Home ->
Apollo BBS ->
Apollo Archive Index ->
June 1991 -> June 23 - 27
Apollo BBS Archive - June 23 - 27, 1991
Mail from Apro Poet
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 19:01:27
"In the 1960's studies of radiometrically dated lavas
yielded a consistent log of past polarity changes, including
no fewer than nine major reversals in the past 3.6 million
years ((one per 400,000 years)), the most recent of which
occurred 730,000 years ago." Scientific American, May, 1988
Looks to me like we're overdue.
However, there are massive species extinctions every 26
million years, but we're just now approaching the middle of
that cycle. ((Sky & Telescope, March, 1990, p.76))
So eat, drink, and be merry for in 13 Megayears ye shall die!
I would hope mankind could shape up without a planetary-scale
disaster.
[A]bort, [C]ontinue, [I]nsty-reply or [Z]ap:Continue
Mail from Melissa Dee
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 22:59:45
[A]bort, [N]ew only, [R]ead or [S]kip:Read
HI there! I saw Christian and her baby this evening. Wow, that was weird.
I went up to Ianuzzi's this evening with Beau and expected to see Nick there
but was really surprized when Christian, Rosy(I think that was her name) and
Christian's friend showed up. A nice surprize!
I don't think I knew that Jasmine had another baby, around the same time as
Christian. That was also a surprize.
Hope your teeth are better.
[A]bort, [C]ontinue, [I]nsty-reply or [Z]ap:Insty-reply
Enter a line containing only an <*> to stop
1:Rosy, Christian's baby was born 2 and a half days after Katrina,(Jasmine's
2:baby).
3:
4:My animal teeth are better, thanks.
5:
Mail from Todd Reese
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 03:45:33
I see you're back on Apollo. What happened to you? See you next month.
[A]bort, [C]ontinue, [I]nsty-reply or [Z]ap:Insty-reply
Enter a line containing only an <*> to stop
1:Hi Todd, it's good to hear from you. How'se it goin?
2:
3:Do you think I am Jesus?
4:
5: Rod
6:end
Mail to Apro Poet
Date: 06/28/91 Time: 00:34:09
[A]bort, [N]ew only, [R]ead or [S]kip:Read
Good message. Not a particle is lost in the whole of the universe.
Galaxies come and go, no big thing, and not a single particle is lost.
Nothing dies, only changes. Time does not exist.
Thanks for the message. I hope to meet you one day.
[A]bort, [C]ontinue or [Z]ap:Continue
Public Bulletin Board command:$C
Message: 75957
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff/Afghanistan
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 16:05:01
If it hadn't been for the US supplying the rebels with Stinger missles to
shoot down those gunships --- they would have lost. BTW, have the rebels
taken over the gov't there yet ?
Message: 75958
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Felix/hedge
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 16:07:44
I thought my answer was too clever for words. I hope that I don't have to
point out to you that my "stone hedge" is that block wall that surrounds all
back yards on McCormick Ranch.
Message: 75959
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Lies, Damn Lies, and
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 16:13:24
Statistics. The relatively high probability of an asteroid knocking you
off is because it is likely that everyone on earth would be killed directly
or indirectly because of the asteroid impact. Since relatively few people
fly (I SAID RELATIVELY ---) and airplanes crash more often the odds are
lower that the average person would be killed.
Message: 75960
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Drug Talk
Subject: Marijuana
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 18:18:08
The reports that there are no documented deaths because of marijuana
are very misleading. There is medical evidence that show marijuana if
smoked by someone with a mental problem, the problem will be worsened. The
smoke also contains many of the same poisons that other cigarettes do and
this causes pulmonary damage that can lead to death. Marijuana seems to set
off other illnesses that are the eventual cause of death, thus the illness
is the listed reason even though it was brought about by marijuana use.
Yea, it kills, some of you guys just don't want to believe it
because you can't handle life.. and you need a mind altering drug just like
the boozers who indulge.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 75961
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Politics
Subject: Robber Barons
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 18:40:30
Even among southern blacks, where all the military,
political, and economic force of the southern states, with
the acquiescence of the national government, was
concentrated on keeping them docile and working, there were
sporadic rebellions. In the cotton fields, blacks were
dispersed in their work, but in the sugar fields, work was
done in gangs, so there was opportunity for organized
action. In 1880, they had struck to get a dollar a day
instead of 75 cents, threatening to leave the state.
Strikers were arrested and jailed, but they walked the roads
along the sugar fields, carrying banners: "A DOLLAR A DAY OR
KANSAS." They were arrested again and again for
trespassing, and the strike was broken.
By 1886, however, the Knights of Labor was organizing in
the sugar fields, in the peak year of the Knights' influence.
The black workers, unable to feed and clothe their families
on their wages, often paid in store scrip, asked a dollar a
day once more. The following year, in the fall, close to
ten thousand sugar laborers went on strike, 90 percent of
them Negroes and members of the Knights. The militia
arrived and gun battles began.
Violence erupted in the town of THibodaux, which had
become a kind of refugee village where hundreds of strikers,
evicted from their plantation shacks, gathered, penniless
and ragged, carrying their bed clothing and babies. Their
refusal to work threatened the entire sugar crop, and
martial law was declared in Thibodaux. Henry and George
Cox, two Negro brothers, leaders in the Knights of Labor,
were arrested, locked up, then taken from their cells, and
never heard from again. On the night of November 22,
shooting broke out, each side claiming the other was at
fault; by noon the next day, thirty Negroes were dead or
dying, and hundreds wounded. Two whites were wounded. A
Negro newspaper in New Orleans wrote:
... Lame men and blind women shot; children and
hoary-headed grandsires rithlessly swept down! The
Negroes offered no resistance; they could not, as the
killing was unexpected. Those of them not killed took
to the woods, a majority of them finding refuge in this
city....
Citizens of the United States killed by a mob directed
by a State judge.... Laboring men seeking an advance
in wages, treated as if they were dogs! ...
At such times and upon such occasions, words of
condemnation fall like snow-flakes upon molten lead.
The blacks should defend their lives, and if needs must
die, die with their faces toward their persecutors
fighting for their homes, their children and their lawful rights.
Message: 75963
Author: John Cummings
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Return
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 20:10:55
Hello again, all! John Cummings is alive and well and living in
Arizona. In logging on, I notice that my $tatus has expired--see how time
flies when you don't pay attention? I intend to remedy that, come payday,
and be a member of the group once more.
Since I last read the Apollo stuff, two more grandchildren have been
born (there are now thirteen) and thank God, my son who was a sergeant in
the 3rd Infantry division is now home again with his wife and family and
Mustang GT with 5 liter engine and 5 speed tran.
He is fine, his wife is fine, his baby is fine, the Mustang is
somewhat the worse for wear.
When I get status again I will do it myself, but in the meantime,
Cliff, it would be nice if you'd drop in on the religious types of the
prayerful SIG and mention that John C. prays "thanks" very heartfelt.
See you all again soon. . . . John C.
Message: 75964
Author: $ Paul Carelli
Category: Drug Talk
Subject: Marijuana
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 20:55:54
It's true that marijuana smoke is about as harmful as regular cigarette
smoke. It's also true that many people who smoke marijuana do it only
because it is illegal and therefore expensive. If marijuana were legal it
would no doubt go down in price and then users could afford to say
put a quarter ounce in their salads rather than have to smoke every last bit
of THC out of the over priced plant. About the other effects Cliff
mentioned I can not comment.
Message: 75965
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: John C.
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 23:39:51
Welcome back, John!
Message: 75966
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Politics
Subject: Political correctnes
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 23:41:13
[That's "correctness" of course, only the subject line won't take more than
20 characters. 'Scuse the spelling erorr...]
The very term "political correctness" is one step short of an oxymoron. The
word "politics" connotes contention among groups, differing interests,
varying points of view, and opposing arguments. How can such a thing happen
if only one view is "correct"? To advance the concept of political
"correctness" is to deny all opposing views and to stifle independent
thought.
By definition, the term "political correctness" is itself incorrect. I hope
this phrase has a great future -- as a club of ridicule to hit "politically
correct" people over the head with.
Message: 75967
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger/gun reg.
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 23:41:40
Mandatory caller ID = mandatory gun registration? You have a point there,
Roger. As you see, I am completely consistent in my views on privacy.
Message: 75968
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller ID
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 23:42:41
Cliff, I do have a driver's license. I DON'T have my social security number
on it. A social security number is to designate a social security account.
To argue that the use of SSN in improper places justifies other
encroachments on privacy is pure defeatism. When things like the use of SSN
as a general-purpose identifier become so pervasive, it's time to call a
halt to such invasions of our privacy, not shrug our shoulders and give up.
As I said before, I don't have a real problem with a caller ID system that
allows blocking. The point is, some other systems proposed in other states
in the past have not provided such a feature. So I can't be accused ot
"spreading myths" until I've seen something definite and official that says
blocking IS provided for in the scheme proposed here. All I've heard here
is "blocking *could* be provided for...", not that it WILL. And the
telephone companies only changed their minds after public protest.
I doubt very much that a caller ID could be faked, as Apro suggested. That
part of the telephone signal "protocol" would be part of the switching
system, not under control of the caller. I would warn, though, that
telephone systems do suffer from noise on occasion, leading to wrong numbers
being called (as we all know), so I'm sure that caller IDs will be displayed
wrongly on occasion. A caller ID shouldn't be construed as completely
foolproof evidence of anything, e.g. the origin of a crank call. Two or
three the same in a row, though, would be pretty reliable evidence.
Message: 75969
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Child abuse
Date: 06/23/91 Time: 23:43:51
I can only conclude that the edition of Spock advising no correction of any
kind must have been a very early one, perhaps from 1947 or so. I haven't
found anything like that even in the 1957 edition, which does however have a
discussion about "strictness versus permissiveness" that speaks a lot of
common sense. It cautions against people "going overboard" with new
theories. It also points out that it's perfectly possible for parenting
styles to range from moderate strictness to moderate permissiveness, and
that both styles will work fine as long as children's basic needs are met
and parents are consistent. Finally, it urges parents to trust their own
convictions; and in fact, this message is there in the very first sentence
of every edition of the book I've seen: "You know more than you think you
do." This is a confidence-building message for parents.
Actually, Paul's ascribing the scalding of a child's bottom to "ignorance"
on the part of the mother wasn't as silly as it might have sounded to some
readers. Granted, any rational person can see that dumping a child's bottom
into scalding water is not "potty training", but an agonizing piece of sheer
cruelty. The problem is that the people who do such things are *not*
entirely rational. There are all kinds of twisted thinking going on in
their heads. Somehow this woman had convinced herself that (a) the kid is
perfectly capable of being potty trained at that age (which may or may not
have been true); (b) that if a kid doesn't do something you want, you can
always make him do it by applying more pressure; (c) that this is perfectly
fair, and you have a right to hurt the kid as much as is "necessary".
But the most important factor is (d), that she had obviously blocked from
her awareness the reality that she was seriously hurting the kid. This
isn't exactly "ignorance" in the usual meaning, because everybody "knows" in
a rational sense what things hurt and what things don't. But I do say she
had an ability to block the *awareness* of the kid's pain from her mind, or
to persuade herself that it didn't matter. And this is a mental trick that
people develop when they're forced to do the same with their own pain.
There is no doubt in my mind that the reason this woman developed that trick
is that she was raised in a similar way -- with cruelty.
If you took that woman and forced her to examine exactly what she did in the
light of every bit of common sense she has, she would have to admit that
yes, what she did wasn't "training"; it was sheer sadism; it was completely
unjustifiable, wrong, and for that matter not even effective. But she
wasn't deploying anything we would call "rationality" when she did it.
Certainly she was entirely ignorant of what constitutes good child raising;
but more important, she was ignorant of the workings of her own mind. She
would do her best to rationalize what she did; part of her mind would know
perfectly well that it was wrong, but another part would try to justify it.
