HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill
Date: 15 Nov 92 21:29:52 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <21879@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>No one complains that the chess club is pressuring children to play chess
>because the members talk about how much fun chess is.  It is hypocritical
>to complain that God-fearing children are pressuring others to believe in
>God.

Sorry, but this doens't wash, for two reasons: 1) No chess grandmaster has
written a book asking his followers to believe in him as the representative of
the creator of the universe, and promising eternal life; and 2) believing in
chess as a recreation and adhering to a religion are two entirely different
things, and you won't offend a Buddhist, or a Muslim, or a Jew, by asking him
to play chess.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
           "Cat: Four legs and an attitude." -- Jim Reese
From: wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Rick Russell)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Practical Atheism (Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill)
Keywords: atheism not god
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:49:51 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station

In article <BxuBn8.7Bz@NeoSoft.com> rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally) writes:
>order. I must now confess that my perception of atheism has to be the
>fault. I've always thought atheists were absolutely sure there was no
>God, and that agnostics weren't sure. Where do I now draw the line?

Well, since you asked, I'll give you my definitions of atheist and
agnostic.  They may not be strict dictionary definitions :-)

The Theist: Someone willing to make the 'leap of faith', and believe
in supernatural entities (perhaps 'supernatural' is too strong a term)
without evidence. 

[To be honest, I really respect the true theists who accept faith
without feeling the need to justify their belief to other people. I've
always thought that those theists who feel pressed to defend their
faith are exactly the theists who don't really understand what faith
is.]

Agnostic: Someone who applies normal evidence-based reasoning to their
lives, but reserves judgement on religious matters. An agnostic would
be quick to dismiss extraterrestrials, the tooth fairy, and
intelligent marshmallows for lack of solid evidence, but the agnostic
usually gives special consideration to religious issues, stating
instead that we don't know or can't know.

"Soft" Atheist: The "soft" atheist subjects all things to the same
evidence-based reasoning, without reserving judgement for anything. To
the soft atheist, God, Yahweh, Allah, Vishnu, and whatever go in to
exactly the same classification as the tooth fairy and
extraterrestrials. To the soft atheist, the Bible is NOT evidence for
the existence of God, any more than a physics textbook is evidence for
the existence of gravity, or Tolkein is evidence for the existence of
elves.

[BTW, I consider myself to be a soft atheist.]

"Hard" Atheist: The "hard" atheist sees religion as a specifically
perpetrated deception on the part of powerful religious and secular
figures.  While some hard atheists will agree that the originators of
a particular religion were well-intentioned (if wrong), a hard atheist
suggests that the myth of a God (or Yahweh, or whatever) is maintained
exclusively to keep religous figures in power, and to proliferate
their own political and moral views.

[I think "hard" atheists are in a minority among atheists, but it's
certainly not hard to see where a hard atheist could get his or her
views!]

This unmitigated opinion has been brought to you by:
-- 
#      Rick Russell | TAMU Meteorology | wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu       # 
#     "I am Elfy of Atlantis." "I am Jo-Jo of Munchkinland."           #
#     "We are Elfy and Jo-Jo!"                                         #
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000)
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:36:18 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

David L. Cathey (davidc@montagar.com) wrote:
: In article <1992Nov12.181722.27222@watson.ibm.com>, johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:
: > We only "have" to in the sense that it's how the system is currently set up.
: > It doesn't mean that it makes sense or that it can't be changed.
: 
: 	But *NOW* it does, so until the problem is solved, I'm not wanting
: to attack the symptom.

But you perpetuate the problem by supporting the symptom.

: 	Besides, after reading some of your posts about what you think the
: "system" should look like, I don't like it much (Re: no need for an M.E.,
: just feed that criminal you shot to your dog.).

I don't know why this bothers you so much.  The guy's dead.  What's the point
in spending thousands of taxpayer dollars to plant him in the ground somewhere
(except maybe to prop up the funeral home business)?

: > I could say the same for English, Math, History, and Science.
: 
: 	So what are you trying to say here, that we ought to stop teaching
: these as well, since most students don't want to learn them?
  
I think most of them DO want to learn them (for different reasons).

: 	Life is a constant learning experience, whether you like it or not.
: I'm learning that I really don't like the world that you would like to see,
: since all you seem to be interested in is yourself.

