 Message number: 27 Reply to message number: unavailable ------------------------- Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the Jan. 4/11. 1996 issue of Workers World newspaper ------------------------- MONOPOLY GAME: AT&T IS AWASH IN PROFITS; SO WHY DOES IT LAY OFF 40,000? By Stephen Millies Happy New Year! You're fired! That's the message AT&T Chair Robert E. Allen is giving to 40,000 telephone and computer workers. These job cuts-- scheduled to be carried out throughout 1996--followed AT&T's announcement in November letting 72,000 managers know they were expendable. "I truly wish we didn't have to do this downsizing," Allen said in a handout to the media. No one should be fooled by these crocodile tears. AT&T made a $4.71 billion profit in 1994. It's only the labor of workers that produces these profits for AT&T's stockholders. Divide these profits by the 302,000 employees on the payroll as of January 1995 and you get $15,596 garnered from every one. That's nearly $7.50 per hour that was stolen from each AT&T worker in unpaid wages. Actually, the rate of these unpaid wages is much higher since top boss Allen and thousands of smaller bosses are counted as "employees." According to AT&T, the average clerical employee being laid off in New Jersey has 18 years on the job. As many as 7,000 AT&T workers--the majority of them women--will be laid off in the Garden State alone. Robert Allen--or his media spin doctors--must have been inspired by Oliver Stone's movie about Richard Nixon to say that "compassion will be an essential ingredient in the handling of the job cuts." AT&T is showing so much compassion that a fired union worker will get as little as one week in severance pay. [cut] (Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted if source is cited. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: ww@wwpublish.com. For subscription info send message to: ww-info@wwpublish.com.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CAPTAIN CRUNCH To: Froggy Subject: Re: Community Date: Sat Jan 20 11:13:19 CST 1996 Message number: 28 Reply to message number: 20 I think people should quit being whiners. Fifty years ago we were strong as a country. We had just won one of the worst wars ever. We didn't sit around whining about political correctness, sueing, and blaspheming God. The nation was religious hard working and intelligent. Somewhere between then and now too many people have lost their integrity. - Captain Crunch ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Captain Crunch Subject: Re: Community Date: Sat Jan 20 13:33:44 CST 1996 Message number: 29 Reply to message number: 28 CC> I think people should quit being whiners. Fifty years ago we were strong as CC> country. We had just won one of the worst wars ever. We didn't sit around CC> whining about political correctness, sueing, and blaspheming God. The natio CC> was religious hard working and intelligent. Somewhere between then and now CC> many people have lost their integrity. CC> Every generation thinks that its war was "the worst ever." The "religious" KKK where I was born had nightly prayer meetings proclaiming their superiority and burning crosses and hanging people. There were then and always have been many whiners. Please learn to use quotes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Captain Crunch Subject: Re: Community Date: Sat Jan 20 15:27:33 CST 1996 Message number: 30 Reply to message number: 28 CC> I think people should quit being whiners. Fifty years ago we were strong as CC> country. We had just won one of the worst wars ever. We didn't sit around CC> whining about political correctness, sueing, and blaspheming God. The natio CC> was religious hard working and intelligent. Somewhere between then and now CC> many people have lost their integrity. No ... people sat around persecuting suspected Communists, building lots of nuclear weapons and hiding in fallout shelters. Poltiical correctness wasn't even a concept to people who went around lynching blacks. Besides the "negatives", lot of the seeming stability of the 40s and 50s is illusory. Others parts can't be repeated because the world is a differnet place, and America is no longer the only functioning industrialized society on Earth. Somewhere between then and now, many people have been revisng history to suit their own agenda. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: EUROPA To: Captain Crunch Subject: Re: Community Date: Sun Jan 21 05:52:08 CST 1996 Message number: 31 Reply to message number: 28 CC> I think people should quit being whiners. Fifty years ago we were strong as CC> country. We had just won one of the worst wars ever. We didn't sit around CC> whining about political correctness, sueing, and blaspheming God. The natio CC> was religious hard working and intelligent. Somewhere between then and now CC> many people have lost their integrity. Notice how I'm quoting here.... :) Whiners? What could you possibly mean? Because some want rights? I guess 50 years ago everyone had their little roles and it wasn't okay to step out of those little boundaries. Blacks had their place; so did women. The working class was just that and proud of it, but they shouldn't want more than what they had. I guess it's easier for some when everyone plays by the rules so there's no discomfort for those who had their roles assigned by the Almighty. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG BROTHER To: TBOB Subject: Re: Affirmative Action Date: Sun Feb 04 14:45:16 CST 1996 Message number: 32 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Tbob to Big Brother <=- BB> Hussein is an non-entity. The true threat is lurking in the shadows of th BB> Ural Mountains. Tb> The real threat is lurking in our own hearts. Tb> "and what rude beast, Tb> his turn ocome round at last Tb> is slouching toward Bethlehem to be born?" -- Yeats. In one's heart can lie courage, determination and heresy. Ferreting the diffe is a task in itself, the subject of debate. In one's heart can lie the true danger to one's self and to one's nation. ... The best defense is a damned good offense. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: GENERIC To: Peregrin Subject: Re: The Nation Date: Mon Feb 05 06:48:29 CST 1996 Message number: 33 Reply to message number: -912 The difference between the Rainforests and the Moon, is that in the Rainforests, there is slave labor galore, plus we can rape the land rather cheaply. Whereas on the moon, there is no slave labor, and it would cost a bundle to rape it, and for what? rock? Sure maybe a few minerals, but just not finacially viable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVID FISCHER To: All Subject: U.S. vs The World Date: Fri Feb 23 05:40:45 CST 1996 Message number: 34 Reply to message number: unavailable My friends and I spent over two hours debating this: Could the United States (if we wanted for some reason) take on the world and win. My opinion is a definate yes. I am no expert on anything like this so I was hoping to hear what some of you thought about the possibilities. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: David Fischer Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Fri Feb 23 10:06:40 CST 1996 Message number: 35 Reply to message number: 34 DF> My friends and I spent over two hours debating this: Could the United DF> States (if we wanted for some reason) take on the world and win. My opinio DF> is a definate yes. I am no expert on anything like this so I was hoping t DF> hear what some of you thought about the possibilities. Depends on what you mean by "win." If you mean wage a war and win an armed conflict, yes we probably could, with a little planning. But I don't think we could hold onto it for long. Small oppressed groups of people are usually more motivated and capable of fight ing back against an oppressor. Look at what happened in Vietnam. Then there is , oil. Our fighter bombers and tanks don't work too well withiut it and it would take some GOOD planning to take it away from the countries who own and produce it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVID FISCHER To: Froggy Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Sun Feb 25 05:48:15 CST 1996 Message number: 36 Reply to message number: 35 F> Small oppressed groups of people are F> usually more motivated and capable of fight ing back against an oppressor. Would third-world countries or countries that are already in trouble (i.e. Bosnia) be upset with the United States coming in and cleaning up some of there problems. Sounds familiar doesn't it, probably because we already get stuck going in to clean up everyone else's messes. Why not do it all at once? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: David Fischer Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Sun Feb 25 07:49:02 CST 1996 Message number: 37 Reply to message number: 36 DF> Would third-world countries or countries that are already in trouble (i DF> Bosnia) be upset with the United States coming in and cleaning up some of DF> there problems. Sounds familiar doesn't it, probably because we already ge DF> stuck going in to clean up everyone else's messes. Why not do it all at on Many of them would becaause they are really trying to live their own lives. Cuba and the incident there comes to mind. We do not go around cleaning up everyone else's messes because we are not welcome everywhere. And because we do not have the resources or the wisdom to run the rest of the world. We have a LOT of cleaning up here to do. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: DAVID FISCHER Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Mon Feb 26 08:52:57 CST 1996 Message number: 38 Reply to message number: unavailable ..mOO.. David Fischer was talking to All about U.S. vs The World ..mOO.. DF> My friends and I spent over two hours debating this: Could the DF> United States (if we wanted for some reason) take on the world and DF> win. My opinion is a definate yes. I am no expert on anything like DF> this so I was hoping to hear what some of you thought about the DF> possibilities. Logically yes, historically no. Yes, theoretically we could "accidentally" knock out foreign intelligence satellites, arm our nuclear weapons, aim them haphazardly, and blow the living shit out of humanity (except for the US) as we know it, however the radiation would probably even affect Americans, and if we tried to militarily take the world, even though we had power and good planning, we would meet a Waterloo or Stalingrad, just because world conquest isn't very affordable. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: David Fischer Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Wed Feb 28 14:41:59 CST 1996 Message number: 39 Reply to message number: 34 DF> My friends and I spent over two hours debating this: Could the United DF> States (if we wanted for some reason) take on the world and win. My opinio DF> is a definate yes. I am no expert on anything like this so I was hoping t DF> hear what some of you thought about the possibilities. Most definately, if decent strategy was used. The intelligent thing to do would be to plan the takeover to last a generation or two, taking on one enemy or region at a time while keeping the rest of the world placated. Incidentally, this was Hiter's biggest mistake; taking on too many people at once. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Wed Feb 28 18:13:31 CST 1996 Message number: 40 Reply to message number: 39 DR> Most definately, if decent strategy was used. The intelligent thing to do DR> would be to plan the takeover to last a generation or two, taking on one en DR> or region at a time while keeping the rest of the world placated. DR> Of course it would be more efficient if we would all cooperate. I could breed vicious attack dogs and others could mount tank turrets of enemy churches. :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVID FISCHER To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Tue Mar 05 14:28:24 CST 1996 Message number: 41 Reply to message number: 39 DR> Incidentally, this was Hiter's biggest mistake; taking on too many people DR> once. The scariest part of Hitler's "quest" was that he made a lot of mistakes and with one or two less mistakes, he may have won. Here's a good example of how a country with only one leader will never be able to win: As the Allied forces landed upon the beaches of France, the German troops there fought wave after wave of soldiers. They were close to holding them back and pushing them into the sea. They needed only a little more help, like that of two Panzer tank divisions nearby. Unfortunately, Hitler had ordered the tanks not to move without HIS command. The tanks, which would have stopped the Allied invasion, had to stay where they were because Hitler's assistants were to afraid of him to wake him up to move the tanks. I think that the U.S. on the otherhand with many military leaders, could win a war with many enemies and wouldn't need to use nuclear weapons. My rational for that is that no country (with nuclear weapons) would be willing to give up its entire population for a little damage to the U.S. No nation other than Russia could annialate the U.S. (not sure about that stat) so they would only end up helping the U.S. by enraging the public and bringing more public support for the war. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: David Fischer Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Fri Mar 08 12:41:33 CST 1996 Message number: 42 Reply to message number: 41 DF> The scariest part of Hitler's "quest" was that he made a lot of mistake DF> and with one or two less mistakes, he may have won. Here's a good example DF> how a country with only one leader will never be able to win: I don't know if it proves anything about "one leader" ... in fact, I'd argue the opposite. Assuming that the leader is competent (and sane), it is much more effective to have one person dictate policy for the empire than to have a group of people decide the same. Decisions can be made more consistently, faster and more uniformly; there aren't any hesittions, resentments or second-guesses. Everyone just follows orders. The problemw tih that is, of course, that when a loon gets into power that loon can make some really bad decisions that are ruinous. Therefore, totalitarian power only seems to amplify the leadership abilities of the tyrant. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE ARTFUL DODGER To: All Subject: Food not Bombs Date: Sun Mar 17 17:21:41 CST 1996 Message number: 43 Reply to message number: unavailable I know this is not on the topic, but reading the description of the type of messages that should be in this base convinced me to post this. Is anyone familiar with the Food not Bombs chapter in Minneapolis? Does anyone here volunteer there? Any info would be appreciated. -The Artful (formerly Springer) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BRIAREOS HECATONCHIRES To: David Fischer Subject: Re: U.S. vs The World Date: Fri Mar 22 20:39:56 CST 1996 Message number: 44 Reply to message number: 36 DF> Would third-world countries or countries that are already in trouble (i DF> Bosnia) be upset with the United States coming in and cleaning up some of DF> there problems. Sounds familiar doesn't it, probably because we already ge How, exactly? Those people, like most of the ethnic violence these days, have been killing each other for 2000 years. The only practical way to stop them is to disperse them, which is, of course, incredibly culturally imperialistic and paternalistic. As far as I'm concerned, we need to find a credible way of helping the people not directly involved in the fighting, and then leave everyone else the hell alone. If they don't want to die a stupid death, let them quit the army and come to where they get food reliably. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: The Work Ethic Date: Sun Mar 31 08:30:23 CST 1996 Message number: 45 Reply to message number: unavailable From: malecki@algonet.se (Robert Malecki) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 01:18:34 GMT Organization: AlgoNet Public Access Node, Stockholm PISSING ON THE WORK ETHIC I sent a friend of mine in America my book on Vietnam. In return he sent me a piece that he wrote for people. Here is his piece and my answer.(authors note) I despise work. Its not that I'm lazy or that I hate the idea of working. There are plenty of good things worth working for. What I dislike is the institution of work. In these days of falling living standards, lower expectations, dead end jobs and temporary work, the workplace is increasingly becoming a hostile place. I should know. It doesn't take much to lose your job these days. I've been fired from two jobs in just the past five months. The last job really sucked the shit out of my septic tank. It was quite a relief to get fired from that one. I can also thank my parasitic, tyrannical bosses for instilling in me a contemptible aversion to employment. In today's economy there are thousands, perhaps millions of people each year desperately searching for employment yet are unable to find any. My question is, why bother? You see, I've come to the conclusion that it isn't money that is the root of all evil. I believe that "work" as it is currently defined, is the root of all evil. Work is forced labour. Work sucks. For anyone who values freedom and liberty, the workplace should be recognised as the one place where democracy does not exist. It is also the place where most people spend the vast majority of their waking hours. Whenmost people talk about work, they usually complain about it. But they never do anything about it. The next morning, they grudgingly climb into their metal boxes and drive to the place they can't stand to be at. Why? They have no choice. Or do they? Work is looked upon as an inevitable fact of life, like death and taxes. Some people will actually attach self-worth with work. They will tell you that if you work harder and produce more, you'll get a bigger share. That's an easy myth to shoot down. Recent statistics from the Labour Department shows that in the 12-month period ending in March 1995, average wages and salaries dropped 2.3 percent even though workers worked harder and productivity increased by 2.1 percent. This is not a recent trend. real wages for American workers have been steadily declining for well over twenty years. Increased productivity only means increased profits for rich corporations. The good news is that more and more people are beginning to realise that working hard doesn't translate into better living. However, it can still be a dangerous thing to explain your disdain for the typical work environment to other people. I've had several people sternly lecture me in condescending tones with lines like "with an attitude like that you're never going to get a REAL job!" Exactly! I only hope they are right! Gee, not only am I jobless, I've got an attitude problem. I must be doing something right. Why do some people exhibit such closed-minded subservient views about work? Well, I suppose one should look at how they live. After spending their day at work they come home and plop themselves into their living room caves and watch television all night. The television is a wonderful tool that can be utilised to properly pacify and anaesthetise the viewing population with a steady diet of nothing. Boring, unenlightened, uncreative, stultifying entertainment for the boring pathetic work drones. Anything to divert them, to keep these people from engaging in some useful activity like thinking for themselves. The problem with some people who have spent a lifetime in boring repetive work is that they become accustomed to it. They begin to accept it as normal. Their blind obedience to this system of regimentation has, in effect, created in them a fear of freedom. No longer capable of thinking for themselves, they regurgitate the standard propaganda. Why, they'll start telling people who aren't properly submissive that "with an attitude like that, you'll never get a REAL job!" In today's social climate Thoreau,s call to "simplify, simplify, simplify" is considered by the captains of capitalism to be quite radical and extreme. Why be lazy and sit back and admire the wondrous beauty of a lush forest when you can put people to work and tear that whole forest down! Work! Work! And the harder you work the more money your friendly tax office makes! Ah, nothing like busting your ass to make your employer wealthy off of your labour! Work is for suckers. Having developed a disdain for mainstream material values, its a lot more fun in defiance of those values. But I know many people who have bought into the American dream crap. A few of them are my friends. They desire the fancy home, stylish cars, massive entertainment systems, fancy gadgets, the finest consumer goods, etc. The overwhelming debt attached to that dream essentially makes them prisoners of the system and reduces their lives to one of servility; they are nothing more than wage slaves. They try to live by the motto: "He who dies with the most toys wins." I would argue for a different motto. I prefer the motto articulated by Tim Haugen in a recent issue of the Earth First! journal. He simply states that, "He or she who dies after spending the most time at play, wins." I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty appealing to me. I'm quite content to let my friend slave away so he can collect his silly trinkets. I,ll settle for having a little fun. Besides, don't you think we should redefine affluence to mean, "an abundance of leisure time?" Fortunately, there are some people who are actively resisting the message of advertisers imploring use to participate in our vacuous, empty consumer culture and are making a transition to a less materialist and more viable way of life. What they have discovered as a result is more freedom. They've discovered you don't have to continually endure the daily drudgery of a 9 to 5 job. They have chosen to devote their lives to fun and adventure rather than the accumulation of material things. It is a matter of priorities. After all, work is a burden. It is a burden that needs to be removed, or at least, done less often. Work is under surveillance, the worker must obey orders. The boss can tell you when to show up for work, what to do, when you can go home, when you can take a lunch, what clothes are acceptable to wear, and demand forced overtime without compensation, among other things. Many companies can and will fire you for any reason, or, no reason. The workplace can intrude on your free time, whatever little free time that may be. Some companies require drug screening as a condition of employment. So not only is your time at work controlled and regulated but your time off the job can be controlled too! There was probably more freedom in Russia under communism than there is in the American workplace. It is a demeaning system of domination. Anyone who calls this freedom and democracy is either a lair or a complete idiot. All the while, political pundits and talk radio hosts will go to great lengths to demonize state institutions as impediments to freedom. However, they dutifully ignore corporations who demand subservience from their workers. For those who want to maximise freedom the major coercive institution is not the State, it is the workplace. If we were honest we would talk about corporations the way we used to talk about Stalin. Corporations are totalitarian institutions and anyone who supports the notion that corporations have the right to exploit people certainly doesn't give a shit about individual freedom. As Bob Black put it " The workplace is the last bastion of authoritarian coercion." Most work serves no useful purpose. Work eats up too much precious free time. No amount of tinkering from job consultants with their job enrichment programs is going to solve the problem of work. Fuck job enrichment. I'm more interested in life enrichment. That means devoting less time at work and devoting more time to living. And I don't need a goddamned consultant for that. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Mailer Daemon Subject: Re: The Work Ethic Date: Mon Apr 01 09:09:19 CST 1996 Message number: 46 Reply to message number: 45 MD> PISSING ON MD> THE WORK ETHIC There's some interesting points made in this article, though I don't know if I agree with every single one of them. MD> "He or she who dies after spending the most time at play, wins." MD> I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty appealing to me. I'm MD> quite content to let my friend slave away so he can collect his silly MD> trinkets. I,ll settle for having a little fun. Besides, don't you MD> think we should redefine affluence to mean, "an abundance of leisure MD> time?" Why is it that a lot of people feel the need to make lots and lots of money, so they can buy their piece of the American ego (a flamingly cool car), whet their consumeristic appetities (Guess jeans, Gucci handbags, 40" TVs to watch football on sundays) and a 4-bedroom house in the Suburbs? What's wrong with shooting for "just enough"? MD> Corporations are totalitarian institutions and anyone who supports the MD> notion that corporations have the right to exploit people certainly MD> doesn't give a shit about individual freedom. I tend to agree, unfortunately. Why is it that when someone pays you a wage, you instantly become their indentured servant for a few hours? Sure, the law has limited them a bit ... they can't hire children, have to give you a break every 8 hours and have to pay you $4.25 an hour. But otherwise, the average worker is at the merc of their employer. Where's the "freedom" and human dignity here? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: The Work Ethic Date: Mon Apr 01 11:50:03 CST 1996 Message number: 47 Reply to message number: 46 DR> watch football on sundays) and a 4-bedroom house in the Suburbs? What's wro DR> with shooting for "just enough"? DR> The problem is in deciding what is "just enough." I only have one phone jack. I have been having a lot of phone problems and the repair technicians keep telling me there must be a short in my other jack. What other jack? I live alone, have one phone line, and only need one jack. Apparently most people think they need more. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: Attack of the Killer Cars Date: Fri May 03 06:10:14 CDT 1996 Message number: 48 Reply to message number: unavailable CARS MAKE SUBURBS RISKIER THAN CITIES, STUDY SAYS Los Angeles Times, April 15, 1996, page A-1 By James Gerstenzang Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON--The automobile, long considered the ticket to freedom in suburbia, is instead turning suburban life into a territory of destruction more dangerous than urban communities, according to a study released today. The study of the long-reaching impact of cars, trucks and suburban sprawl on the quality of life in the Pacific Northwest found that the prevalence of automobiles and auto accidents has led to more deaths and injuries in suburbs than have guns and drugs in urban settings. "People dramatically underestimate the risks of driving and overestimate the risks of crime," the study's author, Alan Thein Durning, said. "Tragically, people often flee crime-ridden cities for the perceived safety of the suburbs--only to increase the risks they expose themselves to," the study found, citing statistics compiled by the Federal Highway Administration and Justice Department figures on juvenile offenders. In its overlay of the risks posed by violence and drugs--the widely perceived ills of city life--with the risks associated with the reliance on automobiles in suburbs, the study covers new territory by applying existing--but rarely compared--data to census tracts rather than to race, age or other conventional standards. While the examination focused on the cities of the Pacific North- west, primarily Portland, Seattle and, across the Canadian border, Vancouver, British Columbia, its findings are applicable throughout the United States, its author said, with the exception of particular neighborhoods with "substantially" higher crime rates. His book, "The Car and the City," was published by Northwest Environment Watch, which Durning founded. It describes itself as an independent, not-for-profit research center in Seattle established to promote economic advances that do not damage the environment. Using Police Department figures for traffic accidents and injuries linked to crimes in Seattle, for example, and then taking into consideration the greater number of miles driven by people in suburbs, he calculated that 16 out of 1,000 city residents faced the risk of injury or death in 1995 due to either traffic accidents or crime, while 19.2 out of 1,000 suburban residents faced the same risks. More specifically, he calculated that the crime risk for city residents was 10 out of 1,000, and for suburban residents it was 1 out of 1,000. But the traffic risk for city residents was 6 out of 1,000, while that same figure was more than three times higher, 18.2 out of 1,000, for those living in suburbs. Building on work that appeared earlier in the Journal of the American Medical Assn., Durning wrote: "Traffic accidents kill more Northwesterners each year than gunshot wounds or drug abuse do; almost 2,000 people in the region died--and 168,000 were injured--in car wrecks in 1993 alone. The young are especially endangered. Traffic accidents are the leading cause of death among Americans aged 10 to 24, and 5- to 15-year-olds are the age group most likely to be run over by motor vehicles while bicycling." And going back to 1980, he said, those killed by cars represent "far more than have died or been injured as a result of violent crime." Jim Hedlund, associate administrator for traffic safety programs of the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said that national figures indicate rural driving is roughly twice as dangerous for young people, with 34% of the fatalities of 15- to 20-year-olds occurring in urban areas, and 66% occurring in rural precincts. "It's very clear rural [driving] is more dangerous than urban [driving] for kids and everybody else," Hedlund said. Durning reported that crime rates vary little by neighborhood in Seattle--and that violent crime is more commonly committed by acquaintances than by strangers. His conclusions took experts by surprise at the National Safety Council, a private research organization funded largely by businesses. "It seems counterintuitive," said Alan Hoskins, manager of the council's statistics department. But, he said, "certainly driving pretty hazardous for teenagers; and clearly teenagers do more driving in the suburbs than urban teenagers do in the city." On the other hand, he said, any comparison of risk must weigh "the perception of control." Given a choice between the risks of the automobile in the suburbs and violence in cities, he said, "people think they have more control of the hazards they are exposed to when they are driving a car. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: ALL Subject: Class Warfare 1/2 Date: Tue Aug 27 02:54:20 CDT 1996 Message number: 49 Reply to message number: unavailable =======================Electronic Edition======================== . (Post Part One) . . RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #497 . . ---June 6, 1996--- . . ========== . . Environmental Research Foundation . . P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403 . . Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net . . ========== . . Back issues available by E-mail; to get instructions, send . . E-mail to INFO@rachel.clark.net with the single word HELP . . in the message; back issues also available via ftp from . . ftp.std.com/periodicals/rachel and from gopher.std.com. . . Permission to repost, reprint or quote is hereby granted. . . Subscribe: send E-mail to rachel-weekly-request@world.std.com . . with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It's free. . ================================================================= By Peter Montague It seems obvious that poor people are more likely to be sick, and to die at an earlier age, compared to rich people. Several recent studies from the U.S. confirm that this is the case.[1,2,3,4] What is not so obvious is that the health of the poor is harmed in proportion to the size of the gap between rich and poor. It isn't the absolute level of poverty that matters so much as the size of the gap between rich and poor. In other words, "...what matters in determining mortality and health in a society is less the overall wealth of that society and more how evenly wealth is distributed. The more equally wealth is distributed the better the health of that society," according to an editorial in the BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL April 20th.[5] Two recent studies of the U.S. indicate that this is so,[6,7] and they are not the first to make the case.[8,9] The two recent studies, published in April in the BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, examine all 50 states within the U.S. Each study defines a measure of income inequality and compares it to various rates of disease and other social problems. Both the studies -- one from Harvard and one from University of California at Berkeley -- conclude that the greater the gap between rich and poor, the greater the chances that people will be sick and die young. It isn't the absolute level of wealth in a society that determines health; it is the size of the gap between rich and poor. Let's look at some of the details: George Kaplan and his colleagues at Berkeley measured inequality in the 50 states as the percentage of total household income received by the less well off 50% of households.[6] It ranged from about 17% in Louisiana and Mississippi to about 23% in Utah and New Hampshire. In other words, by this measure, Utah and New Hampshire have the most EQUAL distribution of income, while Louisiana and Mississippi have the most UNEQUAL distribution of income. This measure of income inequality was then compared to the age-adjusted death rate for all causes of death, and a pattern emerged: the more unequal the distribution of income, the greater the death rate. For example in Louisiana and Mississippi the age-adjusted death rate is about 960 per 100,000 people, while in New Hampshire it is about 780 per 100,000 and in Utah it is about 710 per 100,000 people. Adjusting these results for average income in each state did not change the picture: in other words, it is the gap between rich and poor, and not the average income in each state, that best predicts the death rate in each state. This measure of income inequality was also tested against other social conditions besides health. States with greater inequality in the distribution of income also had higher rates of unemployment, higher rates of incarceration, a higher percentage of people receiving income assistance and food stamps, and a greater percentage of people without medical insurance. Again, the gap between rich and poor was the best predictor, not the average income in the state. Interestingly, states with greater inequality of income distribution also spent less per person on education, had fewer books per person in the schools, and had poorer educational performance, including worse reading skills, worse math skills, and lower rates of completion of high school. States with greater inequality of income also had a greater proportion of babies born with low birth weight; higher rates of homicide; higher rates of violent crime; a greater proportion of the population unable to work because of disabilities; a higher proportion of the population using tobacco; and a higher proportion of the population being sedentary (inactive). Lastly, states with greater inequality of income had higher costs per-person for medical care, and higher costs per person for police protection. The Harvard researchers used a slightly different measure of inequality, called the Robin Hood index.[10] The higher the Robin Hood index, the greater the inequality in the distribution of income. The researchers calculated the Robin Hood index for all 50 states and then examined its relationship to various measures of health and well being. They found that the Robin Hood index correlated with the overall age-adjusted death rate. Each percentage point increase in the Robin Hood index was associated with an increase in total mortality of 21.7 deaths per 100,000 population. The Robin Hood index was also strongly associated with the infant mortality (death) rate; with deaths from heart disease; with deaths from cancer; and with deaths by homicide among both blacks and whites. The Harvard team concludes that reducing inequality would bring important health benefits. For example, if the Robin Hood index were reduced from 30% to 25% (about where it is in England), deaths from coronary heart disease would be reduced by 25%. These studies are important because they confirm work that has previously found a relationship between income inequality and health, using data of good quality from all 50 states.