In Massachusetts a while back, there was a little boy of four named Walter
whose father (or possibly his stepfather) tried to teach him to count. His
method of teaching him to count was to beat him every time he made a
mistake. Eventually he beat little Walter to death.
I have no doubt that some part of this man's mind would try to argue that he
was beating Walter for the child's own good. They put him in jail where he
won't be able to practice his childrearing methods for a long time.
In my view there are probably four forms of abuse practiced on children:
physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and also a subtle thing which
for want of a better word I would call "spiritual" abuse. Physical and
sexual abuse need no introduction. Emotional abuse consists of constantly
running a child down, insulting him, giving him the message that he is not
really wanted. Children in this situation can do nothing to please their
parents, so they give up trying to please anybody. Also, they get the
message that they are "bad". Usually they act accordingly.
What I think of as "spiritual abuse" consists in stunting a child's spirit
of independence, the desire to grow and learn and achieve things on their
own. One form of this is the stifling of free thought, discouraging a
child's questions and ridiculing or punishing a child for his opinions. I
call this "abuse" because it isn't intended seriously as positive help with
the child's thought processes. It's done solely to protect the parents'
sensibilities. And it damages the child's growth.
Parenting is a challenge, and perhaps the first requirement of a good parent
is to feel reasonable comfortable with himself or herself; to have
confidence and a kind of internal congruency, and reasonable answers to such
questions as "how does the world work?", "what's really important in life?",
"how should we behave towards others?" and "why are we here in the first
place?" And to live life in a manner consistent with those answers. These
things are fundamental, and children do their best to find out the answers.
They easily spot inconsistency, or lack of integrity, and that becomes a
challenge for the parent. A child's questions can be very stimulating,
because they are honest. But if an honest question becomes a threat, the
parental response can easily be abusive -- to suppress the threat.
Some parents will prevent a child from exploring new things that would be of
real value to the child. My daughter's babysitter has a pool where several
kids swim or splash about, under supervision of course. A brother and
sister who also go there are not allowed to go into the pool because their
stepfather says "they don't swim well enough". Not that they *have* to be
able to swim to go in the shallow end; but apart from that, how are they
supposed to learn to swim better if they can't go into the pool? All right,
perhaps their stepfather is just extra cautious. All the same, my
suspicions about his attitude were confirmed when I found out that they do
go into the pool they have at home, but are not even allowed to *try* to
swim. They are eight and nine.
Anybody with half a brain can see that the best way to protect a child from
drowning is to allow him to learn to swim. Parenting should encourage
children's growth; yet this stepfather is deliberately holding the children
back. Some people might call this "overprotectiveness"; but it does hurt
the kids, who not only fail to develop an important skill but also have to
sit resentfully on the sidelines watching their friends have fun.
I know you can't even mention such a thing in the same breath with a mother
who dumps her baby's bottom in boiling water. Yet all bad parenting has
this in common: that it is done ostensibly for the child's own good, while
what it really does is to protect the unreasonable fears and gross
inadequacies of the parents.
What should a parent know about childrearing? Psychology has this to teach:
that behavior is conditioned by reward and punishment, yet reward is much
more powerful than punishment. A human being faced with two choices of
action, A and B, will instinctively explore both of them. If he learns that
A is rewarded while B is punished, he will be conditioned to repeat A.
The punishment, however, isn't so important. If he learns that A is
rewarded while B gets no response, he might "reserve" B for another attempt
in the future, but he will have no encouragement for doing so. Instead, he
will continue to repeat A, which brings a reward. Humans are goal-oriented.
If on the other hand he learns that B is punished while A gets no response,
he will do his best to avoid B, *but* he will have no motivation to do A
instead. Eventually he will give up and not care too much what he does.
Good parenting, then, lies much more strongly in rewarding approved behavior
than in punishing disapproved behavior. But it does need something else
besides. A child has to be shown some mode of living, some method of
relating to people, that is demonstrably successful in bringing happiness.
The most powerful means of affecting a child's behavior is what psychology
calls "modeling" a desirable behavior. If parents are happy with one
another and behave with respect and love for one another, *and* demonstrate
that same respect and love for the child, why should a child see any
advantage in behaving differently? But far too many children are not
treated with respect, and do not see respect for others demonstrated by
their parents.
I have no argument with Paul's advocacy of parent education in the schools.
It won't solve the hardest problems, but at the very least, education can do
no harm, and there is always something useful to be learned from it. It
should give future parents not only practical guidance, but also some kind
of baseline for examining what constitutes good parenting, what children
need, what parents expect to get out of being parents, why families go
wrong, and what they could do to make things go right instead.
I'm not naive enough to think that the woman who scalded her baby's bottom
would change her behavior simply by being given information. A much more
radical change in her thought processes is needed, and one that she would
resist very strongly. Still, the value of education lies not only in giving
people information, but also in encouraging them to think for themselves.
If this woman had been exposed to some parenting class that tackled the
problem of abuse, she would have been forced into a head-on collision
between her own beliefs (many of them subconscious and distorted) and
reality. If it happened before or early in her teen years, she might well
have taken the first step toward understanding herself and her relationship
with her own parents, and towards correcting her twisted notions of the
universe.
Here we should understand why parenting classes are *not* part of school
curricula. Too many parents are threatened by them. Suppose you took a
group of children and said to them clearly and authoritatively: there is a
right way to do things, and a wrong way to do things. Knowledge like this
is easily verified, because the child himself is human and understands --
without necessarily being *aware* of his understanding -- the rules of human
behavior. He knows that it hurts if somebody beats him, or assaults him
sexually. He knows that he'd try harder to do certain things if he was
praised or rewarded for it, and that it makes no difference that he's
punished for doing other things if nothing he does ever makes his parents
happy with him.
Perhaps also he can see that his parents aren't happy with one another, or
they do things that they tell lies about; and perhaps, being a child, he can
see even more clearly than they can just what is wrong, and why they waste
their lives chasing false values such as money and status when what is most
important is love and honesty and emotional security. These things come
from the heart. But for a child to present such challenging realizations to
his parents -- that's far too threatening to many parents. So it will be
hard to get parenting classes adopted in schools -- or at least to get them
beyond such matters as the right temperature for a baby's bottle.
Especially when they're better off being breast-fed in the first place.
Message: 75977
Author: $ Todd Reese
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Greetings!
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 03:46:43
Aloha from Hawaii.
I'm still spending all of that Logbook money - har har har!
Message: 75978
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: John Cummings
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 05:54:53
WElcome back John! Where in the world have you dropped off to? Anyway, it's
good to see you back with us. 13 grandkids, eh? Well, counting only my own,
you've now got me beat by one. Of course, I could count my wife's 3 and
still be 2 up on you. Congratulations anyhow. I think we're out of the race
now. No more forthcoming, I HOPE! Now all I have to do is see how long it
takes for the first great grandchild. Since I have one 21 year old
grandaughter and a couple of 17s, I'm sort of holding my breath. God bless
you and yours.
Message: 75979
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 06:04:15
Excellent posts on child abuse, Gordon! Can't think of another word to say.
Message: 75980
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Doggy on ripping
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 06:54:28
He isn't ripping off the phone co. - never did - he had a mobile phone for
the business and 99% of the calls incoming and outgoing were done on that.
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 75981
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Rod on astroid
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 06:57:16
I think they just want to keep the people stirred up - negative thinking and
scared! I have NEVER heard of anyone killed by an astroid. Have you?
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 75982
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gordon on abuse
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 07:13:23
But I also ask you, if the school are going to teach prospective parents
what is the proper way to raise a child ... who is going to teach them what?
What IS the proper way? Who knows this?
You seem to agree with Pauley, right? Do you then agree that prospective
parents should be educated BEFORE they are allowed to have children?
Screened? Mandatory? You see, that is what he is advocating. *>>> ANN O.
<<<*
Message: 75983
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Yesterday ...
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 07:24:34
... we went for a long drive in the car - ended up in Prescott. The car has
been driving terriable for a couple of weeks. We had it tuned about a week
ago and still problems. My husband also tuned it, yet it was running pretty
bad - missing. We figured a major, expensive overhaul was probably in store
for us. We also noticed that when we left our house, we had 3/4 of a tank of
gas. When we got to Prescott, we only had 1/4 left and knew something must
be wrong because we ALWAYS make it up there and back on way less than a 1/2
tank!! Just as we were leaving town, we filled up and as SOON as he started
the engine, we both noticed it was running perfectly, smoothly and it did
drive great - like another car! I thought it was running so bad because of
the altitude. It was the gasoline we got HERE that was causing the car to
run so badly and to use almost double the gas. I had just filled up a couple
days before we left.
My question is ... if they put these additives in the gas to curb pollution
and it makes your car run so bad you need double the gas, where is that
saving on pollution?? This isn't even mentioning the mechanical work that
has to be done to get our cars to perform well. I also ask hubby if a person
tuned their car up wouldn't the gas with the additives work better - he said
no. Our car WAS tuned up as well as it could be. He has been having so very
much trouble with his truck also and now wonders if it is the gasoline
that's causing it and not carboration. Anyone else noticing bad preformance
with this new gas? Just curious. *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 75984
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Drug Talk
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 10:43:37
Re: The smoke also contains many of the same poisons that other cigarettes
do and this causes pulmonary damage that can lead to death.
The smoke from marijuana probably has a bigger effect on the body than smoke
from cigarettes because of the way they are inhaled. One takes a puff on a
cigarette and inhales it. When smoking marijuana, one sucks the smoke in a
deep breath straight into the lungs. As a result, much more smoke is taken
into the lungs. The heat from this smoke is also a lot more than one would
get from smoking a cigarette. When Rod called it "cool smoke" I had to
wonder about it.
Message: 75985
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 10:50:23
Re: Cliff, I do have a driver's license. I DON'T have my social security
number on it.
If you have an Arizona driver's license, your SSN in on it.
Message: 75986
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Answer!
Subject: last
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 11:56:52
Well, I have an Arizona driver's license, and my SSN is NOT on it. Instead,
I have an Arizona-issued number that begins with the letter "A". I had a
similar number in Massachusetts.
Message: 75987
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 12:05:10
No, I think "screening" for prospective parents would be an extremely
dangerous procedure. Who would get to set the standards? Presumably some
bunch of politicians with an interest in turning out a "standard American
child". Horrors! No, the point is that if you put parenting education INTO
the school curriculum, you don't have to set up educational prerequisites
for people to become parents, because they already HAD the education in
school. In any case, how can you stop people from "becoming parents"?
People have a habit of getting pregnant anyway, without waiting
to go through the course first...
Message: 75988
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Mr Cat on S.S.
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 12:38:28
Sorry Bob, Felix, but you are NOT required to fill in the S.S.
number on a driver's license. You may have been led to believe otherwise
so it seems.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 75989
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 12:57:49
Privacy?
Okay Gordon, you did your drivers license correctly. However, you
did not answer if you had and used Visa or MasterCard? If you do use these
cards, you leave a TRAIL and lots of information about yourself. Now this
is information that Big Brother can and does on occasion use, as well as
IRS. In your Credit Card applications is also your PHONE NUMBER... Oh God!
As for Caller I.D., You have failed to show me how this will take
away my privacy?
Message: 75990
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 15:46:43
Where does Whitey get his information? Most stations only sell oxygenated
fuel in the winter, so what additives does he think Phoenix gasoline has
that Prescott gasoline doesn't have?
Message: 75991
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann #75983
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 17:54:26
Yes, I definately notice my gas tank empty faster when using
the oxygenated fuel. My car is only driven to and from work
and I noticed I needed more fillups in the winter.
Does anyone understand the chemistry here? I would think
that oxygenated fuel would deliver more energy. Is it just
that more energy goes into heat than pressure? I use the
MTBE fuel.
