### 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.