In article <9408240204.AA21095@runner.utsa.edu>, Douglas R. Floyd <dfloyd@runner.jpl.utsa.edu> wrote:
I most likely will get toasted for this, but here goes:
Naw...
I seriously wonder who is trying to create a repressive government. Clinton cannot pass a simple crime bill, much less become Big Brother.
Oh? Just wait and see... Now it just has to get past a Republican point of order (it breaks the Budget Act) that requires 60%. Once past that, it's home-free. Even if he can't pass the Crime Bill (which I think is one of the most frightening pieces of legislation in a long time: 2nd Amendment right to violent revolution aside, it includes a measure which requires anybody *accused* of a "sex crime" to be tested for HIV, at the alleged victim's demand), think of it as a sort of "Pascal's Wager." I'd far rather be wrong about this country getting dangerously oppresive than be wrong about it being just fine, business as usual. YM, of course, MV. -- L. Todd Masco | "Large prime numbers imply arrest." - Previously meaningless cactus@bb.com | grammatically correct sentence. Now...