Message: 75992
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Politics
Subject: Robber Barons
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 18:04:16
Native-born poor whites were not doing well either. In
the South, they were tenant farmers rather than landowners.
In the southern cities, they were tenants, not homeowners.
C. Vann Woodward notes (*Origins of the New South*) that
the city with the highest rate of tenancy in the United
States was Birmingham, with 90 percent. And the slums of
the southern cities were among the worst, poor whites living
like the blacks, on unpaved dirt streets "choked up with
garbage, filth and mud," according to a report of one state
board of health.
There were eruptions against the convict labor system in
the South, in which prisoners were leased in slave labor to
corporations, used thus to depress the general level of
wages and also to break strikes. In the year 1891, miners
of the Tennessee Coal Mine Company were asked to sign an
"iron-clad contract": pledging no strikes, agreeing to get
paid in scrip, and giving up the right to check the weight
of the coal they mined (they were paid by the weight). They
refused to sign and were evicted from their houses.
Convicts were brought in to replace them.
On the night of October 31, 1891, a thousand armed miners
took control of the mine area, set five hundred convicts
free, and burned down the stockades in which the convicts
were kept. The companies surrendered, agreeing not to use
convicts, not to require the "iron-clad contract," and to
let the miners check on the weight of the coal they mined.
The following year, there were more such incidents in
Tennessee. C. Vann Woodward calls them "insurrections."
Miners overpowered guards of the Tennessee Coal and Iron
Company, burned the stockades, shipped the convicts to
Nashville. Other unions in Tennessee came to their aid.
An observer reported back to the Chattanooga Federation of
Trades:
I should like to impress upon people the extent of
this movement. I have seen the written assurance of
reinforcements to the miners of fully 7500 men, who
will be on the field in ten hours after the first shot
is fired.... The entire district is as one over the
main proposition, "the convicts must go". I counted
840 rifles on Monday as the miners passed, while the
vast multitude following them carried revolvers. The
captains of the different companies are all Grand Army
men. Whites and Negroes are standing shoulder to
shoulder.
That same year, in New Orleans, forty-two union locals,
with over twenty thousand members, mostly white but
including some blacks (there was one black on the strike
committee), called a general strike, involving half the
population of the city. Work in New Orleans came to a stop.
After three days -- with strikebreakers called in, martial
law, and the threat of militia -- the strike ended with a
compromise, gaining hours and wages but without recognition
of the unions as bargaining agents.
The year 1892 saw strike struggles all over the country:
besides the general strike in New Orleans and the coal
miners' strike in Tennessee, there was a railroad switchmen's
strike in Buffalo, New York, and a copper miners' strike in
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. The Coeur d'Alene strike was marked
by gun battles between strikers and strikebreakers, and
many deaths. A newspaper account of July 11, 1892, reported:
... The long dreaded conflict between the forces of the
strikers and the non-union men who have taken their
places has come at last. As a result five men are
known to be dead and 16 are already in the hospital;
the Frisco mill on Canyon Creek is in ruins; the Gem
mine has surrendered to the strikers, the arms of its
employees have been captured, and the employees
themselves have been ordered out of the country.
Flushed with the success of these victories the
turbulent element among the strikers are preparing to
move upon other strongholds of the non-union men....
The National Guard, brought in by the governor, was
reinforced by federal troops: six hundred miners were
rounded up and imprisoned in bullpens, scabs brought back,
union leaders fired, the strike broken.
Message: 75996
Author: $ Steve MacGregor
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Apro/Oxygenated
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 18:54:43
It seems to me that oxygenated fuel should give less energy, not more,
since the energy comes from the burning of the fuel (i.e., combining it with
oxygen), so in effect, the oxygenated fuel is already partially "burned".
We all live in a ....,,,,________nnhn____ yellow subroutine
Message: 75997
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Oxygenated
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 19:40:00
I thought the purpose of the oxygenation process was to get more oxygen into
the fuel mix so that the fuel would burn more completely, thus polluting
less.
I was getting *better* mileage during the two winters.
Message: 75998
Author: John Cummings
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul S/Grandkids
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 21:41:52
The oldest of my 13 is just seven, going into second grade. Three of
my six kids claim they want more children, so I anticipate more to come.
However, I'm plenty content now, I have enough trouble with names as it is:
three granddaughters are Melissa, Alyssa, and Alicia. Secretly, I call them
Clyde, Fred, and George, but I don't dare tell the mothers that. Thanks for
the kind wishes. John C.
Message: 75999
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gas
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 22:05:22
I've only had the T-Bird since October and its performance has been
improving quite a bit due to new parts being thrown into it left and right.
It doesn't seem to run too bad on oxygenated fuel, but then maybe it does
better without it. I wouldn't mind taking a trip to Prescott in it some
time anyway, maybe I'll get some of that magic gas while I'm there.
Anybody want to go along?
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76000
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Politics
Subject: Brady Bill
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 22:06:28
"Wait a Minute", by Jacob Sullum, Reason Magazine July 1991
The general attitude toward the Brady Bill, which would establish a
national, seven-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns, was
probably best expressed by a supporter quoted in USA Today. "I like the
idea of a waiting period," he said, "but I don't see how it will do any
good."
A new study from the Colorado-based Independence Institute shows that
such doubts are well-founded. David B. Kopel, a Denver attorney and gun-
control expert, demonstrates that even the relatively modest claims of
Brady Bill supporters do not stand up under close scrutiny.
Kopel carefully dissects the argument that a waiting period would have
prevented John Hinckley's attempted assassination of President Reagan, the
main impetus for the bill. He notes that Hinckley had no felony record and
no public record of mental illness. Contrary to the assertion of Handgun
Control Inc., it appears that Hinckley was indeed a resident of Texas,
where he purchased the weapon, as required by law.
More generally, Kopel writes, "criminologists of every persuasion have
examined waiting periods, and not one has found statistically significant
evidence that waiting periods are effective." Criminals can readily obtain
weapons by buying them on the black market, by stealing them, or asking
acquaintances without felony records to buy them. "Of all guns acquired
for crime," Kopel says, "only about 0.5% to 2% are personally bought at a
retail outlet by a person with an existing criminal record who does not
already have another gun."
Message: 76001
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Politics
Subject: Brady 2/2
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 22:07:10
Thus a waiting period coupled with a background check is a very
inefficient way of preventing crime, one that would take police away from
more-productive activities, such as street patrol. Kopel estimates that
background checks would consume at least 7.5 million police hours a year;
each resulting arrest would cost about $40,000.
The main effect of a waiting period would be to delay, and in some
cases improperly prevent, the acquisition of handguns by law-abiding
citizens. Citing actual cases, Kopel shows that even a one-week delay can
be the difference between life and death for people who need a gun for
self-defense. Moreover, he estimates that some 725,000 people would be
mistakenly denied permission each year because of incomplete records.
Kopel concludes that supporters of the Brady Bill have failed even to
show that the benefits of a waiting period would outweigh its costs. They
have certainly not met the traditional burden of proof for measures that
infringe on constitutional rights.
Message: 76002
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller-ID
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 22:07:52
For those who haven't downloaded the text file on caller-id, here is an
excerpt from it:
Most of your telephone operating companies are now in the midst of
upgrading to a totally digital system that includes a number of new CLASS
services. By far the most popular new service is known as Caller Number
Delivery, which can show you who is calling you before you pick up your
telephone handset.
Caller number delivery does appear rather controversial. But, for most
people most of the time, knowing who is calling you is infinitely more
important than protecting your "right" to make undetected obscene phone
calls. Very sadly, at least one state (Pennsylvania) has stupidly banned
this wonderful new service. In other areas, the caller is given the
option of blocking their caller id, for those one-in-a-thousand calls
when your anomynity might legitimately be desired. Maybe for a drug
overdose hotline. Blocking can get done by entering a three digit code
before you make your call.
It might be worth noting that this rather low opinion of the right to
privacy comes from someone who is active in developing equipment to be sold
as an add-on to this phone service, and this person therefore has a vested
interest in seeing the service become widespread. I think the service has
Message: 76003
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller 2/3
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 22:08:37
merit, but I would like to see its potential problems given a more serious
hearing than this.
I agree with the writer's sentiments in opposing a state banning such
services outright, but I do not concur that it is only for one call in a
thousand that we might legitimately desire to avoid publishing our number.
I often make calls to people or businesses that I may or may not want to
deal with again in the future. It is by no means illegitimate for me to wish
to avoid having my phone number given to them so that they may use it, sell
it, or publish it further as they see fit.
The option of blocking the sending of your number out sounds like it is
something you may or may not be able to do, depending on the actual
specifications of the system installed in your area, and even then it would
be up to the caller to remember to dial the three digits first. I would
prefer something that could be turned off and on for all calls, like call
forwarding is, and if possible it should alert you with a reminder tone of
some kind as soon as you pick up the phone if it is armed to send out your
number.
As for technical aspects of this system, the text file said that the
caller-id is sent by means of a burst of tones after the first ring. It does
not specify this, but it suggests to me that the system may not work on your
phone if you have pulse rather than tone service on your line. If this is
true then anyone who sets up their phone to reject all incoming calls
without a caller-id will be rejecting all calls from pulse/rotary dial
phones or modems.
Message: 76004
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller 3/3
Date: 06/24/91 Time: 22:10:46
Being able to know before answering your phone if it is someone you do or
do not want to speak to, or possibly having your phone not even ring if the
call is one you do not want, would be nice options to have. The question is,
does this system really offer that, and at what true price? In reality,
problem callers who are purposely annoying you will be able to do so with a
minimum of effort anyway, unless you lock out every phone number in the
world except the ones you know you want to receive calls from. Is that
option really viable, when it could be your best friend calling from a phone
booth or someone's rotary phone? Of course your system would have to blank
out the first ring of all incoming calls in order to not ring on calls from
unwanted or unidentified numbers since caller-id isn't received until after
that first ring signal.
By all means we should explore the possibility of better phone services,
but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that we can get something of
equal value in return if we trade in the idea that privacy is a right.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76005
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Answer!
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 02:23:12
I'm sure the issue is that as the Sysop of a BBS, you are far more often
the recipient of telephone calls than the originator. The effect of Caller
ID is to *transfer* the possession of information from the call originator
to the recipient. Transfer of the originating number is the issue of
overwhelming importance, though I would note that if caller ID blocking is
possible, there is still information transferred from the caller to the
recipient that was not transferred before; namely, the FACT that the caller
does not wish to reveal his number. (Without any implementation of Caller
ID, there is no vehicle for transferring this information.)
I don't see a problem with transferring that information. But the point is
that if you see yourself primarily as a *recipient* of calls, then Caller ID
does in fact transfer a traditional advantage of privacy *from* the maker of
the call *to* the recipient of the call. Either the recipient gets the
caller's number, or he gets the information that the caller doesn't want to
give his number. He didn't get either of these before. So the recipient
gets an advantage he didn't get before. But I'm looking from the point of
view of the caller.
Message: 76006
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: Annie/gas
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 05:18:17
THe only time there are any additives (methanol or MTBH) if from Sept. 15
to April 15. Mobil, however, is proposing that they go to the gasohol on a
12 month basis. Everybody who is supposed to know anything claims that the
alcohol should make the engine run cleaner, therefore better. I'm certainly
no expert in that field, but it seems to me that, at least in our hot
summers, that alcohol is going to evaporate long before it ever gets near
the carburetor. If that's true, then we're getting perhaps 85% of a gallon
of fuel for every gallon we're paying for. Another major ripoff for the oil
companies!
Message: 76007
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Felix/SSN
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 05:20:19
Social Security numbers are optional on Az. drivers licenses. I just got my
renewal by mail form, and am given the option of putting the SSN on it or
not. I choose not.
Message: 76008
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: parenting courses
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 05:29:22
The whole point of my position is that, while there's nothing we can do
about past generations, or the sins of the past, we can do something to
prevent the cycle of child abuse from continuing on to future generations.
