ecl@mtgzy.UUCP (e.c.leeper) (02/10/86)
(For the benefit of newcomers: this is based on a long discussion of someone's .signature file in net.women which said, "If we can send a man to the moon, why can't we send all of them?") I have a better idea. Let's send everyone who *wants* to go to the moon. The rest of you turkeys can stay here. In case the preceding isn't clear enough, I'll spell it out. I'm sick of this whole discussion. It is stupid, assinine, and childish. But most of all, it implies that going to the moon is a bad thing. While everyone is so busy deciding who's sexist, who's racist, and what's humorous, no one seems to care that there are a *lot* of people (men AND women) who would give their eyeteeth to go to the moon. Some have given more. I doubt that Resnick or McAuliffe would think very much of *any* of these arguments. There is a saying, "The meek will inherit the earth; the rest of us are going to the stars." It's not the meek; it's the short-sighted, and Lord knows this group has its share. Evelyn C. Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!ecl (or ihnp4!mtgzy!ecl)
ggr@lanl.ARPA (Geary Radcliffe) (02/12/86)
> (For the benefit of newcomers: this is based on a long discussion of someone's > .signature file in net.women which said, "If we can send a man to the moon, > why can't we send all of them?") > > Evelyn C. Leeper > ...ihnp4!mtgzz!ecl > (or ihnp4!mtgzy!ecl) Actually, I like the .signature file (it's humorous), and encouraged me to try this one: -- "If we can send a man to the moon, why can't we put metal in a micro-wave?" ...(I heard it on "Cheers") IIIIIIIIIIII II . . II ( ^ ) \ 0 / \__/ The foregoing statements should only be attributed to me, and not to my employer.