[11] Inequality in the distribution of income and wealth[12] has been increasing in the U.S. for about 20 years.[13,1 In 1977 the wealthiest 5% of Americans captured 16.8% of the nation's entire income; by 1989 that same 5% was capturing 18.9%. During the 4-year Clinton presidency the wealthiest 5% have increased their take of the total to over 21%, "an unprecedented rate of increase," according to the British ECONOMIST magazine.[17] Inequality in the distribution of wealth in the U.S. is even greater than the inequality in income. In 1983, the wealthiest 5% of Americans owned 56% of all the wealth in the U.S.; by 1989, the same 5% had increased their share of the pie to 62%.[16,pg.29] These trends in inequality in the U.S. are accelerating as time passes. We now know that these trends have real consequences for the health of people and society. As a nation, we have traditionally thought it was acceptab if the rich got richer, so long as the poor were minimally provided for. These studies now reveal that such a situation is not acceptable. As the gap grows between rich and poor, the health of the nation deteriorates, the social fabric unravels, and the cost of maintaining community goes up. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: ALL Subject: Class Warfare 2/2 Date: Tue Aug 27 02:54:21 CDT 1996 Message number: 50 Reply to message number: unavailable How does the gap between rich an poor harm the health of the poor? Evidently, the psychological hardship of being low down on the social ladder has detrimental effects on people, beyond whatever effects are produced by the substandard housing, nutrition, air quality, recreational opportunities and medical care enjoyed by the poor.[18] The growing gap between rich and poor has not been ordained by extraterrestria beings. It has been created by the policies of governments: taxation, training investment in children and their education, modernization of businesses, transfer payments, minimum wages and health benefits, capital availability, support for green industries, encouragement of labor unions, attention to infrastructuire and technical assistance to entrepreneurs, among others. In the U.S., government policies of the past 20 years have promoted, encourage and celebrated inequality. These are choices that we, as a society, have made. Now one half of our society is afraid of the other half, and the gap between us is expanding. Our health is not the only thing in danger. They that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind. --Peter Montague =============== [1] George Davey Smith and others, "Socioeconomic Differentials in Mortality Risk among Men Screened for the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial: I. White Men," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 86, No. 4 (April, 1996), pgs. 486-496. [2] George Davey Smith and others, "Socioeconomic Differentials in Mortality Risk among Men Screened for the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial: II. Black Men," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 86, No. 4 (April, 1996), pgs. 497-504. [3] Gopal K. Singh and Stella M. Yu, "US Childhood Mortality, 1950 through 1993: Trends and Socioeconomic Differentials, "AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 86, No. 4 (April, 1996), pgs. 505-512. [4] C. Wayne Sells and Robert Wm. Blum, "Morbidity and Mortality among US Adolescents: An Overview of Data and Trends," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Vol. 86, No. 4 (April, 1996), pgs. 513-519. [5] Editorial, "The Big Idea," BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 312 (April 20, 1996), pg. [985]. [6] George A. Kaplan and others, "Inequality in income and mortality in the United States: analysis of mortality and potential pathways," BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 312 (April 20, 1996), pgs. 999-1003. [7] Bruce P. Kennedy and others, "Income distribution and mortality: cross sectional ecological study of the Robin Hood index in the United States," BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 312 (April 20, 1996), pgs. 1004-100 [8] Richard G. Wilkinson, "Income distribution and life expectancy," BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 304 (January 18, 1992), pgs. 165-168. See also footnote 11, below. [9] Robert J. Waldmann, "Income Distribution and Infant Mortality," THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS Vol. 107 (November 1, 1992), pgs. 1283-1302 [10] The Robin Hood index (RHI) is calculated by dividing the population into 10 groups, richest to poorest. The RHI calculation proceeds by first summing the percentage of income for each 10% group whose percentage of available income exceeds 10% and then subtracting the product of the number of 10% groups that meet this criterion times 10%. Example: in Massachusetts in 1990, the top 10% received 29.93% of income; the next lower 10% received 16.41% of all income; the next lower 10% received 13.09% of all income; the next lower 10% received 10.83% of all income, and the remaining six 10% groups each received less than 10% of income and are therefore ignored in the RHI calculation. The RHI index for Massachusetts in 1990 is therefore calculated from the top four 10% groups: (10.83% + 13.09% + 16.41% + 29.93%)-(4x10%) = 70.26%-40% = 30.26%. See Appendix, pg. 1007, of Kennedy, cited above in note 7. [11] The body of literature linking health to the gap between rich and poor is reviewed in Richard G. Wilkinson, "Commentary: A reply to Ken Judge: mistaken criticisms ignore overwhelming evidence," BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 311 (November 11, 1995), pgs. 1285-1287, which was written as a response to Ken Judge, "Income distribution and life expectancy: a critical appraisal," BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 311 (November 11, 1995), pgs. 1282-1285. [12] Wealth is the net worth of a household, calculated by adding up the current value of all assets a household owns (bank accounts, stocks, bonds, life insurance savings, mutual fund shares, houses, unincorporated businesses, consumer durables such as cars and major appliances, and the value of pension rights), then subtracting the value of all liabilities (consumer debt, mortgage balances, and other outstanding debt). [13] Sheldon Danziger and others, "How the Rich Have Fared, 1973-1987,&qu AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW Vol. 79 (May, 1989), pgs. 310-314. [14] McKinley L. Blackburn and David E. Bloom, "Earnings and Income Inequality in the United States," POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Vol. 13, No. 4 (December, 1987), pgs. 575-609. [15] Johan Fritzell, "Income Inequality Trends in the 1980s: A Five-Country Comparison," ACTA SOCIOLOGICA Vol. 36 (1993), pgs. 47-62. [16] Edward N. Wolff, TOP HEAVY; A STUDY OF THE INCREASING INEQUALITY OF WEALTH IN AMERICA (New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1995). Although this is a study of wealth inequality, chapter 6 deals with income inequality. [17] "Up, down and standing still," THE ECONOMIST February 24, 1996, pgs. 30, 33. [18] George Davey Smith, "Income inequality and mortality: why are they related?" BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Vol. 312 (April 20, 1996), pgs. 987-988. Descriptor terms: wealth; income distribution; equity; inequality; economy; poverty; morbodity statistics; mortality statistics; homicide; tobacco use; education; disabilities; incarceration; robin hood index; harvard; berkeley; =======================Electronic Edition======================== RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #497 ---June 6, 1996--- Environmental Research Foundation P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403 Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.clark.net ========== Back issues available by E-mail; to get instructions, send E-mail to INFO@rachel.clark.net with the single word HELP in the message; back issues also available via ftp from ftp.std.com/periodicals/rachel and from gopher.std Permission to repost, reprint or quote is hereby granted. Subscribe: send E-mail to rachel-weekly-request@world.std.com with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It's free. ================================================================= ################################################################ NOTICE Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge even though it costs our organization considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. --Peter Montague, Editor ################################################################ ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: All Subject: more riots Date: Sun Nov 24 03:38:16 CST 1996 Message number: 51 Reply to message number: unavailable ------------------------- Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the Nov. 14, 1996 issue of Workers World newspaper ------------------------- REBELLION IN MISSISSIPPI: HUNDREDS ACCUSE POLICE IN SHOOTING DEATH By Judi Cheng The suspected police murder of a young man in the small Mississippi town of Leland on Oct. 17 has led to yet another rebellion by an African American community. Aaron White, 29, died from a bullet to the head when he fled from police after his car was involved in a traffic accident. On Oct. 30, some 1,500 community residents met at a local high school to discuss White's death. The town only has 6,300 people. Some 400 then march ed to the police station, intending to meet with Mayor Sam Thomas and Police Chief Mike Dees about the incident. When they were rebuffed, the crowd of about 400 showed their anger by pelting parked police vehicles with rocks, smashing windows of businesses, and throwing firebombs. No one was hurt, but one arrest was made before the rebellion ended at about 1 a.m. State Rep. Jimmy Thornton, who represents many of the Black communities in Washington County, said the rebellion showed widespread dissatisfaction with local officials. Community residents are convinced White was killed because he was Black. Resentment against the local police and courts had been growing in Leland's Black community. Protest organizer L.C. Gatewood and others said Officer Jackie Blaylock shot White and later tried to cover up the story by claiming White had shot himself as he crawled through bushes trying to get away from police after the car accident. Initially, the police said White, own er of a television repair shop, was killed in an exchange of gunfire after he crash ed his pickup truck into a tree at night in a rural area. But on Oct. 28, the author ities changed their story and claimed the death was a suicide. Mayor Thomas imposed a 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew all weekend, and later called in state troopers in case of further confrontations. The rebellion in Leland followed by just one week an uprising in St. Petersburg, Fla., also spark ed by the police killing of a Black man. - END - (Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted if source is cited. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: ww@wwpublish.com. For subscription info send message to: ww-info@wwpublish.com. Web: http://www.workers.org) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: All Subject: MLK Date: Sat Jan 04 06:49:44 CST 1997 Message number: 52 Reply to message number: unavailable The Martin Luther King You Don't See On TV By [1]Jeff Cohen and [2]Norman Solomon [3]Media Beat, January 4, 1995 It's become a TV ritual: Every year in mid-January, around the time of [4]Martin Luther King's birthday, we get perfunctory network news reports about "the slain civil rights leader." The remarkable thing about this annual review of [5]King's life is that several years -- his last years -- are totally missing, as if flushed down a memory hole. What TV viewers see is a closed loop of familiar file footage: [6]King battling desegregation in Birmingham (1963); reciting his dream of racial harmony at the rally in Washington (1963); marching for voting rights in Selma, Alabama (1965); and finally, lying dead on the motel balcony in Memphis (1968). An alert viewer might notice that the chronology jumps from 1965 to 1968. Yet [7]King didn't take a sabbatical near the end of his life. In fact, he was speaking and organizing as diligently as ever. Almost all of those speeches were filmed or taped. But they're not shown today on TV. Why? It's because national news media have never come to terms with what [8]Martin Luther King Jr. stood for during his final years. In the early 1960s, when [9]King focused his challenge on legalized racial discrimination in the South, most major media were his allies. Network TV and national publications graphically showed the police dogs and bullwhips and cattle prods used against Southern blacks who sought the right to vote or to eat at a public lunch counter. But after passage of civil rights acts in 1964 and 1965, [10]King began challenging the nation's fundamental priorities. He maintained that civil rights laws were empty without "human rights" -- including economic rights. For people too poor to eat at a restaurant or afford a decent home, [11]King said, anti-discrimination laws were hollow. Noting that a majority of Americans below the poverty line were white, [12]King developed a class perspective. He decried the huge income gaps between rich and poor, and called for "radical changes in the structure of our society" to redistribute wealth and power. "True compassion," [13]King declared, "is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring." By 1967, [14]King had also become the country's most prominent opponent of the [15]Vietnam War, and a staunch critic of overall U.S. foreign policy, which he deemed militaristic. In his "Beyond Vietnam" speech delivered at New York's Riverside Church on April 4, 1967 -- a year to the day before he was murdered -- [16]King called the United States "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today." From Vietnam to South Africa to Latin America, [17]King said, the U.S. was "on the wrong side of a world revolution." [18]King questioned "our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America," and asked why the U.S. was suppressing revolutions "of the shirtless and barefoot people" in the Third World, instead of supporting them. In foreign policy, [19]King also offered an economic critique, complaining about "capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries." You haven't heard the "Beyond Vietnam" speech on network news retrospectives, but national media heard it loud and clear back in 1967 -- and loudly denounced it. [20]Time magazine called it "demagogic slander that sounded like a script for Radio Hanoi." The [21]Washington Post patronized that "[22]King has diminished his usefulness to his cause, his country, his people." In his last months, [23]King was organizing the most militant project of his life: the Poor People's Campaign. He crisscrossed the country to assemble "a multiracial army of the poor" that would descend on Washington -- engaging in nonviolent civil disobedience at the Capitol, if need be -- until Congress enacted a poor people's bill of rights. Reader's Digest warned of an "insurrection." [24]King's economic bill of rights called for massive government jobs programs to rebuild America's cities. He saw a crying need to confront a Congress that had demonstrated its "hostility to the poor" -- appropriating "military funds with alacrity and generosity," but providing "poverty funds with miserliness." How familiar that sounds today, more than a quarter-century after [25]King's efforts on behalf of the poor people's mobilization were cut short by an assassin's bullet. As 1995 gets underway, in this nation of immense wealth, the White House and Congress continue to accept the perpetuation of poverty. And so do most mass media. Perhaps it's no surprise that they tell us little about the last years of [26]Martin Luther King's life. _________________________________________________________________ [27]Jeff Cohen and [28]Norman Solomon are syndicated columnists and authors of "[29]Adventures in Medialand: Behind the News, Beyond the Pundits" ([30]Common Courage Press). _________________________________________________________________ [ [31]Next | [32]Previous | [33]Media Beat | [34]FAIR | [35]Mail/Suggest | [36]Index ] References 1. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/c.html#Cohen, Jeff 2. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/s.html#Solomon, Norman 3. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/media-beat/ 4. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 5. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 6. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 7. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 8. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 9. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 10. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 11. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 12. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 13. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 14. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 15. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/v.html#Vietnam War 16. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 17. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 18. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 19. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 20. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/t.html#Time|i 21. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/w.html#Washington Post|i 22. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 23. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 24. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 25. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 26. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/k.html#King, Martin Luther, Jr. 27. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/c.html#Cohen, Jeff 28. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/s.html#Solomon, Norman 29. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/a.html#Adventures in Medialand: Behind the News, Beyond the Pundits|i 30. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/c.html#Common Courage Press 31. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/media-beat/950111.html 32. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/media-beat/941214.html 33. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/media-beat/ 34. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/ 35. http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/mernst/fair/send-comment.html 36. http://www.igc.apc.org/fair/index/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: MLK Date: Sat Jan 04 08:14:51 CST 1997 Message number: 53 Reply to message number: 52 BT> Almost all of those speeches were filmed or taped. But they're not BT> shown today on TV. BT> BT> Why? BT> BT> But after passage of civil rights acts in 1964 and 1965, [10]King The Civil Rights Act was drafted in 1963 and passed in early 1964. BT> began challenging the nation's fundamental priorities. He maintained BT> that civil rights laws were empty without "human rights" -- including BT> economic rights. For people too poor to eat at a restaurant or afford BT> a decent home, [11]King said, anti-discrimination laws were hollow. BT> There is no secret about this. He was amiddle-class Baptist minister who preached this line in his sermons long before he was ever drafted into the Civil Rights Movement. He always did think that poverty was the greatest discriminator. BT> By 1967, [14]King had also become the country's most prominent BT> opponent of the [15]Vietnam War, and a staunch critic of overall U.S. BT> foreign policy, which he deemed militaristic. In his "Beyond Vietnam" BT> speech delivered at New York's Riverside Church on April 4, 1967 -- a This is no secret either. Read *Letters from a Birmingham Jail* (1961). BT> As 1995 gets underway, in this nation of immense wealth, the White BT> House and Congress continue to accept the perpetuation of poverty. And BT> so do most mass media. Perhaps it's no surprise that they tell us BT> little about the last years of [26]Martin Luther King's life. BT> Maybe I am biased, because I was there at the time. I heard King personally several times, and followed this line of reasoning. Not only that, but this is also what *I* was taught in the Baptist church as a child. I suppose there are those who haven't heard of it. Why aren't they reading about it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: All Subject: Flag burning... Date: Tue Feb 04 15:54:22 CST 1997 Message number: 54 Reply to message number: unavailable Ok, you can probably guess the from the subject heading what this is about... I'm interested in getting some of your thoughts about flag burning for a debate some of my (school) lunch table friends and I are having. Right... wrong? Freedom of speech... or going too far? As this is a fairly liberal group, I might guess the tone of the responses, but I'll just wait and see. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Specter Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Tue Feb 04 23:35:26 CST 1997 Message number: 55 Reply to message number: 54 S> I'm interested in getting some of your thoughts about flag burning for a S> debate some of my (school) lunch table friends and I are having. S> S> Freedom of speech... or going too far? S> Both. There are a few selected examples where burning a flag was an effective way to protest, and the Supreme Court has already ruled that it is Constitutional. However, I am an old protester from way back, and my take on it is that burning flags or otherwise disrespecting them is counterproductive. So many people are angered by doing this that they do not listen sympathetically to your issue, and this, of course, was your reason for the protest in the first place. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Specter Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Wed Feb 05 11:30:00 CST 1997 Message number: 56 Reply to message number: 54 S> Ok, you can probably guess the from the subject heading what this is about.. S> I'm interested in getting some of your thoughts about flag burning for a S> debate some of my (school) lunch table friends and I are having. As far as I'm concerned, a flag is a peice of cotton, so there's no reason why it should be illegal, fuck the supposed "sentimental value" attached. It's almost like Chomsky was saying, only in two places in the world would people not laugh at you for saying that you're anti- their country -- in the US and Russia. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Specter Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Wed Feb 05 17:18:28 CST 1997 Message number: 57 Reply to message number: 54 S> Ok, you can probably guess the from the subject heading what this is about.. S> I'm interested in getting some of your thoughts about flag burning for a S> debate some of my (school) lunch table friends and I are having. If it's your flag, go for it. Just don't be surprised if some pissed-off veteran comes up and whacks you across the head with a baseball bat when you're done. Actually, since so damned few flags are bruned anyways, it makes more sense just to leave it all alone. If you try to pass a constitutional amendment, more flags will be burned in protest than if you never did anything ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: SPECTER Subject: Flag burning... Date: Wed Feb 05 20:35:27 CST 1997 Message number: 58 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Specter to All <=- The roof. The roof. The roof is on fire. Let's toss a couple of flags in! Sp> Ok, you can probably guess the from the subject heading what this is Sp> about... I'm interested in getting some of your thoughts about flag Sp> burning for a debate some of my (school) lunch table friends and I are Sp> having. Sp> Right... wrong? Sp> Freedom of speech... or going too far? Right? Wrong? This should apply to each individual case. During the Gulf War I saw on tv some protesters take an American Flag and pour black oil onto it. The symbolism was beautiful. "Blood was being shed for oil!". I have also seen individuals torch a flag for no sound purpose but the Ra! Ra! that goes with unthinking jocks. Nothing but a waste of a good flag. The flag is nothing but a symbol. A symbol for freedom, of independence, of nationhood, & of sacrifice. There is danger in granting special protection to this symbol. It is very possible that the flag, a symbol of freedom, could be used in a way to deny the actual freedom that it stands for. What would we need with the actual freedoms when we could just fly the "Flag of Freedom" over a concentration camp or burn books with Old Glory flapping high above the smoke. By making the flag a protected sacred symbol of freedom we could very well be handing those who hate actual freedom a tool that can put a stamp of approval on repression. Just wave the flag and everything is ok when it really isn't. ... A shot of reality never hurt anyone ³ÄÄÄIJþ²þ²þð=ÄÄÄÄ, ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Specter Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Fri Feb 07 15:54:56 CST 1997 Message number: 59 Reply to message number: 54 S> As this is a fairly liberal group, I might guess the tone of the responses, S> but I'll just wait and see. Some are offended by it because they see it as representative of "the ultimate liberty", and if you desecrate it you must want to oppress them in some way. Others, like me, view it as a symbol representing the country at it's current point in time and what the country stands for - the good, the bad, and the oh so ugly. America's the land of the free - don't say anything against it. Ironic, no? *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPECTER To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Sat Feb 08 09:43:59 CST 1997 Message number: 60 Reply to message number: 59 BT> Some are offended by it because they see it as representative of "the ultim BT> liberty", and if you desecrate it you must want to oppress them in some way BT> Others, like me, view it as a symbol representing the country at it's curre BT> point in time and what the country stands for - the good, the bad, and the BT> so ugly. BT> BT> America's the land of the free - don't say anything against it. Ironic, no I'm not going to take the time to respond to everyone, because I agree with you on almost every point. But I would like to thank you for throwing a little something into my lunch debate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THROCKMORTON To: SPECTER Subject: Flag burning... Date: Tue Feb 11 11:06:25 CST 1997 Message number: 61 Reply to message number: unavailable S>Ok, you can probably guess the from the subject heading what this is about.. >I'm interested in getting some of your thoughts about flag burning for a >debate some of my (school) lunch table friends and I are having. S>Right... wrong? >Freedom of speech... or going too far? S>As this is a fairly liberal group, I might guess the tone of the responses, >but I'll just wait and see. Freedom of expression gives you the right to burn the flag as a form of protest; the same way it gives me the right to hit you upside the head with a baseball bat for doing it. At one time wasn't there the concept of "fighting words?" Words or actions that were of such a nature that it was expected they would elicit a violent response and the response was to be expected when using those words. --- þ OLX 1.53 þ Don't rush me. I'll face today tommorrow ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: THROCKMORTON Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Tue Feb 11 19:10:04 CST 1997 Message number: 62 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Throckmorton : Th> At one time wasn't there the concept of "fighting words?" Words or Th> actions that were of such a nature that it was expected they would Th> elicit a violent response and the response was to be expected when Th> using those words. I don't think that such an exception would pass judicial muster, any more than the excuse that "she was asking for it" justifies sexual assault. That being said however, I dare imagine that procecutors and juries might not judge the guy who beat up the flag-burner as harshly as they might judge the neighborhood pimp ... ... Let no good deed go unpunished. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Flag burning... Date: Sat Feb 15 11:15:16 CST 1997 Message number: 63 Reply to message number: 62 DR> Th> At one time wasn't there the concept of "fighting words?" Words or DR> Th> actions that were of such a nature that it was expected they would DR> Th> elicit a violent response and the response was to be expected when DR> Th> using those words. DR> DR> I don't think that such an exception would pass judicial muster, any DR> more than the excuse that "she was asking for it" justifies sexual assault. There's your problem, then. The law is supposed to be "just and fair", but justice and fairness only encourages people to push the envelope, to find out how much they can get away with. Still, the law doesn't actually _prevent_ anything--sure, the "she was asking for it" defense won't stand up in court, but that doesn't mean that a woman in a tight one-piece outfit won't be attacked. Just because you're on the right side of the law doesn't mean that your nose won't hurt when some redneck you've just insulted breaks it for you. Sure, there are laws, but there are also mores, guidelines to right behavior. Things only get worse when conservatives claim that mores should be made into laws... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: All Subject: My Dream Date: Tue Apr 01 15:08:41 CST 1997 Message number: 64 Reply to message number: unavailable My American dream is to have social security checks one day... With the way things are looking now it's not going to happen. I think a few DRASTIC changes must take place: No SS for immagrents. Now this one has raised many quesions... I think that if people want to come to our country they need to work just as our ancestors did (The majority of us our immagrents) They should not be allowed to sit on SS until they are old enough to retire. I don't give a krap who you are... No SS for more then 1 year! Those of you who disagree with this one are diluted... Has anyone else noticed the Minnesoplis papers weigh more then a damn phonebook?!?!? A very good portion of those are jobs. These are only a few of the things that need to change. --- þ [TN71] Area 51 bbs * xxxxxxxxxxxxxx * "The Truth is Here" |13--------- Edited by SysOp - BBS ads are still not allowed in the message areas.. --------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Tue Apr 01 16:31:53 CST 1997 Message number: 65 Reply to message number: 64 FE> My American dream is to have social security checks one day... With the FE> way things are looking now it's not going to happen. FE> FE> I think a few DRASTIC changes must take place: Yes. First, you have to finish your education -- learn to spell and a little government action. . . FE> No SS for immagrents. FE> That is spelled, "immigrants," if it is the word I think you mean. FE> Now this one has raised many quesions... I think that if people want to FE> come to our country they need to work just as our ancestors did (The FE> majority of us our immagrents) They should not be allowed to sit on SS FE> until they are old enough to retire. FE> If by SS, you mean Social Security, apparently you do not know that it is necessary to have worked to get social security. It is available ONLY after you retire, or in very specific cases, as a disability income. There are a few children who receive it because their parents have died or become disabled, and again, it depends on having worked first. The amount of social security income a person receives is based on his salary in the last ten years of employment. FE> I don't give a krap who you are... No SS for more then 1 year! FE> So you think that people should be eligible to retire and receive social security retirement at 65 and then go back to work for the rest of their lives at 66? FE> Those of you who disagree with this one are diluted... Has anyone else FE> noticed the Minnesoplis papers weigh more then a damn phonebook?!?!? A FE> very good portion of those are jobs. FE> I think you mean "deluded," Unless, indeed, you think we drink a lot and therefore are " diluted." Do you qualify for any of those jobs that you are caliming exist? A lot of people don't. FE> These are only a few of the things that need to change. Yup. Agreed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Thu Apr 03 11:39:29 CST 1997 Message number: 66 Reply to message number: 64 FE> No SS for immagrents. I don't know much about social security for immigrants, but since you chose not to go into further detail, I'll spare myself the necessity of defending myself. Here's some food for thought however. We are humans. We live on this planet that most of us call Earth. Earth doesn't know boundary lines. Does a person living in "Mexico" deserve to live a worse life than a human living in "USA" ? Maybe they deserve some help. They are only human. FE> Now this one has raised many quesions... I think that if people FE> come to our country they need to work just as our ancestors did FE> majority of us our immagrents) They should not be allowed to sit on FE> until they are old enough to retire. All on this continent are immigrants, it's simple as that -- not even most. They try to work, but can they all get jobs? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Thu Apr 03 16:01:06 CST 1997 Message number: 67 Reply to message number: 66 TI> I don't know much about social security for immigrants, but since you TI> chose not to go into further detail, I'll spare myself the necessity of TI> defending myself. Here's some food for thought however. We are humans. We l TI> on this planet that most of us call Earth. Earth doesn't know boundary line TI> Does a person living in "Mexico" deserve to live a worse life than a human TI> living in "USA" ? Maybe they deserve some help. They are only human. Okay... Now you sound like someone who wants the whole world to work perfect. We all do but it's just not possible... No they don't deserve to live any worse then us but that's what they have... That's what they have made for themselves, They do not need to run from their problems that will only make it worse, they need to stick where they are and fix what is wrong. I guess I am speaking mainly of the RUSH of mexicans into the US... It's crazy... and it's making me that way also. I think there should be a few laws right out front before they are ever even allowed in... Know english and speak it well. No more then 500 children per family. No welfare first 5 years of citizenship Now, the major rush of illegal immagrents from mexico comes from the texas area, something severe needs to be done there... They are currently KILLING people who try to cross over. I think that's what needs to be done, it's sad to say and I hate to admit it but it does... We cannot let out country turn into a land of chaos and let anyone who wants in the country in! I think they need to make something like a "Belin Wall" now that term does not make a lot of sense since that wall was used to keep people in and now out. Illegal immagrents are causing SERIOUS problems in the US and other countries. They come over here thinking jobs are easy to get and pay good when the fact is the job's are becoming less numorous and paying less. I think any company that knowingly lets illegal immagrents work for them should be wiped out... And I mean it, every last penny takin away... If we tighten up our rules we can let more immagrents into the country and still maintain complete and total order. This message is getting way too long so I had better stop meself now. Fatal Error ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFIRE To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Fri Apr 04 18:30:20 CST 1997 Message number: 68 Reply to message number: 67 FE> Okay... Now you sound like someone who wants the whole world to work perfec I believe that he was trying to point out the holes in your statement and its self contradictory voice. I am a second generation danish immigrant and I am fairly sure that if you better understood your heritage you would see that you are and immigrant too. FE> Know english and speak it well. FE> No more then 500 children per family. FE> No welfare first 5 years of citizenship This seems like the Jim Crow laws of