Of course we can't stop people from getting pregnant. TO assume that would
be ridiculous. What we CAN do, through education, is prepare them to face
the rigors and responsibilities of parenthood in a more appropriate way, and
hopefully prevent yet another cycle of abusiveness from repeating itself.
I believe that, if a study were done, far more students will eventially
spend their adulthood as parents than will have a career in football, or
music, or teaching foreign languages. What I am saying is that the next
generation of adults would be far better off, as would the next crop of
children, if more emphasis were placed on the practicality of proper
parenting than is now being placed on things that should be electives for
those interested in certain fields of endeavor.
Let's take a better look at the cirriculums that are being required of our
youth, and realign priorities to better fit the real needs.
Message: 76009
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: John C.
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 05:33:21
If you should want to bless any of your grandchildren with a great clown
birthday party, look me up. I'm always available, and at a very good rate
for my Apollo friends.
Message: 76010
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller ID
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 05:44:04
It was not until I had a business phone installed for my agency that I
realized that there were so many nuts out there that had nothing better to
do than initiate harrassing, nonsense, foolish or otherwise wasteful phone
calls. Much of this is from kids with too much time on their hands, but not
all. I would like nothing better than to be able to know the point of origin
ot these calls, so that I could at least talk to the parents of these kids
and let them know that repeated events COULD cost them their telephone, or
to report such things as obscene calls to the proper authorities without all
the hassle of tracing, etc. If (and hopefully when) the feature is offered
here, I will be one of the first to use it.
Message: 76011
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Brady Drivel
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 07:50:42
Poppycock ! Take everybody's guns away and melt 'em down. The hell with the
2nd amendment. Think the Supreme Court will support your consititutional
rights ? Think again. The First has just been thrown out in favor of G
strings and pasties.
Message: 76012
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 09:02:38
Businesses do use the addresses on checks for their mailing lists. I leave
my phone number off of mine because I've seen this done. Also, if you
register a special-interest car at a friend's house in Apache Junction
because you can't find the parts necessary to pass the emissions underhood
inspection, you'll start getting junk mail from companies that have somehow
discovered your name, where you said you lived, and what kind of car you
registered.
Message: 76013
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: nonsense
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 09:06:44
Does everyone realize that they probably DON'T have oxygenated fuel in their
cars right now?
Message: 76014
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller ID
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 09:14:43
I like this idea as long as the caller has the option of blocking it.
It would be nice for the callee to know whether the caller's number was
unavailable intentionally or for technical reasons (such as a long-distance
call). Another potential snag is that my roommate and I use the "custom
ringing" option that gives me a separate phone number on the same line that
rings twice instead of once. I presume all outgoing calls would broadcast
the main number, so people who knew MY number wouldn't know it was me
calling them until I explained this.
Message: 76015
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cat on #
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 10:03:15
My Arizona driver's lic. does not have my social security number on it it -
but like Gordon, it has the letter 'D' on it?! *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76016
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gordon on teaching
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 10:05:32
OK - I can go along with that, but I do ask what you'd have in mind that
they would teach the kids in school about being a parent. Who there is to
choose what is proper and is not? BTW - what IS proper and is not?
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76017
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Michael on gas
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 10:09:52
If I'm not mistaken, it tells you right on the pumps here what has been
added. All I know is, the car changed completely - almost miraculously!
I thought I read something in the paper just the other day that they we
altering the gasoline again. *>>> ANN O. <<<*
BTW - the Prescott gasoline was cheaper too.
Message: 76018
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pauley on gas
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 10:20:41
I don't profess to know about these additives or what have you, but hubby
has been into cars for a very long time and he associates with other's that
are also - I can hear them constantly complaining about the gas - what it
does to the engines - it's performance, etc. All I know for sure is - I saw
it with my own eyes! I just wonder if we are all so used to the gas that we
don't know what it's doing. Someone told me that maybe I got a bad tank of
gas - but that couldn't be true because I had filled the car up twice at two
differnt places when it first started running so bad. Too much of a
coincidence that instantly, after getting the Prescott gas (Yavapi county)
it runs perfect! *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76019
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pauley on teaching
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 10:24:27
OK - I'll go along with that, but I also ask you what is proper parenting?
What are they going to teach the kids about it? Do you know the proper way?
Do you even know the perfect parents? Were you a perfect parent?
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76020
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger's G String
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 11:29:51
I never could understand (and we have talked about this years ago)
what taking one's clothing off has to do with FREE SPEECH! To me free
speech is the flowing of words to express ideas and thoughs.
Taking off your clothing or burning of the flag (stars & stripes)
is NOT free speech, it's just being obscene.
However...behind closed doors and NOT in open PUBLIC, I could care
less if Roger took off his clothes or played his organ or someone elses
organ!
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76021
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: M. James
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 11:46:03
Then do not use checks... My checks have my P.O. Box number for the
address.... and I too do not have my phone number on them. I also very
rarely use checks, mostly for the common bills, Electric, Water, Mortgage
ETC.....
Sure, there are a FEW businesses that might gather that info, but
most don't! I don't seem to get junk mail at my P.O. Box. My junk mail at
home is way down since I refuse to tell Radio Shack my address when buying
something there as well as other places. Seems to be working. But I don't
phone these places either, even without Caller I.D. in place.
Credit Cards... Dean and Gordon seem to have not answered, so I bet
they have VISA and/or MasterCard. So much for them being PRIVATE people.
When it came to privacy versus convenience of PLASTIC (recorded data on
computer everywhere for everyone's eyse) money.... They sold out their
privacy.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76022
Author: $ Wild Barbarian
Category: Answer!
Subject: seem{to be for you
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 12:23:58
Hmmm... Seems to me that you THINK you are the only one who is right around
here and does not like to be told you are wrong. Well, I got some really
BAD news for you. YOU ARE MOST CERTAINLY WRONG.... Maybe it is I who
should be a little less subtle with you in the future. But then again, na.
I won't lower myself that far. Oh well. No one ever accused me of NOT
having a big mouth. If I upset you, toooo bad. You'll get over it.
Message: 76023
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Politics
Subject: Roger
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 12:33:23
Good idea, Roger. While we're at it, why don't we throw out the whole
Constitution and Bill of Rights? It would save an awful lot of useless
litigation, Supreme Court appeals and all of that junk. Let's introduce a
benevolent dictatorship. Then we can get Amerika (oops, sorry, that should
be a "c") moving again economically...
Message: 76024
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Apollo's free speech
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 14:00:47
Expression need not be verbal. For example, Michelangelo's David is an
example of expression and is protected under the First Amendment. The point
you are missing, my friend, is not whether Nude Dancing is speech but rather
the reasoning behind Justice Scalia's consideration of the 1st Amendment. He
is saying that the 1st Amendment does not take precedence if the local law
making bodies decide to declare some activity (or speech, for that matter)
obscene. This seems to imply that a community would be able to pass laws
outlawing gun ownership (even though protected by the 2nd amendment) Given
the courts swing away from civil liberties, I would be concerned if I were
you.
Message: 76025
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Politics
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 14:02:04
I'm sure the Supreme Court would go along with you on that. Let's make
America safe for "democracy"
Message: 76026
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 17:10:19
I didn't answer your questions about whether I had credit, etc. because
that has absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand. You are
confusing the issue of becoming a non-person in the eyes of the state with
avoiding the publishing of your phone number to everyone you call.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76027
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Politics
Subject: Rights
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 17:14:34
Since being subject to search for no reason if you are on a bus or train
is acceptable to the court in the name of drug war, it would seem that the
door is open for any kind of flaunting of the Constitution.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76028
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Robber Barons
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 17:15:14
When was this adoring chronicle of socialism in America written?
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76029
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Politics
Subject: Last
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 18:32:17
1980.
Message: 76030
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Politics
Subject: Robber Barons
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 18:42:44
In early 1892, the Carnegie Steel plant at Homestead,
Pennsylvania, just outside of Pittsburg, was being managed
by Henry Clay Frick while Cranegie was in Europe. Frick
decided to reduce the workers' wages and break their union.
He built a fence 3 miles long and 12 feet high around the
steelworks and topped it with barbed wire, adding peepholes
for rifles. When the workers did not accept the pay cut,
Frick laid off the entire work force. The Pinkerton
detective agency was hired to protect strikebreakers.
Although only 750 of the 3,800 workers at Homestead
belonged to the union, three thousand workers met in the
Opera House and voted overwhelmingly to strike. The plant
was on the Monongahela River, and a thousand pickets began
patrolling a 10-mile stretch of the river. A committee of
strikers took over the town, and the sheriff was unable to
raise a posse among local people against them.
On the night of July 5, 1892, hundreds of Pinkerton guards
boarded barges 5 miles down the river from Homestead and
moved toward the plant, where ten thousand strikers and
sympathizers waited. The crowd warned the Pinkertons not to
step off the barge. A striker lay down on the gangplank,
and when a Pinkerton man tried to shove him aside, he fired,
wounding the detective in the thigh. In the gunfire that
followed on both sides, seven workers were killed.
The Pinkertons had to retreat onto the barges. They were
attacked from all sides, voted to surrender, and then were
beaten by the enraged crowd. There were dead on both sides.
For the next several days the strikers were in command of
the area. Now the state went into action: the governor
brought in the militia, armed with the latest rifles and
Gatling guns, to protect the import of strikebreakers.
Strike leaders were charged with murder; 160 other
strikers were tried for other crimes. All were acquitted by
friendly juries. The entire Strike Committee was then
arrested for treason against the state, but no jury would
convict them. The strike held for four months, but the
plant was producing steel with strikebreakers who were
brought in, often in locked trains, not knowing their
destination, not knowing a strike was on. The strikers,
with no resources left, agreed to return to work, their
leaders blacklisted.
One reason for the defeat was that the strike was confined
to Homestead, and other plants of Carnegie kept working.
Some blast furnace workers did strike, but they were quickly
defeated, and the pig iron from those furnaces was then used
at Homestead. The defeat kept unionization from the
Carnegie plants well into the twentieth century, and the
workers took wage cuts and increases in hours without
organized resistance.
In the midst of the Homestead strike, a young anarchist
from New York named Alexander Berkman, in a plan prepared
by anarchist friends in New York, including his lover Emma
Goldman, came to Pittsburgh and entered the office of Henry
Clay Frick, determined to kill him. Berkman's aim was poor;
he wounded Frick and was overwhelmed, then was tried and
found guilty of attempted murder. He served fourteen years
in the state penitentiary. His *Prison Memoirs of an
Anarchist* gave a graphic description of the assassination
attempt and of his years in prison, when he changed his mind
about the usefullness of assassinations but remained a
dedicated revolutionary. Emma Goldman's autobiography,
*Living My Life*, conveys the anger, the sense of injustice,
the desire for a new kind of life, that grew among the young
radicals of that day.
Message: 76033
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Answer!
Subject: Caller ID
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 19:52:23
The "pulse of tones after the first ring" *DO NOT* originate at the caller's
phone. They are generated by THE PHONE COMPANY and are based upon the
circuit which is making the call, not by the action of any equipment at the
business/residence where that line is.
As to "faking records", yes, it would be fairly easy to set up a log of
incoming calls by phone number and time stamp them. It would also be fairly
easy to give oneself the ability to edit such a record.
Message: 76034
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Barbarian/76022
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 19:59:16
What?
Message: 76035
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James/MTBE
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 19:59:55
Wherever I filled up recently definitely had MTBE added. Not only did it say
so on the pump, but it smelled like it.
Message: 76036
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean H/Constitution
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 20:01:25
Ummm, the government of this country is FLOUTING the Constitution during
this War on Drugs (kind of like some people were pushing for similar action
during the "Gulf War"). I'd really rather that the Constitution *were*
being flaunted, but I think that too many people are really ashamed of it.