Don't you see the absurdity in the statement "I care about you so much, I'm 
going to dictate your life for you"?  No thanks.  You run your life, I'll run
mine.

: I think Fred is wrong to call you a Libertarian.

So does the Libertarian party, I imagine.

: I think "Anarchist" would be more fitting. 
: Everyone gets to do what they want, irregardless of the impact on others.

No, it's more like "everyone gets to do what he wants, as long as he doesn't 
hurt others".  Of course if it "hurts" you that I don't pick a career that you
approve of then it doesn't count.

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
    "Egad, a base tone denotes a bad age" -- TMBG   "I Palindrome I"
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000)
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:52:42 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

David L. Cathey (davidc@montagar.com) wrote:
: 	Rights of the individual are more important that society.  Okay...
: . . . 
: 	Yep, John is really concerned about the rights of the individual that
: was shot...  And none at all for the individual survivors still living.

David, HE'S DEAD.  Dead people don't have any rights.  What amazes me is that
you are so concerned about where to put the body of a dead burglar.  If he
left enough money to plant himself in the ground then fine.  If his family 
wants to come pick his body up, then fine.

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
    "Egad, a base tone denotes a bad age" -- TMBG   "I Palindrome I"
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Successful education program in Cleveland
Date: 17 Nov 92 19:21:57 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin


    =====  GOAL FIVE:  LITERACY AND LIFELONG LEARNING  =====

*5   JOB TRAINING:  CLEVELAND WORKS "HUGELY SUCCESSFUL"
     A Cleveland program that customizes its training classes to
meet employer needs has been "hugely successful," according to Ed
Sec Lamar Alexander (AMERICA 2000 Conference Call).  The
Cleveland Works program has taken 6,000 people off welfare,
according to David Roth, founder and exec. director.
     "Any individual, when given the opportunity to become
gainfully employed and achieve and maintain a good quality of
life, would learn whatever they needed to learn to apply in the
work place," said Roth.  The program is a four week workshop but
allows people to continue their training until they find a job.
     Cleveland Works runs a comprehensive health clinic, a day-
care center, a Head Start program and helps participants with
legal troubles in addition to the training program.  "We'll stick
with you if you're meeting us halfway," said Roth.  So far 450
employers have provided full time jobs with health benefits to
graduates of Cleveland Works (11/16).
     For more information on Cleveland Works, contact David Roth
at (216) 589-9675.

-- 
--
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |        Austin, TX
- FICA isn't a retirement plan. Money's spent. It'll be gone when you need it.-
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Protectionism and Japan
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:12:49 GMT
Distribution: usa,tx
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900

In article <1992Nov17.141239.16753@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> In <1992Nov16.152717.687@cpqhou.compaq.com> thomasr@cpqhou.compaq.com (Thomas Rush) writes:
> 
> >>In article <1992Nov12.142955.625@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> >> 
> >>> This one was more politically motivated than anything else, wasn't it?
> >>> I mean, given that the bulk of the sugar on the world market was
> >>> coming from Cuba, etc., and we wanted to try and do something with
> >>> Hawaii?  I can try to look it up in my baby library here, if someone
> >>> doesn't know.
> 
> >If the motivation was to discourage use of Cuban sugar and boost sales of
> >domestic, why wouldn't we simply require labelling: "This sugar contains
> >70% imported sugar and 43% imported Cuban sugar."  
> 
> Because we have a Representative Democracy and not a Democracy?
 
Because the sugar lobby could care less where the foreign competition
comes from, it simply wants to get rid of it.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: YOU OWE ME FREE HEALTHCARE!
Date: 15 Nov 92 22:38:08 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Nov13.142251.16920@montagar.com> davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey) writes:

>In article <1992Nov12.132221.26636@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>> In <1992Nov11.210046.4293@awdprime.austin.ibm.com> curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806) writes:
>> 
>>>Clinton was elected on the claim, (among others,) that 
>> 
>> You know, I've heard more people during (and after) this election
>> trying to explain to me just what Clinton 'meant' by some bit of
>> campaign rhetoric.

>	But the quote I heard was "Health care is a right, not a privilege".
>So just what does he mean?