southern seperatisism. Do you agree with those? In case you are not familiar with them they were established to keep "free" men of African decent from voting in the south. Your ideas here are interesting in that you have obviously though through what you would like to happen but there are some basic human rights that they violate. There is a right to life, just a trifle really. FE> people who try to cross over. I think that's what needs to be done, it's sa FE> to say and I hate to admit it but it does... We cannot let out country turn This made me gasp at first read, and cry at the second. How could anyone truly believe that this should be done. They are people. If you ever saw what they lived in, the horrible conditions of the children, their hope for a better life. You would want to leave if you were in that situaiton. They are shown the true american dream and taught to believe in it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Starfire Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sat Apr 05 14:57:34 CST 1997 Message number: 69 Reply to message number: 68 S> I believe that he was trying to point out the holes in your statement and it S> self contradictory voice. I am a second generation danish immigrant and I a S> fairly sure that if you better understood your heritage you would see that y S> are and immigrant too. I know I was just being sarcastic. S> This seems like the Jim Crow laws of southern seperatisism. Do you agree wi S> those? In case you are not familiar with them they were established to keep S> "free" men of African decent from voting in the south. Your ideas here are S> interesting in that you have obviously though through what you would like to S> happen but there are some basic human rights that they violate. There is a S> right to life, just a trifle really. I didn't know about those laws... I am not trying to say that black people should not vote... That idea was far beyond what mine is. S> This made me gasp at first read, and cry at the second. How could anyone S> truly believe that this should be done. They are people. If you ever saw S> what they lived in, the horrible conditions of the children, their hope for S> better life. You would want to leave if you were in that situaiton. They a S> shown the true american dream and taught to believe in it. You don't live in St. Paul do you? There are problems here also, I am not saying STOP THE DAMN IMAGRATION all I am trying to say is STOP THE DAMN *ILLEGAL* IMMIGRATION. I am well aware of the problems Mexico faces, I realize we are all from foreign ancestory (I am 90% the other 10% is Indian) Now, I think that if we stoped the illegal imagration then we could allow, afford, and welcome many more people into our country. We need to stop the people who come into our country without permission. Do you know what it is like to face illegal aliens every day? Are you aware as to just how much it's affecting all of us? (Legal and Illegal) I had a friend working at Valley Fair this past summer who had to direct 5 men to their new jobs. While they were filling out some forms they were asked for Green Cards, they each had one... That's fine... What's not fine is they all had the same name and number on them. They were still hired and the fact that they were not legally in the country did not even phaze my friend. When I mentioned the wall idea I was not trying to imply that nobody should be allowed in! I was trying to imply that only those who are accepted should be allowed in! I am not someone who is against all aliens just those that are illegal. Thanks for your reply it had some good text in it! Fatal Error ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sat Apr 05 15:47:17 CST 1997 Message number: 70 Reply to message number: 69 S> This seems like the Jim Crow laws of southern seperatisism. Do you agree wi S> those? In case you are not familiar with them they were established to keep FE> I didn't know about those laws... I am not trying to say that black people FE> should not vote... That idea was far beyond what mine is. FE> You are suggesting worse. You are saying that they should not only not vote, but that they shouldn't even be allowed in the country at all. I had not seen the Jim Crow Laws as a parallel, but Starfire is right -- there are some similarities. And the similarities are ugly. As a child in Appalachia, I grew up with and knew many things about those unfair laws, and fought long and hard myself to get rid of them. We do not need them again. Those laws were also written for illegal aliens. Aliens because they were never allowed to have citizenship until 1963, and illegal because someone else brought them here against their will. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFIRE To: Froggy Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sat Apr 05 17:50:17 CST 1997 Message number: 71 Reply to message number: 70 F> You are suggesting worse. You are saying that they should not only F> not vote, but that they shouldn't even be allowed in the country at all. I Not only that, should they try to enter our country, they should be shot? Just because you (Fatal Error) live in St. Paul your experiences are not that wich give you the right to be able to generalize about a vast group of people. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Froggy Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sun Apr 06 07:03:23 CDT 1997 Message number: 72 Reply to message number: 70 F> You are suggesting worse. You are saying that they should not only F> not vote, but that they shouldn't even be allowed in the country at all. I F> had not seen the Jim Crow Laws as a parallel, but Starfire is right -- there F> are some similarities. And the similarities are ugly. As a child in F> Appalachia, I grew up with and knew many things about those unfair laws, and F> fought long and hard myself to get rid of them. We do not need them again. F> Those laws were also written for illegal aliens. Aliens because they were F> never allowed to have citizenship until 1963, and illegal because someone el F> brought them here against their will. Froggy, you did not finish reading my message before you answered... I didn't say they should not be let into the country at all, only with permission (which as you know is generously done) My point was to stop ILLEGAL aliens from entering the country in order to allow more legal aliens to enter the country. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sun Apr 06 08:41:50 CDT 1997 Message number: 73 Reply to message number: 72 FE> Froggy, you did not finish reading my message before you answered... I didn FE> say they should not be let into the country at all, only with permission FE> (which as you know is generously done) My point was to stop ILLEGAL aliens FE> from entering the country in order to allow more legal aliens to enter the FE> country. I did read that whole message. You explained this point in a later explanation to Starfire. Here is my problem with it: whether you realize it or not, you are expressing racism. On another BBS, I argued laong and hard because a guy said that the local MacDanald's hired illegal aliens. Of course they don't. Some sleazy little businesses are saving some bucks by hiring illegals, but MacDonald's is too big and stands to lose too much if they get caught. Yuo can bet that they are checking green cards very carefully. So, when the guy saw several Chicanos working at a MacDonald's he was just assuming that they were illegal and making an issue of it. Here is another issue: which do you dislike the most, immigrants who come here to try to get a job and work, or slackers? It seems to me that the people who were trying to get a job with an illegal green card are of the first group. Some of my family were Irish immigrants, and we are very familiar with people who claimed that Irish were all alcoholic and lazy and then put up signs that said, "Job openings. No Irish need apply." I nthink that this country needs more peope who are willing to work, and fewer rich, spoiled Americans who want to get as much money as they can with as little work as possible. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sun Apr 06 15:49:01 CDT 1997 Message number: 74 Reply to message number: 67 FE> I think they need to make something like a "Belin Wall" now that term does FE> make a lot of sense since that wall was used to keep people in and now out. FE> Illegal immagrents are causing SERIOUS problems in the US and other countri FE> They come over here thinking jobs are easy to get and pay good when the fac FE> is the job's are becoming less numorous and paying less. I think any compan FE> that knowingly lets illegal immagrents work for them should be wiped out... FE> And I mean it, every last penny takin away... If we tighten up our rules we FE> can let more immagrents into the country and still maintain complete and to FE> order. This message is getting way too long so I had better stop meself now You know, I think this is exactly the point. Most immigrants don't sneak across the border for benefits. They come here for work. If the jobs were not there, if unscrupulous businessmen didn't hire them, they're would be no reason to sneak over the border in the first place. But since they do, we hire them. And for that, we get cheap clothes and veggies and fruit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Froggy Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Mon Apr 07 12:13:30 CDT 1997 Message number: 75 Reply to message number: 73 F> then put up signs that said, "Job openings. No Irish need apply." I nthink F> that this country needs more peope who are willing to work, and fewer rich, F> spoiled Americans who want to get as much money as they can with as little F> work as possible. Whether you want to admit it or not you are no longer Irish, You are American... You were American the day you signed those papers or took that oath or whatever you yourself had to do... I am not racist or even trying to imply it, I did not look at a bunch of Mexicans working at Valley Fair and say "They gotta be illegal" I was told that they were in fact illegal. McDonalds would loose millions if they were caught hiring illegal aliens, I don't know who this other guy was but it sounds almost like you think I have the same view's as he does when in fact I have far different ones. I am partly Irish myself, along with French, German, Italian, etc, etc, etc,. My parents were muts or something... I dunno, I have a little bit of everything in me (except for Polish and Mexican, or any asian or african) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Mon Apr 07 12:16:16 CDT 1997 Message number: 76 Reply to message number: 74 DR> But since they do, we hire them. And for that, we get cheap clothes and DR> veggies and fruit. You miss the idea I try to make, the people who really want the damn jobs are the ones who are willing to apply to come to our country! They are willing to wait and go hungry yet another day before they come to this new land and start all over again. They are not the lazy ones! The ones who sneak across are! They are just walking over!!! I live in the southern area of Texas for about 6 years total, I know how it works, I've seen it happen... BTW, I think it was you who wrote that one logon display screen message... VERY impressive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Mon Apr 07 14:29:15 CDT 1997 Message number: 77 Reply to message number: 75 F> then put up signs that said, "Job openings. No Irish need apply." I nthink FE> Whether you want to admit it or not you are no longer Irish, You are FE> American... You were American the day you signed those papers or took that FE> oath or whatever you yourself had to do... FE> I never did claim to be Irish. Like you, I have many different ethnic groups in my background. I did not have to do anything ti be an American except be born, because I am a birthright citizen. But there were many people in my family, as recently as my father, who regardless of his citizenship, was forced to live in poverty because people regarded him as Irish and refused to hire his parents. FE> I am not racist or even trying to imply it, I did not look at a bunch of You may not think you are racist, but you are supporting stands that are. Here is an example: There was a story over the weekend about a girl who is 17, a senior in high school, n honor student, and a scholarship winner. She was brought here from El Salvador as a little child. Her parents have both been granted political asylum under the new immigrant act, because they ran from an oppressive regime and would probably be murdered if they returned. The girl was only a child and therefore cannot claim the asylum, so she is scheduled to be deported in a few months. Is this fair? Is this the kind of society you want? I don't think so. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FATAL ERROR To: Froggy Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Tue Apr 08 17:06:51 CDT 1997 Message number: 78 Reply to message number: 77 F> both been granted political asylum under the new immigrant act, because they F> ran from an oppressive regime and would probably be murdered if they returne F> The girl was only a child and therefore cannot claim the asylum, so she is F> scheduled to be deported in a few months. Is this fair? Is this the kind o F> society you want? I don't think so. (Don't even reply on this part) Well, Yeah... Had her parents been smart enough to apply for the citezenship before they got into the country they would not have the problem. (End) I think if I was them I would stay and fight it out, or then again I sure can see why they did what they did. You are overlooking one fact here... If I was to say "All criminals should have to do jail time for their crimes, Which is already happening) You would have no problems with this... The thing that makes the 2 issues the same is one simple fact... They are both illegal!!!!! What these people have done is betrayed their country when it was in need and fled to another... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Wed Apr 09 00:59:17 CDT 1997 Message number: 79 Reply to message number: 78 F> The girl was only a child and therefore cannot claim the asylum, so she is F> scheduled to be deported in a few months. Is this fair? Is this the kind o F> society you want? I don't think so. FE> FE> (Don't even reply on this part) FE> Well, Yeah... Had her parents been smart enough to apply for the citezenshi FE> before they got into the country they would not have the problem. Yeah. Should they fill out and submit the papers befor or after the soldiers were finished raping theri mothers or after they burned down their house? FE> I think if I was them I would stay and fight it out, or then again I sure c FE> see why they did what they did. FE> This is a decision a lot of people must make. The reality is that we never hear about a lot of the ones who stayed, because they are murdered and gone, and their belongings seized. This was certainly true in El Salvador. We only know as much as we do about what was happening because of the people who escaped and were able to tell us. FE> You are overlooking one fact here... If I was to say "All criminals should FE> have to do jail time for their crimes, Which is already happening) You woul FE> have no problems with this... The thing that makes the 2 issues the same is FE> one simple fact... They are both illegal!!!!! What these people have done i I certinly would have trouble with it. All things that are defined as crimes are not moral or even sensible. It is illegal in many countries to criticize the government, and in at least on American city, it is law that all horses and other stock animals must wear pants. Just because something is law does not make it right. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: All Subject: Boston Tea Party Date: Tue Apr 15 12:56:41 CDT 1997 Message number: 80 Reply to message number: unavailable On the evening news, they discussed a group of Republican Congressmen who are taking advantage of Tax Day to advertise the bill the want to pas that abolishes the IRS. They pitched a cooler full of tax returns into Boston Harbor and said that it was like the Boston Tea Party. Wait -- the Boston Tea Party was about taxation without representation, and these *are* our representatives. Or I thought they were. Are they trying to tell us something? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Fatal Error Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sat Apr 19 03:53:26 CDT 1997 Message number: 81 Reply to message number: 66 FE> worse then us but that's what they have... That's what they have made for FE> themselves, They do not need to run from their problems that will only make FE> worse, they need to stick where they are and fix what is wrong. And I take it the problems in Mexico don't aren't rooted from the oppresion of conquistadors, and most definitely don't have anything to do with a corrupt government, somewhat accountable for by a huge drug market in the US that Mexicans and Colombians are foolish not to exploit? Definitely not! FE> I guess I am speaking mainly of the RUSH of mexicans into the US... It's FE> crazy... and it's making me that way also. I think there should be a few la FE> right out front before they are ever even allowed in... Even more reason for us to help the Mexican government. If we help them and they can get rid of their corruption, and living conditions are more favorable there, will so many people want to come here? Probably not. FE> Know english and speak it well. You seem to be forgetting that states such as California, Texas, and New Mexico were spanish speaking sections of Mexico and then captured by the US, they have a good enough right to speak Spanish in the southern sections of the US. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Sat Apr 19 04:28:51 CDT 1997 Message number: 82 Reply to message number: 81 FE> Know english and speak it well. TI> TI> You seem to be forgetting that states such as California, Texas, and Ne TI> Mexico were spanish speaking sections of Mexico and then captured by the US TI> they have a good enough right to speak Spanish in the southern sections of TI> US. Not only that, but people who know English and speak it well also now that it should be capitalized. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: FROGGY Subject: Re: Boston Tea Party Date: Mon Apr 21 17:03:15 CDT 1997 Message number: 83 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Froggy : Fr> tax returns into Boston Harbor and said that it was like the Boston Fr> Tea Party. Wait -- the Boston Tea Party was about taxation without Fr> representation, and these *are* our representatives. Or I thought Fr> they were. Are they trying to tell us something? That taxes are evil, and so is the IRS. The same IRS, incidentally, which continues to audit more low-income people than high-income people under the pretenses of collecting lost revene. Go figure. ... Clinton supporters know how the American Indians felt. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: Froggy Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Tue Apr 22 13:21:16 CDT 1997 Message number: 84 Reply to message number: 82 TI> You seem to be forgetting that states such as California, Texas, and Ne TI> Mexico were spanish speaking sections of Mexico and then captured by the US TI> they have a good enough right to speak Spanish in the southern sections of TI> US. F> F> Not only that, but people who know English and speak it well also n F> that it should be capitalized. Superiority at any cost, eh? That really came to mind when I was walking around many different areas of Minneapolis last weekend, and noticed how different you would be treated whenever you opened your mouth, simply based upon your mannerisms of speech, you could be either a prude or targeted by your mastery of proper english. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Tue Apr 22 14:22:11 CDT 1997 Message number: 85 Reply to message number: 84 F> Not only that, but people who know English and speak it well also n F> that it should be capitalized. TI> TI> Superiority at any cost, eh? That really came to mind when I was walkin TI> around many different areas of Minneapolis last weekend, and noticed how TI> different you would be treated whenever you opened your mouth, simply based TI> upon your mannerisms of speech, you could be either a prude or targeted by TI> your mastery of proper english. Hardly. I have worked as a volunteer in battered women's shelters, lived in homeless shelters, blended in in other places. I was pointing out that there is no point in holding other people (immigrants) to a standard that you do not meet yourself. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: FROGGY Subject: Boston Tea Party Date: Tue Apr 22 16:58:44 CDT 1997 Message number: 86 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Froggy to All <=- Fr> On the evening news, they discussed a group of Republican Fr> Congressmen who are taking advantage of Tax Day to advertise the bill Fr> the want to pas that abolishes the IRS. They pitched a cooler full of Fr> tax returns into Boston Harbor and said that it was like the Boston Fr> Tea Party. Wait -- the Boston Tea Party was about taxation without Fr> representation, and these *are* our representatives. Or I thought Fr> they were. Are they trying to tell us something? Hey. Maybe they realize deep down that they are just a tiny minority among the population? Short sighted with blinders on. They wish to end the IRS but offer no other system to collect taxes. For thr rich it is simple because trickle down economics apply. The rich may (they don't have to) create jobs therefore they should not be compelled to pay any taxes. What about the middle class and poor? The republican religious agenda calls for potentially billions of taxpayer dollars for private schools, vouchers, and religious based charities. Let's not forget the military. "We have a hollow military" can be heard from republicans everywhere. Trillions could be wasted here. Taxes are a necessity to fund these idealogical programs. The rich aren't going to pay. This puts the burden on the working class. Every penny will count here. If the IRS is gone who will collect the taxes from us? Men with guns? ... Defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign & elected! ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Sandman Subject: Re: Boston Tea Party Date: Wed Apr 23 03:07:29 CDT 1997 Message number: 87 Reply to message number: 86 S> Fr> tax returns into Boston Harbor and said that it was like the Boston S> Fr> Tea Party. Wait -- the Boston Tea Party was about taxation without S> Short sighted with blinders on. They wish to end the IRS but offer S> no other system to collect taxes. I have wondered about this too. Most of them seem to think that it is OK to collect taxes from the other guy as loong as they and their friends are left alone. S> What about the middle class and poor? S> The republican religious agenda calls for potentially billions of S> taxpayer dollars for private schools, vouchers, and S> religious based charities. S> Let's not forget the military. "We have a hollow military" can be S> heard from republicans everywhere. Trillions could be wasted here. S> Taxes are a necessity to fund these idealogical programs. S> The rich aren't going to pay. This puts the burden on the working S> class. Every penny will count here. The middle class and the poor pay for these, silly. S> If the IRS is gone who will collect the taxes from us? S> Men with guns? S> Employers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Froggy Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Wed Apr 23 16:22:20 CDT 1997 Message number: 88 Reply to message number: 72 F> Here is another issue: which do you dislike the most, immigrants w F> come here to try to get a job and work, or slackers? It seems to me that th I'm going to do my sacrifice as an American citizen by becoming a hobo. This will free up jobs for the working man with a family to support. Yes, yes it will. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: My Dream Date: Wed Apr 23 20:03:49 CDT 1997 Message number: 89 Reply to message number: 88 F> Here is another issue: which do you dislike the most, immigrants w F> come here to try to get a job and work, or slackers? It seems to me that th BT> BT> I'm going to do my sacrifice as an American citizen by becoming a hobo. Th BT> will free up jobs for the working man with a family to support. Yes, yes i BT> will. BT> Hehehe. Then the working man can give you a couple of onions for your stew. :)