Message: 76037
Author: $ Steve MacGregor
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: BDog/Caller-ID
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 20:24:32
Thank you for pointing out the origin of the caller-ID information. Some
people could get the idea that they could do something with their phones to
cause them to give out phony numbers, but since the phones don't *give out*
numbers at all, there's probably nothing you can do about this, especially
since I don't believe that your phone gets connected to the call recipient's
phone until after he (or some of his equipment) actually answers the phone.
That means that no signal you can whistle into your phone while the call is
in the process of being completed will affect the other person's phone.
Of course, there are probably phone phreaks who will figure out a way to
mess this up for a while.
We all live in a ....,,,,________nnhn____ yellow subroutine
Message: 76038
Author: $ Peter Petrisko
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: CLIFF/POT DEATHS
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 21:46:31
Care to share a list of sources for your "medical evidence"?
Message: 76039
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Question?
Subject: Wild B..
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 23:04:50
Who are you directing your posts at? You never mention names?
At me? At Dean? At Gordon? At Paul Savage? At Ann Oudin? WHO??????
Read your post of 76022 and tell us if you even understand it?
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76040
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 23:25:32
You had better read the Bill of Rights and Amendment... I see no
where the word you used 'Expression' being part of the first Amendment.
However, I do clearly see in the second Amendment, "the right of the people
to KEEP and BEAR arms shall NOT be INFRINGED"
Somehow I see you BENDING the meaning of the first Amendment for
self serving reasons (Playing with your organ) yet you ignor the right of
Americans to protect themselves with such clear wording as "shall not be
infringed" only because you are afraid of weapons.
Free Press and free speech as mentioned in the first Amendment
mentions nothing about being obscene or slanderous just like the second
amendment mentions nothing about shooting thy neighbor for sport. Both
crimes by the way....
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76041
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean
Date: 06/25/91 Time: 23:44:19
Why do you figure you have the RIGHT to call other people, and they
don't have the right to call you? If you call them, by doing so, you just
gave them the right in fair exchange. You make it sound like you are the
only important person with rights and the outside world is garbage.
The reason I brought up credit card numbers is that for one who
CLAIMS to be private, if you have said credit cards, you have given the FEDs
and anyone else who wants the data, a documented statment of your life
style. You also happened to bring up my refusal to file a census form as
being private so why would I want to give my phone number. I don't happen
to feel having my phone number in other hands gives away any personal info.
Phone numbers and addresses are needed in this life style we live. How many
bathrooms, How much we make, what time we go to work, ETC. however is
PERSONAL info that need not be given out.
By the way, I recall you did not wish to file a census form
yourself, yet you support PLASTIC money and the personal info you must
supply to have the convenience. I have looked at the forms, and there is no
way I can fill them out not to mention I don't like the paper trail they
leave.
Note: I did get cornered by the census people and ONLY gave the NUMBER of
people at this address. I totaly avoided the long form.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76042
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann/Gas!
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 01:00:19
You are absolutely correct. Mobil has been adding alcohol to their gas
since June 10th. They discontinued it a few days ago because of NUMEROUS
complaints. I could tell after a few days that something wasn't right. I
get very low idling, almost to the point of stalling. I wasted $200 on an
expensive tuneup a couple of years ago when the oxegenated fuels started
coming out. And it just went away on March 15th...
I won't use ARCO gas during the oxegenated months, but the ingredients in
Mobil agrees with my engine. But Mobil just started using the same additive
as Arco. I know someone on another board whose car vapor locked, and had to
spend $100 on towing on a very HOT day.
Message: 76043
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 02:38:44
Re: Well, I have an Arizona driver's license, and my SSN is NOT on it.
Well, I guess that means that Arizona used to use SSN on their driver's
license, but now they don't.
Or, it means that now they do, but they didn't used to.
Or maybe, they use SSN for some people, but for others they don't.
Who knows the logic the government uses for anything? It usually isn't
common sense.
Message: 76044
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Felix
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 03:23:01
Government? Logic? Common sense? Wow, even I have trouble getting all of
those into the same paragraph!
Message: 76045
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/parenting
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 03:24:21
What is "proper" parenting? And what should we teach about it? It's a very
good question, and it certainly deserves an answer. I think there are
acceptable answers. Not "correct" answers -- still less "politically
correct" answers. (Heaven forbid!) But I do think there are answers that
are not only acceptable, but a great deal better than teaching nothing at
all.
First of all, I do understand the dangers present in trying to "teach"
anything, especially such a fundamental human skill as parenting. The
danger is that somebody, or some group, is put in control of teaching it,
and they are bound to teach their own vision of "correctness" -- which may
be very far from being correct, or good for the human race as a whole.
People have little private agendas that are not in everyone else's interest.
Even if they didn't, there is no guarantee that what any particular person
teaches is "right". It can only be right according to their best knowledge
and belief -- in other words, some part of it is guaranteed to be wrong.
This is the great value of diversity, of not forcing some standard culture,
some standard lifestyle, some standard set of ethics upon people. If you do
that, some part of it is bound to be detrimental. If you allow diversity to
occur, there's a good chance that someone, somewhere will stumble on a
better idea. If you don't allow diversity, then they never will, and
society will stagnate -- not to mention that life will be crashingly dull.
For the same reason, I heartily dislike seeing a company acquire a monopoly
of some market. Not only do they have the public over a barrel so that they
can charge whatever they want for their product, but it's impossible to get
the product you really want because it only comes in one shade of black.
It would be horrifying to think that parent education should teach anything
like "all kids should go to bed at eight o'clock", or "never let the kid do
this" or "always do such-and-such", or "the right amount of time to play
with your child is X hours per day". Then we'd all turn out a bunch of
little robots. I don't think that's what parent education is all about.
Fortunately I don't think that's likely to happen, because the human spirit
is very resilient, and people are all so different. If parents themselves
didn't rebel against idiotic extremes of conformity, I have great confidence
that the kids themselves would.
Like you, I'm very suspicious of any notion of "screening" or "licensing"
parents before the fact. A society that hopes to have responsible people
must begin by *expecting* people to act in a responsible manner, not by
treating them with suspicion. Doing so is tantamount to telling them they
can't be trusted, that somebody else knows better. The result is that they
tend to make the belief come true and act in an untrustworthy manner! Any
decent society treats people *as if* they are competent and responsible, and
only cracks down on them *if* they demonstrate the opposite.
For example, we don't keep the entire population of the country in jail
until they prove that they are well-behaved. Rather, we assume that they
are well-behaved unless they prove otherwise -- and then we put them in jail
(or give them a week's probation, more likely!)
It's the same thing with parenting. We have to assume that people are
competent parents, and have a right to try their hand at parenting in their
own way -- *unless* they prove that they are not. We must and should permit
a broad diversity of parenting styles. But I'm sure you too would agree
that when parents are not only doing a poor job, but seriously damaging
their children, then we have to intervene. The children too have a right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- not to mention the awful
havoc wreaked on the rest of us by damaged children who grow up to be
damaged adults.
"Education" is something quite different from "screening" or "licensing" or
similar procedures. A licensing procedure says, essentially, "we, your
government, do not believe that you're competent to do this until you've
complied with certain conditions; and until you do so, we won't let you do
it." And there's no guarantee that "your government" will ever accept your
competence and allow you to do it. The burden of proof is on the side of
the citizen, not on the side of the government; and that's quite wrong. The
potential for abuse is ghastly.
"Education", on the other hand, says "we, your government, acknowledge that
you have a right to do this thing and probably will, so here's some *advice*
about how we think you could do it for the better." It's quite different.
The pupil is still free to accept or reject what he or she is taught.
I'll grant that children may swallow things taught in school far too easily
as being "absolute truth", so parenting education does have to be careful
about what it teaches. The notion that there is such a thing as one
"correct" way to raise a child is quite absurd. Even if there were, we
could never prove it. The "best" way to raise a child must depend upon the
personality of that particular child, and also on the personalities and
lifestyles of the parents. You will need to handle one child differently
from another. In addition, there are different ways to raise the same child
that can well meet with equal success. This is why Spock made his comment
about "moderate permissiveness" and "moderate strictness", and how either
can work perfectly well. There is broad latitude for diversity.
I rather like the concept invented by the psychologist Donald Winnicott, who
talked about "good enough" parenting. This is a far cry from the idea of
"correct" parenting. Winnicott's notion of "good enough" parenting points
out that nobody is a perfect parent -- and nobody has the right to expect
perfect parenting. You can't understand every single thing in a child's
head, or always do exactly the right thing in every situation. You can't
meet every single one of a child's needs. But you're not expected to.
As a parent, you're only human. The child, being human also, has an
enormous amount of resilience and intelligence and free will -- and the
ability to compensate for those imperfect parents! You only have to be
"good enough". It's a fairly big target. You do have to hit the target
somewhere -- which means you do have to be trying, and you do have to have
some skill and insight. But you don't go to hell (or send the child to
hell) just because you missed the bullseye. Somewhere out at three o'clock
in the five ring is "good enough". You have to meet a child's basic needs.
The child can reasonably be expected to do the rest. It's a very comforting
concept, and a confidence builder for parents.
So "correct" parenting is not where it's at. But that is not to say that
there's nothing we can put in a parent education curriculum. Far from it.
To begin with, the notion of "correctness" has only a limited place in
education -- proper education, that is. Some part of education does have to
do with "teaching" -- with giving people information that they're supposed
to accept at face value. Was Christopher Columbus a great hero who explored
the Atlantic at great risk and discovered America? Was he a good or a bad
leader of men? Or was he a petty dictator who persecuted the native
population? Which is the "correct" picture? Actually these things are
*all* true. Teaching people that only one view or the other is "correct" is
educational despotism.
"Education", from "e-ducere" meaning to "lead out", is properly a matter of
*showing* people which things are true are which are not -- rather than
telling them -- and giving them the tools to think and find out for
themselves. Math education falls into this category. You don't have to
accept what I say about the square on the hypotenuse. Once I've shown you
how to do it, you can prove it for yourself. Parenting education should
have a lot in common with this.
We can't talk about "correct" parenting, but we can most decidedly talk
about better and worse parenting. To begin with, we can state quite
categorically that beating and sexually assaulting children and emotionally
abusing them is wrong. We don't have to prove this or justify such
teaching. People, whatever their age, know instinctively that it hurts to
be abused. If you tell this to a randomly selected class full of kids, a
surprisingly large percentage will be victims of some kind of abuse. They
won't be instantly cured of its effects because a teacher stands up and
tells them that what's being done to them is wrong. But they will have the
sense that someone is on their side. Some of them will try to interpret any
punishment as abuse! But they will know the difference, really. Perhaps
some of them will talk about what's being done to them, thus enabling some
protective intervention. In any case, they will have a seed of thought
planted that starts them on the path of examining their own upbringing and
questioning whether they want to thoughtlessly repeat those practices when
they become parents themselves.
People behave badly because they don't exercise a choice to behave well.
That's a truism. But all too often they don't believe that they *have* a
choice; or if they do, they don't believe that it would benefit them to
exercise it. It's difficult to change people's beliefs (which is why
"liberal" methods of criminal rehabilitation don't work very well -- though
admittedly such methods put too much effort into making up for past abuses,
and far too little into actually changing beliefs). But children are more
receptive.
Over time, we can help people to resist old patterns by pointing out how
children *do* repeat the things their parents taught them. Once people
become aware of this, they are better able to exercise free choice. Which
of the things your parents taught you are a valuable heritage that deserves
to be passed on through the generations? And which of them should be
modified or discarded? People can make intelligent selections for the good
of their own offspring, but only if their attention is drawn to the fact
that they *do* have a choice.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. We can go much, much farther. Why do
people behave the way they do? Why do *children* behave the way that they
do? Children pass through many stages in childhood. They have different
motivations and different capabilities for self-control at different ages.