It means that we shouldn't just let people die on the streets because
they can't afford health care.  Is this a problem?  Hell, if we
started trying to take politicians speaking to crowds at their exact
values of what they said, we'd have to arrest them all (which isn't
necessariliy a bad idea, but we're all adults here and SHOULD
understand this sort of thing, right?).


>	Much of even what Clinton has said is directed toward socialized
>medicine.  That means that one way or another, we pay the bill.

Pardon me, but I don't believe the plan Clinton is proposing falls
under the term 'socialized medicine' (unless they redefined
'socialized' when I wasn't paying attention ;-)).

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: CHOICE: DEBATE BASED ON COMPETING PHILOSOPHIES
Date: 18 Nov 92 15:02:47 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Nov16.234418.13563@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:
>Gerry Palo (gpalo@digi.lonestar.org) wrote:
>: A choice system would go far to free the public schools of all those Federal
>: and State rules that cost them so much, also of the top-heavy administrative
>: structure that is required to enforce them and which tends to perpetuate 
>: and grow its own existence over time.
>
>I think just the opposite would happen.  You may have noticed that the
>government doesn't give us our money back without a LOT of strings attached.
>This voucher money would be contigent on the schools following a bunch of
>federal regulations which would make them a lot like the public schools are
>today.  Anytime you start to commit public money, you're going to have
>bureaucracy.  On the other hand, we're starting to see a lot of really fine
>school-choice systems being set up in the private sector, which I think will
>be very successful.
>
>--
>John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
>        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
>    "Egad, a base tone denotes a bad age" -- TMBG   "I Palindrome I"

Good point.  Also, it could make life difficult for religious schools
if those strings included a ban on religious activity in the name of
"separation of church and state".  The idea of choice is that it
really must be choice, that is not the maternalistic, protective
state but the real parents must take the responsibility for choosing.
Even a partial movement in that direction would improve things, and
even a little relief for the private schools would reveal how well 
the system would work.  Maybe tax credits for people who send their
kids to private schools would be better.  The primary burden is that
you now have to pay twice to send your children to a private school.
This tends to favor the wealthy.  But it is surprising how many parents
of really modest means will sacrifice to send their kids to anything
but a public school.  

There are many children in the church schools whose parents send them 
there not because they belong to the religion but because they prefer 
virtually anything to the state schools. We would have sent our kids
to a (non-church) Waldorf school if there were one in Dallas.  We looked
at a nearby Catholic school as an alternative, though we are not
Catholics, and found that fully half the students there are non-Catholic.
We finally settled on a Lutheran school for reasons not connected to
religion.

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Subject: Re: Protectionism and Japan
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa,tx
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 02:46:44 GMT

In article <21877@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>In article <Bxo07C.MqJ@NeoSoft.com> hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen) writes:
>>As for "IMHO", I've never understood the point.  Who else's point of view
>>could I possibly be expressing besides my own?  Do you really think that
>>if I don't start each sentence with IMHO I'm claiming to have the truth
>>incarnate?
>
>If there is one thing I've learned about USENET, it is that people will
>SWEAR you are the most opinionate, obnoxious, closed-minded, bigot if you
>DON'T start every sentence with IMHO and pretend that you are stupid and
>all of your ideas are dumb.

	Ah, why do you save your lamest posts for me? (-: How to 
lambaste....hmmm....which of the many ways...so many to choose....
Okay, enough of the rhetorix. (That's the evil rhetoric cycle). 
Point to the factual content of the following:
"You are stupid."
"Your ideas are stupid."
If you or anyone else wants to claim I'm stupid, fine. It's not
a widely-accepted fact, you can quote no source but yourself. I'll
ask for the IMHO, unless it's been printed in Newsweek or some such,
as part of a finding: "Joe can be declared stupid". Otherwise, it is
your opinion, and you can leave off the "H" when appropriate. Cry if
you will. Without other source, it is but your opinion. It is not at
all inappropriate for me to point that out. And, to answer Doug at the same
time: Doug, you ask who's opinion but your own could you be expressing.
In the way something is put, it can be implied that the notion is
universal, or should be. That's your opinion of the House Bank. IMHO.
Do you see that if you call something stupid you are trying to shame
anyone that might hold true the notion you slam? In a case like the
House Bank, I'm frankly surprised that you go out of your way to
defend them on this, when the investigation's still going on, and
they voted not to release the Bank records. I find it absolutely
amazing that you guys think someone put tens of thousands of dollars,
(and not just someone, but a politician), interest-free, into a 
non-FDIC bank, to float checks for their peers. That sums up the defense
of the House Bank, doesn't it? Fairly so? Can it be?

