HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: street@goat.cs.wisc.edu (Nick Street)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: buttons, buttons...
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:45:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.


since there is no alt.politics.paraphernalia newsgroup...

I'm trying to collect campaign buttons from all of the Democratic
women running for Senate this year, but I've lost count of even how
many there are.  So far, I've secured:  Lloyd-Jones from Iowa, Mosely
Braun from Illinois, and the two Californians.  I know I'm missing
Mikulski (MD), O'Dell (KS) and Yeakel (PA).  Any others?

Anybody from these states that would be kind enough to send along a
button would be greatly appreciated.  Reasonable expenses will be
cheerfully reimbursed.

Thanks.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Street				| "Go Make Plans"
street@cs.wisc.edu			|	-Bob
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,soc.singles,alt.politics.homosexuality,talk.bizarre
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: A Most Pressing COncern
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:57:15 GMT

latarra@buhub.bradley.edu (Lisa Ehren) writes:
]
] Although, what if you don't have sex, and have an orgasm anyway?
] Do you still have to take responsibility for it?

Lisa,

Miss Drieux is pleased that you have raised
this question as it presents some important points.

As has already been clearly Established,
If there is NO POTENTIAL FOR GESTATION
there can be NO SEX.

Orgasms, in the main, are messy things,
and Really are not the sort of things
that decent persons with good personal
hygeine standards would wish to involve
themselves in/with/towards.

More Importantly is the matter of how
best to have:

"GUILT WITHOUT SEX."

As then persons can enjoy feeling guilty
without all the bother of having to
engage in Ikky Yukky Messy things.


ciao
Miss Drieux

ps: for the slow reader, this is a 'high concept'
that needs to take a little time to think about.
So Do not feel upset if you are having any problems
with this. Just ask one of your favorite persons
in recovery and they will help you with the
BigPicture.



-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Entropy, Its not Just a Good Idea,
IT's The LAW!!!!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson)
Subject: Re: The 'Missing' Pages
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 04:18:06 GMT

>In article <5907@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>>
>>If it were politically right for Mr. Clinton to have gone to Moscow, why
>>are there three (or however many) pages missing regarding passport
>>documents? 

Imagine how stupid the Bush campaign looks as the FBI announces that there
was no alteration of the Clinton file--there were no pages missing.  There
were only staple holes showing something that had once been attached was
removed.  The FBI found that the "something" was the check for the passport
fee, the manditory copy of Clinton's birth certificate, and the extra
passport photo.

You know, the nice thing about this is that you people have kept the dirt
up so long and at such a vicious and idiotic level that it is finally
blowing up in your faces.  3 major news organizations announced today that
Bush's efforts to tar Clinton over the MMoscow trip had boomeranged, and
that the passport thing was just making it worse.

Paranoids and dirty dealers eventually get caught.  How lovely it is to
watch it happen!


Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:50216 alt.politics.perot:1909 alt.politics.elections:15575
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: All deficits are not created equal.
Date: 8 Oct 92 07:48:40 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Oct5.060755.22957@m2xenix.psg.com> michaels@m2xenix.psg.com (Michael Sandy) writes:
>When can a company or a company run with significant debt?  When the
>increase in cash flow counterbalances in.
>
>If spending 100 Billion $ increases the _annual_ GDP by 10 Billion,
>that will more than counteract 8% interest rates.
>
>Now, that 10 Billion increase in GDP can take a _long_ time, especially
>if you have low interest rates, and still pay for itself.
>
>A lot of businesses _deliberately_ run up their debt to avoid being
>bought out and looted.  Loans used for R&D, equipment development,
>training/education, buying into markets or increasing market share
>are all worthwhile things for deficit spending as they increase
>_income_ by more than their interest cost.

Banks have this nasty habit of requiring *collateral* from businesses
and individuals to secure the debt. And they have this funny notion
that they want their *principle* paid back on a regular schedule.
The US government has nothing but *faith* and *credit* to back it's
debt. Well I've lost faith and say don't give them any more credit.

Gary
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: No on 9
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:51:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.172726.10510@igor.tamri.com> donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
    >>Well, would you rather get beaten with bruises, or lose all
    >>your property (house, car, money, clothes) with no chance of
    >>insurance or recompense?
    >>
    >Different issue. The original poster was talking about
    >gay-bashing, an inexcusable act of violence which typically
    >entails several people with bludgeons thrashing one or two
    >unarmed people. The victims don't have a chance to surrender
    >their wallets, they are beaten purely out of malice. I
    >believe this happens reasonably often; I have friends who
    >have been beaten by such cowards. The property damage you
    >mentioned was a burned police car, not someone's private
    >property.