Is it effective to hit a baby to stop him from crying? Is it effective to
hit a ten-year-old boy to discourage him from hitting other children?
Is it reasonable to expect a two-year-old to sit still and keep quiet for an
hour? An eight-year-old? When is it best to ignore a child's bad behavior?
When is it best to explain patiently that we don't like it? When is it best
to impose firm sanctions? What should we do with a child who isn't toilet-
trained at one year? at two? at three? at four? What is it reasonable to
expect of a child at different ages? We do have pretty definite answers to
these questions, and the answers can be taught.
It's an even more perfect truism to say that family life runs smoothly --
except when there are problems. How do we resolve contention? How do we
deal with anger? What's the best way to deal with somebody else's anger?
With a child's anger? With our own anger? Once again, there are answers to
these questions that can help people: not answers that people have to take
at face value, but methods that they can try out for themselves and prove
whether they work or not. Many of them have been studied because businesses
want to know how to get people to work together, how to manage people, how
to exercise leadership, how to negotiate, how to resolve conflict. But they
are very much a part of parenting. These things can be taught also.
None of these things are an imposition of "correct" doctrine. Rather,
they're a matter of giving people tools that they can experiment with, and
succeed with. Parent education should be participatory, interactive. There
are many basic lessons that can be learned without "indoctrinating" anybody.
One high school conducted a creative experiment in which kids -- both boys
and girls -- had to act out the role of looking after a "baby" -- actually a
doll, or just a package of something -- all of their waking hours. This
showed them that having to care for a baby is a big responsibility. You
can't just dump it on the sidewalk and go off to play baseball. It must
have made them think very hard about whether they were ready for parenthood
or not.
I don't think such a course could possibly be complete without some
examination of basic ethics. These are the questions that I asked in my
earlier post, about how we behave towards other people, and why. Its
significance to parenting is fundamental: not only what values we would like
to pass on to our children, but why do we want to have children in the first
place, and what is our attitude to our children? Are we genuinely
supportive of them? Are they there because we're stuck with them, or
because they satisfy some need of our own -- and if so, is it a need that
complements theirs, or a need that they meet at their own expense?
For many people, "ethics" will be rooted in religious values. But we can
avoid political controversy simply by examining ethics logically, from first
principles. We will still come up with something of great value. What is
the most productive attitude for people to have towards one another? What
kinds of agreements should people reach, what codes of behavior should they
follow, so as to get everybody's needs met as far as possible? The greater
part of a code of ethics can be derived by pure logic.
These things are all intensely relevant to parenting. But parenting, after
all, is simply a matter of relating to another human being -- a child -- at
a particular stage of his or her development. Some specialized knowledge is
needed about these stages of development, and in addition the parent adopts
a special position of leadership. But many of the skills involved can be
applied to any relationship among human beings. You can't reach into
people's heads and *force* them to live their lives less destructively. But
you can offer them behavioral choices that can benefit them personally, as
well as everybody around them. We don't do that very much in the schools
today. I don't see where this kind of "education" regiments people's
thinking. On the contrary, it's liberating. If only half of them chose to
try out half of the suggestions offered, I think the potential for positive
side-effects would be enormous.
Message: 76055
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie/education
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 05:25:52
It's not so much a question of what is proper as it is what is abusive. THe
intent of parental education is to prevent child abuse, not invade anyone's
privacy. If John and Jane Doe want to raise their kids to be ditch diggers
or bank presidents is nobody's business but their own, as long as they don't
beat the kids to death in the process.
Message: 76056
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie/gas
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 05:28:55
If you read EVERYTHING on the pumps, it also tells you that the additive
is used only between Sept 15 and April 15. That's what the law provides.
That's what the gas companies do.
Mobil Oil Co. is proposing to expand the use of MTBE to all year. Personal
opinion?It won't work, due both to the vapor lock problem and the fact that
the additive, be it ethanol or MTBE will evaporate much too fast in Arizona
summer heat.
Message: 76057
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie on gas again
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 05:33:17
I don'T know what grade of gasoline you use, but my van takes regular. I
was advised recently to use an occassional tankful of super unleaded to keep
the engine running cleaner. It just might be that you got a tankful of the
better stuff in Prescott.
As to the quality of gasoline, it's all garbage, at least in my opinion.
Some's a little less garbage than others, maybe, but most of it comes out of
one main pipeline into Phoenix, so how much difference can there be?
Message: 76058
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Wild Barbarian
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 05:37:39
You have a habit of sending off little messages without addressing them to
anyone in particular. It would be nice if you attached a name to your posts,
like the rest of us do. At least to the insulting ones. Then someone would
know if they have been had, or if the message was intended for someone else.
Message: 76059
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: "Free" speech
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 05:41:11
Michelangelo is protected under the first amendment. Fine. Unfortunately, so
is Mapplethorpe and "Piss Christ". It's about time some "liberality" was
turned around.
Message: 76060
Author: $ Bill Burkett
Category: Answer!
Subject: Yoo Hoo! Barb!
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 06:44:29
I think it's me Wild Barbarian is raging at. Therefore...
>
Nah. Forget it. Not worth the trouble.
Message: 76061
Author: $ Bill Burkett
Category: Politics
Subject: Court Decisions
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 07:11:55
Since a couple U.S. Supreme Court decisions are stirring up the locals, I've
uploaded the following for everyone's reading and edification:
Filenames: SCSEARCH.TXT and SCSEARCH.ZIP
Case Title: Florida v. Bostick (6-20-91) This is the bus
search case.
Filenames: SCDANCE.TXT and SCDANCE.ZIP
Case Title: Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc. This is the most
recent nude-dancing case.
As you can see I've uploaded each case in both straight ASCII (.TXT) and
compressed as a .ZIP file.
I've often found public discussion of Supreme Court decisions based on news
accounts to be wildly off-base. I recommend anyone who wishes to
intelligently discuss these decisions read them before doing so. It can be
pretty rough sledding, but once the Justices's reasoning is understood, the
decisions often make sense from the Constitution's point of view.
I haven't read the decisions myself yet, but may have something to say re
them after I have.
Message: 76062
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: New Definition
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 07:48:42
From R. Mann's New Abridged and Liberal Dictionary:
conservative n. 1.A person who believes that someone somewhere is having a
good time and should be stopped.
Message: 76063
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James H.\gasoline
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 08:49:23
Thank you for that backup post on the additives in gas. The way people were
starting to talk here - as if it was all my imagination - like Dean's Magic
Prescott gas! We looked on the pumps up there and nowhere did it say there
was additives. *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76064
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pauley on child
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 08:59:14
OK again! But you still didn't say what would be taught to "prevent child
abuse"!! I'm really curious as to what you think is the going to prevent it.
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76065
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pauley on gas
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 09:00:53
I only use Extra Unleaded in the car - my thinking, it must be the best
because you pay more! HA! *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76066
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Question?
Subject: Pauley on art?
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 09:02:11
Can you elaborate on what is "Piss Christ"? Is it a painting or ....?
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76067
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gordon on child
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 09:22:32
Boyee - when you bring up a subject with you, you answer with 10 posts! :)
Child abuse is prevelent in this day and age and I think the reason why is
many, not just one or even two. I also think the answer is preventing it
comes somewhere between the old way of raising children and the new, modern
way if you will - BUT - leaning towards the old way!! For example, when
parents were told to not spank their little darlings we ended up with rotten
little darlings that ruined their parents life. For the most part, thank
God, these little monsters managed to grow up to be good, responsible
citizens and even parents. (Much to my amazement!) But what of the parents -
what they went through? The next generation after I raised my kids started
in on this 'no spanking - no discipline that would hurt their little persons
- no raised voices - talk to the little ones - reason with them'etc. etc.
and I was there to see the outcome in action. In fact, my next door neighbor
was raising her children with that attitude and I saw it every day. They
were total monsters and I could easily see where someone like that mother
and father just might start abusing those two boys even though they created
them!! I wanted to ABUSE THEM!! - take one of their little necks and
wring it! What brats! These parents did not abuse them ever that I knew of,
but how many other parents taught to raise their kids like that did? Things
have now change for the worse - parents are taught (society teaches them) to
keep doing this method and now the mother works which compounds the problem.
The parents are coming home to little monsters that are almost strangers
because someone else is raising them! What a mess our society is.
Lets take the subject of kids going to bed at a certain time. I've argued
with mothers that thought that was awful to put a child to bed say at 8:PM
all the time - what if he didn't feel like going - or wanted to finish a
movie etc?? I've even had parents tell me that was child abuse! Not only
putting kids to bed at a set time each night is good for the kid, teaches
discipline and most of all, 'saves the parent's sanity'!! The parents need
some time alone to be with each other and recoup from the stressful work
day. All they need is some brat screaming and yelling until both kid and
parents drop from exaustion. I never understood why parents don't
automatically put their kids to bed at a reasonable time. After all, they
themselves must have some discipline in their own lives - go to bed at a
reasonably hour because they have work the next day. Why not teach the child
at a young age{
I've seen mothers let their kids roam the house at will - do what they will
- get into what they will, with mom following them around saying "no no" and
the kids just keeps on doing it! A couple of 'No No's' and a spanking is in
order. How is anyone going to teach a child with out some sort of pain?
Sound awful? It isn't. How else are you going to get their attention and
make it be remembered? I'm not talking beatings here. Just discipline. When
they get old enough to know better, then punishments can be restrictions.
Kids should also have a work schedule in their lives when they get old
enough. This isn't cruel punishment - it prepares them for adulthood. it
also makes them part of the family by helping out. I see so many parents not
making their kids do any work around the house.
All in all, I see the biggest problem is that both parents work in this day
and age! It really doesn't make too much sense to have children and someone
isn't home to raise them - at least in their first years. When school time
comes along it would be alright to work during school hours. When they get a
little older and more self sufficient, then go to work. Child rearing is
probably the most important thing a person(s) can do in this life and no one
seems to be there to do it! Most mothers go back to work a couple months
after the birth. That means that no one that loves the child is raising it!
It makes more sense to me to teach - caution the prospective parents that if
they work, then don't have children because then child abuse might occur in
the best of homes because of too much stress on them and yes, the child has
stress too - he's taken away from mom and dad all of a sudden.
Also, there are a couple set of rules instead of one from the parents.
Do you see my point?
I don't see how we are ever going to over come both parents working now. Not
only does it take two saleries for the most part to run a household, the
women don't want to stay home. Being a housewife is still a second rate
profession. I was floored the other evening - we went to a bar to shoot pool
and I dressed up in a dress for a change. We shot with this couple that were
in their middle 30s and at one point in the evening she said to me because
of the way I was dressed "it looks like you just go off of work!"
I told her that "no, I was a housewife" Her mouth literly flew open and she
replied with "No kidding? I can't believe that. What do yo do with yourself
all day?" She started looking at me as if I was some sort of freak or
something. During the course of the evening, she was amazed to find out how
much I was into computers 'being just a housewife' and what amazed her the
most - I didn't lose a game on the pool table to anyone in 5 straight
hours!! (bragging a bit here!) At times, when I particularly made a good
shot, she would look around the room in amazement an make a comment to
someone that I was a 'housewife' - with incredibility in her voice. Now I
think she thought she was complimenting me - but I ended up really disliking
her by the time we left. She really could not concieve of a women staying at
home. She told me she had two children. I find this attitude prevails now.
Personally, I never could figure out what was so wrong is choosing to stay
home and raise my kids. Heck, it's a good life and fulfulling too. Men could
choose to do it too because in a lot of cases, women make as much as men do
in the work force. He's just as capable if he put his mind to it. My point
is - SOMEONE should stay at home in the early years! Comment?
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76071
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: gasoline
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 10:32:58
Since gas stations are only required to sell oxygenated fuel in the winter,
you should be able to find unaltered gasoline now.