>But that's just MY humble opinion and it may be wrong ...

	Now, that wasn't too hard, was it? Try it in earnest some time,
you might get more than 10% of an audience to listen to you. You really
are sharp on most issues, and an excellent writer. Then you fuck it all
up with immaturity. But, you're getting better, and I have a ton of
respect for you. I would have no fears entrusting you with things I
hold dear; I think you're a great guy.


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"We need stronger death penalties..." George Bush, debate #2
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: CHOICE: DEBATE BASED ON COMPETING PHILOSOPHIES
Date: 20 Nov 92 14:28:47 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Nov18.150247.28340@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:

>Good point.  Also, it could make life difficult for religious schools
>if those strings included a ban on religious activity in the name of
>"separation of church and state".  The idea of choice is that it
>really must be choice, that is not the maternalistic, protective
>state but the real parents must take the responsibility for choosing.
>Even a partial movement in that direction would improve things, and
>even a little relief for the private schools would reveal how well 
>the system would work.  Maybe tax credits for people who send their
>kids to private schools would be better.  The primary burden is that
>you now have to pay twice to send your children to a private school.
>This tends to favor the wealthy.  But it is surprising how many parents
>of really modest means will sacrifice to send their kids to anything
>but a public school.  

This is an even worse system than 'vouchers', since it restricts even
further who it is who will get the 'benefits' of this, and restricts
it to the WRONG people.  More middle-class welfare we do not need.  If
you want your kids to get a religious education, pay for it yourself.
If you don't like the public schools, either fix them or pay for your
own. 

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: 18 Nov 92 14:41:40 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Nov16.185858.14918@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:

>fred j mccall 575-3539 (mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com) wrote:
>: To what?  The only system that avoids these kinds of costs (and it
>: doesn't, really, it just selectively imposes them) is total anarchy.

>..and the only two colors are black and white.  Right.

Cute rhetoric, but not exactly constructive.  You have another?  Let's
hear it. 

>: What you save in taxes you'll surely spend in ammunition.

>At least you have a choice that way.

Yeah, kill or be killed.  Lovely choice; I love your view of how
things should be less and less all the time, John.

>: Gee, I object to that, too.  Given that we both object to that sort of
>: absolute statement, why did you even bring it up?  Of course, it's
>: another thing entirely to say that people who drop out or flunk out
>: are more likely to wind up being criminals than those who don't.

>Especially with no evidence besides "Fred thinks it's the case".

One more time, John, CHECK ******* ANY ******* REPORT ON CRIME.  Pick
the one you like.  It's in there.  This is a well-known thing, except
apparently to you.

>: >I could say the same for English, Math, History, and Science.
>: 
>: You could, but then you'd be missing the point of having schools.  Of
>: course, you don't seem to get the point, anyway, so I guess that
>: wouldn't be any different.

>You mean I'm missing Fred's point of having schools.  And we all know that 
>Fred's opinion is the only one that matters.

Oh, horseshit, John.  I KNOW you were here for the last discussion of
public education; how did this suddenly become just *my* opinion?
Great at rhetoric; lousy at logic.  And as for reasonable discussion,
I think you're clearly demonstrating that you're incapable of it if I
am one of the parties involved.

Sorry your ego is getting in your way so much.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000)
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:21:04 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

John F. Haugh II (jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org) wrote:
: I suspect he is going to drag out numbers that show the distribution of
: criminals is skewed towards the end of the population that doesn't have
: a high school diploma.  And he's right (as much as I hate to admit it).

This is not at all intuitive to me.  I think higher-educated criminals just pick
different crimes.

: Besides, you've seen me shoot.  It would be "death caused by MULTIPLE
: gunshot wounds" ;-)

In interesting places ;-)

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
    "Egad, a base tone denotes a bad age" -- TMBG   "I Palindrome I"