Oh, it was a POLICE car! Well then, THAT makes it different, eh? I
suppose if the had murdered somebody, and it turned out to be a
policeman, then that would have not been so bad either?

Actually, it was TWO cars burned, and a hell of a lot of windows
shattered, and at least one store somewhat looted.



-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

If all the contributions of Dead White Males, a.k.a. Dead White Loathsome
Oppressors, were to vanish, you'd have the Politically Correct(tm) Loathsome
Oppressors using dull rocks to hunt and the Politically Correct Women of
Vision and Strength(tm) using leaves for tampons.

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
From: nrc@cbnews.cb.att.com (N. Richard Caldwell)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Perot and Mortgage deduction
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:15:00 GMT
Organization: AT&T Network Systems  -  Columbus, Ohio

From article <Bvv0Mo.72L@apollo.hp.com>, by nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson):
> In article <1992Oct9.140035.5043@cbnews.cb.att.com> nrc@cbnews.cb.att.com (N. Richard Caldwell) writes:
>>
>>I wouldn't object to seeing the mortgage deduction completely
>>eliminated as part of a complete tax overhaul.  That doesn't mean that
>>limiting the interest deduction for the most expensive homes and
>>vacation home doesn't make sense. 
> 
>   It depends on how you define "sense".   If Perot is truly interested 
>   in sharing the pain he could propose limiting the percentage of the 
>   mortgage interest you can deduct.  That way everybody still has to 
>   pay a price -- in absolute dollars the owner of the expensive house 
>   will still pay more.


You seem to be working on the assumption that people have no choice
but to buy 200k plus homes.  Sure, Polen has been going on about modest 
500k homes but to me that's like your state income tax, you're paying 
for where you've chosen to live.  If you don't like it, move.

We're not talking about tax rates here, we're talking about housing 
subsidies and whether or not we should be subsidizing expensive 
housing.  I say no.  Refusing to subsidize luxury items does not
constitute pain.

>>While you're complaining that his program is a "soak the rich"
>>scheme, others are complaining that his gas and sin taxes place an
>>unfair burden on the middle class
> 
>    Why?  Rich people have bigger, more gas-guzzling cars.  And why
>    would middle class people pay more under a "sin tax"?   

I don't agree with that position, I am merely reporting it.

>    The very
>    nature of what's taxed under a "sin tax" is that it's non-essential
>    so if you don't want to pay the tax you can simply not buy the 
>    product.  

You mean like 200k plus homes?

>    Anyway, as I said, spending cuts, not tax increases are
>    the way to go.

I would much rather see spending cuts than taxes.  Perot has proposed
a vigorous set of spending cuts and they simply will not get the job
done alone.
	
>> or that his deep spending cuts will place an unfair burden on the poor. 
>  
>    This depends on what you cut.  A balanced federal budget without tax
>    increases will still be $1.1 trillion dollars -- plenty of money to
>    look after the poor if that's what you choose to do with it.

Not even Bush believes that will work.  With budget cuts and
optimistic economic forcasts he still ends up with a 130 billion
dollar deficit at the end of four years.  


"Don't drive too slowly."                 Richard Caldwell
                                          AT&T Network Systems
                                          att!cbnews!nrc
                                          nrc@cbnews.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre
From: sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Subject: Re: Family leave farce (was a most pressing COncern)
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:03:27 GMT

In article <9554@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>In <1992Oct9.214739.1488@u.washington.edu> sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>
>>Your view of the employee/employer relationship is substantially
>>different than mine, as well as being substantially different
>>from that in the laws of the legal system of the US.
>>Then, I guess you can find another country. 
>
>Why should he be forced to leave in order to find a country more to his
>liking.  Why can't he work to change this one.  This arguement sounds to
>close to the old love it or leave it arguement.

Sorry.  I forgot to turn the sarcasm flag on.  My snip about 
"finding another country" was in response to the INCESSANT
retort from some opponents of the family leave bill
along the line of "well, if your employer doesn't grant
you unpaid leave, find another job".

>My country. 
>Love it, leave it, or change it.

How true.
America:  Love it = Change it.