My car has been running roughly lately, but I think it just needs new
points.
Message: 76072
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Answer!
Subject: Felix
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 10:35:01
Why did you give the driver's license place your Social Security number?
Message: 76073
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Raising Kids
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 14:16:19
The problem, Ann, is that the kids know the mother (or father) doesn't mean
no when they say no,no and feel free to ignore the no. It takes energy on
the part of the parent to follow up that no with the appropriate action if
the kid disobeys. This doesn't mean a spanking necessarily but the clear
indication that disobeying is not done in this house. Done properly, it does
not require spanking. Next time the kid, when it hears no, it knows you mean
no. It's just a matter of being consistent. Raising kids calls for maturity
and consistency on the part of parents. 99 percent of the time the kid is
going to do what you ask. If you mess up that 1 percent, then the kid learn
that there ARE times he or she can get away with disobeying.
None of this requires spanking. Although I spanked, I realize now that most
of the time I spanked it was because I had lost control of the situation and
had to resort to brute force to gain control over the situation. I might
have spanked less if I had been more mature and had established the no
nonsense meaning of no before I lost control.
Message: 76074
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Working Parents
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 14:18:00
My wife worked. We arranged to have a reliable baby-sitter be there when the
kids got home. Since my wife worked 3-11, I got to be cook and mommy for my
kids. I would not have traded that experience for anything because I got to
know my kids extremely well.
Message: 76075
Author: $ Michael James
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 14:59:17
I enjoy reading your essays but have a hard time digesting the long ones all
at once when I'm looking for messages on other topics. Would you consider
putting them up in groups of, say, five at a time? I know it would increase
my retention of what you have to say.
Message: 76076
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Politics
Subject: APRO
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 16:19:29
Thanks for the reply on when Robber Barons was written. I thought it might
have been much earlier for some reason.
See You later,
Dean H.
Message: 76077
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller-Id
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 16:22:01
Since the id tones come from the phone company, then they will identify
the number if it came from a pulse/rotary phone, but the owner of that phone
will presumably have no way of blocking their number for ANY call they make
since they can't send the blocking code without tone service on their line.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76078
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Politics
Subject: Beau/Const.
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 16:24:46
I stand corrected. Thank you.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76079
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff/Phones
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 16:44:11
Why do I figure I have the right to make phone calls? Because telephones
exist for the purpose of making calls. As long as I did not obtain the
number by some improper means and am not using the phone as a weapon of
harassment, I do have every right to make a phone call. Do I have to give up
my own phone number to the person I'm calling in order for this to be a
legitimate action on my part? No.
If I want to be called back I will give the person my number. You have my
number and have had it for years.
Why you insist on dragging in totally non-related issues like credit
cards is something of a mystery to me. To have credit you must pay the price
of showing the creditor why you are good for it. It is unfortunate, but
true, that the government also seizes upon credit as a handy way of getting
leverage against the individual in ways they don't even know. You can avoid
this by not having any credit, which is something I am working toward mostly
for other reasons.
I don't know where you get this 'for someone who claims to be private'
stuff. Did you think we were having some kind of contest to see who was the
most divorced from commercialism and that I was claiming to be holier than
thou? Not hardly. I am not worried about the government getting my phone
number, or any of the places I regularly do business with, or any of the
people I have any kind of relationship {ith. It is the idea that I must be
assumed a criminal and my number given out to everyone for any use they can
find for it when I make a cal{ that I disagree with.
Message: 76080
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff 2/2
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 17:00:50
{By making a phone call, which the person I call could easily refuse if
they wish, I do not form some kind of contract in which I must supply my
number for their use in order to be moral. If a person you meet at a party
asks your name do you get red in the face and demand to know their name
before you will divulge your own? Do you propose that you each write down
your names and exchange them at the same time to avoid speaking to someone
who has the advantage of knowing your name first for the length of time it
takes you to ask their's?
If I call a business for the first time to make an inquiry from which I
will decide whether or not to do business with them, am I treating them like
garbage if I don't give them my phone number unless I decide in their favor?
Hardly. Am I claiming that I am the only person in the world who is
important and everyone else is garbage if I want the decision of who to
give my phone number to to be a conscious decision on my part? Never.
Someone who takes everything as a slight against them might be appalled
that their phone can ring without them knowing whether they want to answer
it or not, but I don't think caller-id is going to solve that.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76081
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Oxygenated
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 17:56:09
What a dope I am. In #75991 I wrote that I got worse mileage in
the summer. I've corrected the message to say that I got worse
mileage in the winter while using gasoline that reeks of
ether. I wonder if anyone has ever passed out at the pump.
Sorry for the confusion.
I think the oxygenating additives are intended to combine
(burn) during normal combustion, not before. It's said to
burn hotter, too.
Message: 76082
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Politics
Subject: Robber Baron
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 18:06:20
The year 1893 saw the biggest economic crisis in the
country's history. After several decades of wild industrial
growth, financial manipulation, uncontrolled speculation and
profiteering, it all collapsed: 642 banks failed and 16,000
businesses closed down. Out of the labor force of 15
million, 3 million were unemployed. No state government
voted relief, but mass demonstrations all over the country
forced city governments to set up soup kitchens and give
people work on streets or parks.
In New York City, in Union Square, Emma Goldman addressed
a huge meeting of the unemployed and urged those whose
children needed food to go into the stores and take it. She
was arrested for "inciting to riot" and sentenced to two
years in prison. In Chicago, it was estimated that 200,000
people were without work, the floors and stairways of City
Hall and the police stations packed every night with
homeless men trying to sleep.
The Depression lasted for years and brought a wave of
strikes throughout the country. The largest of these was
the nationwide strike of railroad workers in 1894 that began
at the Pullman Company in Illinois, just outside of Chicago.
Annual wages of railroad workers, according to the report
of the commissioner of labor in 1890, were $957 for
engineers, the aristocrats of the railroad -- but $575 for
conductors, $212 for brakemen, and $124 for laborers.
Railroad work was one of the most dangerous jobs in America;
over two thousand railroad workers were being killed each
year, and thirty thousand injured. The railroad companies
called these "acts of God" or the result of "carelessness"
on the part of the workers, but the *Locomotive Firemen's
Magazine* said: "It comes to this: while railroad managers
reduce their force and require men to do double duty,
involving loss of rest and sleep ... the accidents are
chargeable to the greed of the corporation."
Message: 76084
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 21:11:13
The 'proper' way to ask a name at a party or most anywhere is,
"Hello, My name is Cliff, may I ask what yours is?" Feel free to insert
'Dean' where I have 'Cliff'.
My point about Caller I.D. is that you want them to get up from
watching T.V. (at a critical point most times) and answer the phone (their
equipment) without knowing whom is paging/bothering/annoying/harassing them.
In short, you are using THEIR equipment, THEIR time and you say they (the
callee) has no right to know who it is? I still think the one being called
should have MORE rights, since s/he is the involuntary partner (at first) in
this venture.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76085
Author: $ Apollo SysOp
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bad Guys on C-I.D.
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 21:18:52
A trick bad guys do at times is to CALL a home they wish to intrude
and plunder when the home owner is not around. If the home owner answers
the phone...he is home. If there is an answer machine...???? If it just
rings...ahhhh most likely s/he is NOT home. However with caller I.D.,
this will not be so easy. You won't know if the pigeon is not answering
because he does not recognize the number or if the number is blocked by the
caller, that he might not answer blocked numbers... Bad guys don't want
Caller I.D. Just a thought....
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=* <-clif-
Message: 76086
Author: $ Peter Petrisko
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: ANN/P. CHRIST
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 22:45:32
"Piss Christ" is a controversial photograph by Andre Serrano. It
depicts a crucifix immersed in urine. It is quite beautiful actually and
wouldn't have caused a flap at all if not for the title.
Serrano, a devout Roman Catholic, has worked with bodily fluids for
years in his photographic work. A few years ago, for instance, he did a
series of abstracts. These abstracts were created by shooting extreme close
ups of tampons (used ones).
Bodily fluids represent the very crux of human "life" and energy within
some cultural & religious segments.
Of course it's much easier to label the whole idea "obscene" and not
have to think about it at all.
Message: 76087
Author: $ Peter Petrisko
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: CLIFF?
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 22:47:52
You will probably be relieved to know I will not be logging on again
until probably the end of July or so. This will give you plenty of time to
find, or create, a list of "medical evidence" supporting your claim
marijuana kills. Good luck.
Message: 76088
Author: $ Daryl Westfall
Category: News Today
Subject: NewsDay
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 22:57:08
I heard that the paper was going to be delivered free.
Message: 76089
Author: $ Steve MacGregor
Category: $tatus users only
Subject: Mark Adkins
Date: 06/26/91 Time: 23:23:59
In case anyone is interested, Mark seems to be haunting the Mensa bulletin
board (As "Egbert Stadhoffer") and Carol's Starship (but I forget the
pseudonym there). He appears to be behaving himself in both places, though.
========= Pascal #(O,O)# Hoot! MacProgrammer =========
Message: 76090
Author: Bobby Ballentine
Category: War!
Subject: beer and war
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 00:02:33
I feel I have every right to drink as much beer as I please. As an
eighteen-year-old, before I get drafted, by that moronic president, I'm
gonna get as loaded as possible every night. And no one is gonna stop me!
See you out on I-10...
Message: 76091
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/additives
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 05:20:55
"We looked on the pumps up there and nowhere did it say there were
additives."
That's because the requirements for additives are only for Maricopa and
Pima counties, in the heavily populated and polluted areas. Prescott gas
doesn't get the oxygenation that we do in the cooler months.
Message: 76092
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Annie on abuse
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 05:24:55
EDUCATION! That's what is going to prevent child abuse in many, many cases!
THe recognition and acceptance of real parental responsibility, and the vast
difference between loving discipline and abuse.
Instead of continuing to blow the smoke of ignorance, why don't you look up
a seminar on the subject and attend a few sessions? It just might open your
eyes to what is really going on in a lot of homes, and why, and what can be
done about it, if only the right steps were taken.
Message: 76093
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: Annie on "art"
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 05:26:51
"Piss Christ" is some sicko "artist's" conception of freedom of expression.
It is a crucifix in a jar of the demented one's urine. It was actually put
on display as an art object by that name.
Message: 76094
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Apro/additives
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 05:36:11
I haven't heard of anyone passing out at the pumps, but I have heard of
several people who got sick from inhaling the fumes from gas with the MTBE
added. Not the same with ethanol, however. THe MTBE smells horrible.
Message: 76095
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Caller ID
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 05:40:25
I have to agree with Cliff on this subject. I have two lines coming into my
home, one personal and one business. I pay the freight on those lines, and
they are there for MY benefit, not for the benefit of idiots like the 10
year old (he told me) who called about 10 the other evening looking for Bozo
the clown. Of course, when I asked to speak to one of his parents, he hung
up. With caller ID, you can bet that mom or dad would have gotten a friendly
bit of advice concerning their son's use of the telephone.
Hey, U.S. WEST! Hurry up and get called ID! I'm waiting!
Message: 76096
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: News Today
Subject: Daryl/Newsday
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 05:42:16
"I heard that the paper was gong to be delivered free."
Ev must know what his opinions are worth.
Message: 76097
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Roger on No
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 07:32:42
Good post Roger. It is true that most of the time one need not spank a child
- but sometimes - most definately!
Re: your comment - "This takes energy on the part of the parent to follow
up..." (re: them saying no and meaning it) Yes, that is also true, but
things have changed greatly as I pointed out. The mother use to stay home
and raise the children and it's not that way anymore. In fact, I have not
met a young woman with children in several years of the middle class that
didn't work - they all do. This puts extra pressure on the parents. I can
see why they may slough off with the discipline and not mean 'no' the first
time. You are right, it does take energy. Maybe either parent has any left
after a day at work. I remember the stress and pressures of raising my
children and I stayed home!! I have no idea how I'd of handled it if I had
to work! *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76098
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Question?