>Mark
>My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
>Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com


-- 
| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:50395 alt.activism:17302 ca.politics:8551
From: lpb@florida.swdc.stratus.com (Len B.)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Chicken George the Coward President
Keywords: cia, fbi, kill file, fda, dea, bush, nwo, kissinger
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:13:57 GMT

In article <hines.718493648@cgl.ucsf.edu> hines@socrates.ucsf.edu (Wade Hines) writes:
>mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>
>>>>I wonder if the average Clinton fan is so ignorant that he doesn't
>>>>know the difference between the CIA and the Secret Service or if Scott
>>>>here is special.
>
>>>Well shucks,  I suppose I'm an average Clinton fan and well, shoot,
>>>I reckon I wouldn't know the difference between the CIA and Secret
>>>Service either.
>
>>Well, in that case it confirms my opinion that Clinton is pandering to
>>the ignorant.  Unfortunately, there are a lot of ignorant people out
>>there so the strategy may work.
>
>>The CIA is responsible for gathering intelligence and covert
>>operations in foreign countries.  Their domestic activities are
>>limited to non-operational stuff like analysis, planning, etc.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You really are to funny for words! Do you know "Wackenhut"? Do
you know how to go aboaut getting your own file from the FBI?
Do you know that teh CIA has performed drug-related experiments
on people in this country without their consent or fore
knowledge?

Really...this is a scream!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :^)
>
>ha
>ha ha ha
>ha ha ha Ha Ha HA HA
>HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
>
>But don't worry, now that the secret service has a TV show (similar to COPS)
>we will all know to bow and pray for the well being of these guardians of
>democracy.
>ha
>ha ha
>ha ha ha Ha Ha
>HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA 
>-Wade 
>hines@rafael.ucsf.edu  It just doesn't matter.- Bill Murry
> 

Len
--
*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
The accountability of government has gone to the point where the very
use of the law is the instrument of illegality.
		-- Ralph Nader @ Harvard Law School, 1/15/92
From: gt6367c@prism.gatech.EDU (DEAL, DOUGLAS WAYNE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Why I think I'll vote for Clinton Clause
Date: 17 Oct 92 02:51:33 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Oct16.223740.5497@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <71536@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6367c@prism.gatech.EDU (DEAL, DOUGLAS WAYNE) writes:

>>Also please note when the economy went south, very very close tot he time
>>Georgie broke his no new taxes pledge.  What does that tell you.

>Nope.  Recession started summer of '90.  They didn't come to a budget
>deal until, what, October '90?

Again, i said very very close..............
Summer months are Late June, July August, Early and Mid September.
Pledge break came in October........how much of a difference is that.
I admit it is not proof....but it does show that increased taxes do not
help the economy.....
I do like however how you discounted the rest of my post with

[usual sillyness deleated]

Here is another example of someone discounting arguments with an insult
instead of reason.  That is not a sign of intelligence, but a sign
of stick your head in the sand because i must be right democratic logic.
Please refrain from such childish actions.


-- 
Douglas Wayne Deal
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt6367c
Internet: gt6367c@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness)
Subject: Re: ==> Gore Statement On The First Political Debate
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin TX
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:07:55 GMT

In article <BvzpAE.5Hw@doppler.ncsc.org> kmoore@ncsc.org (Kevin Moore) writes:
>In article <92285.221915U56503@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
> >
> >                   Statement of SEN. AL GORE
> >        On the first debate among the presidential candidates
> >
> > George Bush finished fourth -- behind Bill Clinton, who was the clear
> > winner, in expressing a plan for economic recovery, behind Ross Perot
> > in an understanding of why the economy is in trouble, and even behind
> > Jim Lehrer, the debate's moderator, in an ability to present a plan
> > for America's future.

Al Gore, you obviously are on a different planet ... ( you know, the
one where cars are more dangerous than nuclear bombs.)
Perot did well, and drew a good crowd response with his blunt and
honest talk.  Bush did well too, and showed stature, insight
and a genuine desire to do the *right things* that need to be done
to improve this nation.

Clinton was an overscripted clown with some well-prepared "humble
beginnings" anecdotes and a whole bunch of obfuscatory nonsense
that meant nothing, except when he was being dishonest (which was on
several points).

> > George Bush kept the American people waiting for nothing. Anyone who
> > hoped this debate would give them a reason to vote for Bush and
> > Quayle is going to sleep tonight planning to vote for Bill Clinton
> > and Al Gore.

Not I .... I went to bed last night more frightened then ever
at the prospect of Clinton as President. This man is unfit to serve.
Period.

> > And, for good reason. Bill Clinton reached out to the
> > American people with a plan for change and economic recovery, with a
> > reason for hope and a genuine commitment to putting people first.

>I wonder what day last week Gore wrote this.

Ha! 

My take on Al Gore as a spin doctor: His spinning in his own orbit.

Pat
		Bill Clinton: The Status-Quo Candidate
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: drevik@utkvx1.utk.edu (Drevik, Steve)
Subject: utk test
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 13:18:00 GMT


Have been trying to post for two weeks now... 
no bounce, just no post....
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:52163 sci.environment:12015 talk.environment:4226
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 16 Oct 92 00:54:46 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct14.231723.5703@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
=  3a2: relating to, yielding, dealing in, or involving the use of food 
=       produced with the use of feed or fertilizer of plant or animal origin 
=       without employment of chemically formulated fertilizers, growth 
=       stimulants, antibiotics, or pesticides <organic farming> <organic 
=       stores> 

Let me guess.  You're also one of those people who believe that "natural"
vitamins are different than synthesized vitamins, right?

="Stoop labor". I read a nice article a few months ago about the
=nature of hoe handles, in particular why the hoes used by most migrant
=workers used to have (and often still have) short handles. It makes it
=easier for a field foreman to identify people who are not working -
=they are not stooped to the ground. I suggest that a consideration of
=the politics of power relations is always worthwhile when mentioning
=aspects of the past, present and future.

I suggest you also do a little reading in anthropology texts.  I think you'll
find that the short-handled hoe is the "traditional" device.  Now, that article
may well have a point about why the short-handled hoe hasn't been abandoned,
but it certainly wasn't the invention of evil exploitative overseers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice)
Subject: Re: Media Bias
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 02:26:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.223045.11114@Princeton.EDU>, niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes...
>In article <1avguhINN9jv@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ai065@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Thomas Hill) writes:

Bias? Of course, but more importantly...

"News" is Noise.

Kinda like tea-leaves.

>>The answer..........? ROSS FOR BOSS! VOTE FOR ROSS PEROT FOR PRESIDENT!
> 
>He's not running for BOSS!  That's his problem!  He thinks he is.  He's
>running to be *employee*, not boss.

Nice summary.

>David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1993 World Series Champions

- Stephen Tice
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:51810 alt.rush-limbaugh:7429 alt.politics.bush:9178 alt.politics.clinton:10460 alt.politics.elections:16820 talk.abortion:42692 alt.sex:32959
From: hsims@vax.clarku.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
Subject: RE: rights and responsibilities
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:21:34 GMT
Organization: Clark University

In a previous article, sa114984@longs.lance.colostate.edu (Steven Arnold) wrote:

[stuff deleted]
>	If babies just popped into womens' bodies from out of nowhere, I'd
>support the pro-choice position too.  But they don't.  They're in the womb
>because of voluntary and avoidable behavior by the woman.
> 

Excuse me, but isn't "voluntary and avoidable behavior" by the man also 
involved in this process?  Do you think it is fair to force women to pay for 
consenting to sex with their health and possibly their lives without insisting 
on the same consequences for men who consent to sex?


                               .... Heather.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Subject: Sustainable lifestyles
Summary: JMC won't like it
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 17:18:03 GMT

Here is a first pass at some criteria for sustainable living, given a
population of about 1 billion humans worldwide. I have no idea how to
reach that number, nor now effective any of this would be without such
a reduction. For that matter, I don't know how fully it would work
even with such a reduction. I think about this a lot as I try to live
a life that at least in some respects attempts to be sustainable.
Insight and criticism is welcome, even from those who don't take the
idea of sustainability seriously.

A sustainable lifestyle might have the following attributes:

	1) doesn't reduce topsoil depth

RATIONALE: all life on this planet relies on a rather thin layer of soil.
           Its dispersal and denudation are reversible only in the
	   long term, and perhaps not even then.
 
	2) doesn't have more than a <XXX>% effect on atmospheric
		composition

RATIONALE: there is evidence that atmospheric composition represents
                a dynamic equilibrium amongst producers and consumers
		of its contents. I don't know what <XXX> should be.

	3) doesn't redirect or restrict more than 1% of water flow
		in a given watershed 

RATIONALE: ecosystems are generally close to dynamic equilibrium and/or
		carrying capacity. 

	4) doesn't use heavy metals

RATIONALE: we do not yet have ecosystems capable of dealing with
		most heavy metals in significant quantities.

	5) leaves contiguous stretches of any given ecosystem
		connected to original (pre-human) neighbors

RATIONALE: the strength of ecosystems relies heavily on diversity,
                which in part relies on corridors connecting
	        inter-dependent components.

	6) avoids petrochemicals, in general

RATIONALE: we don't yet have ways of dealing with plastic waste; most
                current uses of plastic are for reasons of cost,
                not irreplaceability.

	7) recycles biomass through a given ecosystem, rather
		than dispersing it

RATIONALE: model natural ecosystems

	8) uses biomass to form products that last and are used for as
		long as the biomass takes to be regrown

RATIONALE: the obvious criterion for sustainable manufacture and consumerism.

	9) does not use products whose production uses
		more energy than they save, either in terms of
		food or existing non-human energy supply.

RATIONALE: encourage comfort and leisure through efficiency, not
                through expanded use of energy sources.

-- 
There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a
little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider
price only are this man's lawful prey.
						John Raskin