Subject: Peter on artist
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 07:41:22
Piss and used Tampax stink! Why on earth would anyone think that is art?
Piss doesn't look particularly bad - but a used Tampon surely does! Oh yuk!
Oh well - I guess art is like beauty - it's in the eye of the beholder
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76099
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pauley #76091
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 07:43:35
I knew that. I only put that in so the other's would know that Prescott -
Yavapi county - doesn't require it - and see what additives do - etc.
*>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76100
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Pauley on kids
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 07:47:49
OK I hear you when you say EDUCATION!!! But do you hear me when I say WHAT
WOULD YOU BE TEACHING???? WHAT IS PROPER PARENTING??? You must know all
these answers after going to the seminars on the subject and into the homes
of the people that abuse their children, right?
Re: your ... "If only the right steps were taken" .... What steps? You sound
like you know them, so speak out! *>>> ANN O. <<<*
Message: 76101
Author: $ Roger Mann
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann on Energy
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 08:14:24
I think that is where your "partner" comes in. He shares the load with you.
He doesn't sit down an have a smoke and watch TV while you get the kids
their baths and get 'em into bed. When you have 2 or more both of you
together can do these chores and then neither of you are dog-tired when the
kids have made their final "water" plea.
Message: 76102
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/Gross-out
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 12:49:11
Well, barf with with a spoon! As to whether piss or a used Tampax smells
worse, I'd go for the piss, because in time it decomposes chemically
and the smell spreads over the whole room.
I'm always telling people that the only PROPER way to make a cup of tea
is to put tea leaves in *boiling* water in a teapot. Tea bags make very
inferior tea. What bugs me about a tea bag, though, is that it's a very
unaesthetic object. I usually tell people that a soggy tea bag with the
string hanging out reminds me of a drowned mouse -- as indeed it does.
However, I only tell them that to avoid mentioning in polite company (and
usually over a meal) what it is that a used tea bag REALLY reminds me of.
But now, of course, everybody can guess.
Message: 76103
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 14:01:54
Well, I guess I just singlehandedly sent the entire teabag industry into a
tailspin...
Message: 76104
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Michael
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 14:04:01
Thanks for your comment. I remember two or three months back I posted
something consisting of about twenty-six messages, but I split that one up
into three groups of nine or so. It's a question of knowing what's a
reasonable maximum...
Message: 76105
Author: $ Gordon Little
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean/Caller ID
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 14:04:52
I'm not sure it's necessarily true that owners of rotary (pulse-dial) phones
will not be able to block the caller ID. There are services you cannot
access without a touch-tone phone, but those I can think of are dependent on
first connecting with a number and then sending the tones to the party you
are calling. The point here is that the touch tones are processed by
equipment at the other end of the line, belonging to the party you are
calling. It's no good clicking a dial at that equipment, because it
wouldn't understand.
The blocking code, however, must be processed by the telephone company's
equipment before it rings the phone at the other end. Since the telco's
equipment IS set up to decode pulse dialing, I would imagine it should be
able to process the blocking codes also. However, this doesn't mean it
necessarily *will*.
Message: 76106
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 14:39:32
I thought you would refuse to answer the question about being asked your
name and you didn't disappoint. How you figure that the ownership of your
telephone receiver somehow outweighs the ownership of the telephone placing
the call escapes me.
In any case it isn't worth arguing. Neither you nor I can decide what the
phone company will do. We can only decide what we will do in response. You
can refuse to answer the phone if there is no caller id, and I can relay all
my calls through some other number first. In the end the phone company will
charge more for extra services and equipment, the aftermarket will sell a
lot of new toys, and niche marketing will get a big shot in the arm with all
the new lists of people and where they have called.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76107
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 14:41:10
I suppose it would be too much trouble for someone casing a house by phone
to do it from a phone booth.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76108
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Question?
Subject: Gordon/Phone
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 14:46:43
I suppose you could be right, but don't you have to have a tone phone to
use services like call forwarding? I think telco does require tone service
to operate some of its own options. What about their built-in answering
services, does that work if you don't have tone service?
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 76109
Author: $ Paul Carelli
Category: Question?
Subject: "Piss-Christ"
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 17:31:41
I've heard about the "Piss-Christ" before but I am largely ignorant of
the controversy surrounding it. Paul Savage seems to imply that the artist
created this piece just to flaunt his freedom of expression. Is this true
or was the artist's intent less political?
Message: 76110
Author: $ Paul Carelli
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 17:33:36
I do not get on Apollo too often so sometimes it takes a while for me to
read the messages. Thanks for the welcome.
Message: 76111
Author: $ Apro Poet
Category: Politics
Subject: Robber Barons
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 17:58:44
It was the Depression of 1893 that propelled Eugene Debs
into a lifetime of action for unionism and socialism. Debs
was from Terre Haute, Indiana, where his father and mother
ran a store. He had worked on the railroads for four years
until he was nineteen, but left when a friend was killed
after falling under a locomotive. He came back to join a
Railroad Brotherhood as a billing clerk. At the time of the
great strikes of 1877, Debs opposed them and argued there
was no "necessary conflict between capital and labor." But
when he read Edward Bellamy's *Looking Backward*, it deeply
affected him. He followed the events at Homestead, Coeur
d'Alene, the Buffalo switchmen's strike, and wrote:
If the year 1892 taught the workingmen any lesson
worthy of heed, it was that the capitalist class, like
a devilfish, had grasped them with its tentacles and
was dragging them down to fathomless depths of
degradation. To escape the prehensile clutch of these
monsters, constitutes a standing challenge to organized
labor for 1893.
In the midst of the economic crisis of 1893, a small group
of railroad workers, including Debs, formed the American
Railway Union, to unite all railway workers. Debs said:
A life purpose of mine has been the federation of
railroad employees. To unify them into one great body
is my object.... Class enrollment fosters class
prejudice and class selfishness.... It has been my
life's desire to unify railroad employees and to
eliminate the aristocracy of labor ... and organize
them so all will be on an equality....
Knights of Labor people came in, virtually merging the old
Knights with the American Railway Union, according to labor
historian David Montgomery.
Debs wanted to include everyone, but blacks were kept out:
at a convention in 1894, the provision in the constitution
barring blacks was affirmed by a vote of 112 to 100. Later,
Debs thought this might have had a crucial effect on the
outcome of the Pullman strike, for black workers were in no
mood to cooperate with the strikers.
Message: 76113
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Peaches
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:28:38
Re: I told her that "no, I was a housewife" Her mouth literly flew open and
she replied with "No kidding?
I can relate to that. Bonnie's a house wife too, and we on occasion bump
into the same amazement.
Message: 76114
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Michael
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:32:53
Re: Why did you give the driver's license place your Social Security
number?
I had no idea that it was optional. The next time I renew, I will check it
out. I'm probably on every data base in the world. I was in the military
for 20 years. They started out with military serial numbers but changed
over to SSN later on. My SSN is on my checks and probable everywhere else.
I'll probably be the first Christian fed to the lions when the anti-Christ
takes over!
Message: 76115
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Roger
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:36:27
Re: he problem, Ann, is that the kids know the mother (or father) doesn't
mean no when they say no,no and feel free to ignore the no.
How true; I've seen it so many times. "Now Johnny don't do that. I will
count to 10!" Then when they get close to 10 they start to slow down down
and say things like, "I mean business young man," etc. How incredibly
stupid.
Message: 76116
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Apro
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:41:05
Re: I wonder if anyone has ever passed out at the pump.
When they first switch over in the Fall it kind of gets me in the stomach.
Message: 76117
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:42:42
Re: Bad guys don't want Caller I.D. Just a thought....
Good thought Cliff!
Message: 76118
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Peter
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:47:16
Re: Of course it's much easier to label the whole idea "obscene" and not
have to think about it at all.
Didn't one of those perverts also have a drawing or picture of one man
urinating into another man's mouth?
How abnormal of us all to think it is "obscene!"
Get a life!
Message: 76119
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Bobby
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:49:01
Re: I'm gonna get as loaded as possible every night. And no one is gonna
stop me!
I bet your Mom is so proud!
Message: 76120
Author: $ Felix Cat
Category: Answer!
Subject: Gordon
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 18:55:14
Re: I'm not sure it's necessarily true that owners of rotary (pulse-dial)
phones will not be able to block the caller ID.
In all probability, when Caller-ID is implemented, the "pulse service" will
be retired. The older dial phones will still work, but it will be up to the
customer to upgrade to "tone" to be able to use the various "tone" codes.
Message: 76121
Author: $ Melissa Dee
Category: Answer!
Subject: Art
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 19:30:37
It was Mapplethourpe that had one man urinating into another's mouth.
While I have seen "Pisn'ts Christ" and (enjoy is quite right...) respect the
work and agree it is artistic expression, I don't agree that everything that
is human has to be shoved down people's throats or in there faces. There
are quite a few artists that are "in your face" and as long as you expect
it, you can put it into perspective. Andre Serrano didn't do this piece to
be political, but I am sure he meant to stir things up. If you didn't know
what the picture was about, you would think it was beautiful. I think it's
very imaginitive and creative to have pulled that off, sort of fooling
people, questioning what is beautiful and all that.
But again, I don't think that means you have to be forced to look at it. I
don't think it's obsence, I can see how other's are put off by it. It
pushes buttons which is what it was intended to do.
Child abuse is human, it happens. But everytime another show comes on
exploting the issue, I turn it off as it turns ME off. I know it's out
there. I don't have to look at it all the time. It exists whether I
acknowledge it or not. Same with urine. Big deal.
Message: 76122
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Felix/licenses
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 22:49:50
AZ used to make up a number for everybody. Then they changed to putting on
your SSN unless you don't give it (or ask for it not to be used, I forget
what the form looks like now) and then they make one up for you.
Message: 76123
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Answer!
Subject: Paul/one pipeline
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 22:56:17
Yes, there is a pipeline between here and California, and, yes, many of the
companies share the use of it. They do this by what one could call
"time-division multiplexing" -- they take turns.
Company A gets to ship X barrels down the pipeline, followed by a "buffer"
which serves both to mark the end of its shipment and clean the pipe. Then
comes something else -- perhaps a different grade of oil/gas for the same
company, followed by another buffer, followed by product, etc., ad nauseum.
So, the "all comes from the same pipe" may be true, but it usually has
different sources before it got to that pipe.
Message: 76124
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/mileage
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 22:58:20
So, lessee, your car burned lots of fuel on the way to Prescott, and got
much better mileage on the way back.
Could it be that your car is a gas guzzler going uphill? Perhaps the engine
needs some work.
Message: 76125
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Felix/pulse phones
Date: 06/27/91 Time: 23:20:55
I'll believe that pulse phones will be phased out when the Corporation
Commission disallows US West from charging for touch tone service.
Do you realize that it is actually in the best interests of the phone
network to use a touch-tone phone, that the new equipment would be much
cheaper if it didn't have to understand pulse dialing, and that people who
have pulse phones are actually costing those who have touch-tone phones more
than just the extra monthly cost?
Message: 76126
Author: $ Rod Williams
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff/kills
Date: 06/28/91 Time: 00:40:47
I can see in the dark.
Message: 76127
Author: $ Rod Williams
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: The Cat
Date: 06/28/91 Time: 00:46:42
It doesn't 'screech' into the lungs as bad as a cheeseburger or piece of
pizza 'screeches' into the stomach pouch.
My water pipe broke last week and I had to pound a wooden dowen into the
pipe in order to keep our yard from flooding.
Rod
Message: 76128
Author: $ Rod Williams
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: ART
Date: 06/28/91 Time: 01:07:39
Didn't Serrano do a Jesus in a bottle, filled with kleenex droppings?
Content of this site is ©
Mark Firestone or whomever wrote it. All rights reserved.