HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johniac@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: Sex Education <fairly long, but good!>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 16:49:39 GMT
Distribution: tx
Reply-To: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstation Division, Austin, TX

In article <exuptr.691.717455493@exu.ericsson.se>, exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (Patrick Taylor) writes:
|> Getting them to clean their room teaches them that they have to compromise 
|> with people that they share space with, and it teaches them that they have 
|> to be responsible for their belongings.

Oh really?  Do you all sleep in the same room?  If she's the only one
who uses the room, she should decide when to clean it.  You don't
learn responsibility by edict, you learn it by experience.

|> Since my wife and I own the house, 
|> I think it is appropriate to expect that we can esatblish guidelines for how 
|> the house looks by all that occupy it.

For common areas, I agree.

|> He/she will have to learn this 
|> lesson later in a harsher way if not now.

Or she'll live in a pig-sty when she leaves home, because she never
cleaned up for herself, but rather because her parents told her to.

|> Also, one tends not to step on so many dangerous things if the room is not a 
|> serious pit.

After she steps on a few dangerous things, she'll get this message loud
and clear.

|> Mind you, it is unrealistic to expect everyone to be neatnics.  But there 
|> should be limits.

No problem.  If her bedroom is infested with roaches and rats, then
the rest of the family will be affected.  But teenagers are sloppy by
definition.

-- 
John Iacoletti       IBM AWD Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"It takes a big man to cry.  And it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man."
                                                              -- Jack Handey
From: curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch/131072)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Bush goes after deadbeat dads
Date: 1 Oct 92 20:28:11 GMT
Reply-To: curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch/131072)
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin, TX


*12  DEADBEAT DADS:  PRESIDENT PROPOSES STRICT LEGISLATION
     President Bush yesterday proposed legislation that would
make failure to pay child support a federal crime (multi.).  His
plan also would require employers to withhold wages of workers
under court order to pay child support and would require inter-
state enforcement of child-support orders.
     The proposed plan also would deny passports, professional
licenses and federal loans to those who do not pay support.  And
more absent parents would have to pay for their children's health
insurance.
     The PHILA. INQUIRER writes that "child support is a
significant national problem."  The newspaper adds that
government estimates put at approximately $5B the amount of
court-ordered support that does not reach families every year.
And according to government figures, of the over 10 million
absent fathers across the U.S., half have been ordered by courts
to pay child support.  And only one half of those adhere to the
court orders (Green, 10/1).




                              -30-

--
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |       Austin, TX
 -Public school administration has gone from 15% to 30% of expenses since 1960-
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Subject: Re: John's Brain
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:27:56 GMT

In article <1992Sep22.141815.19754@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>John, I've learned more than I ever wanted to know about you just by
>watching your pathetic little ego games on here.  Thanks, but no
>thanks.  The less I know about you the better I'll like it.

	(To the tune of "Gone Fishin'") 
	Gone discussin'
	Instead of jus' a-fussin'


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"They say 'David, what shall I do? They wait for me in the hallway'.
I say 'Don't ask me- I don't know any hallways."- David Bowie, "Scary Monsters"
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
From: tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli)
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Organization: None.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:13:49 GMT

In article <21644@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>Escalante differs from Eric in one very real area - Escalante faught the
>system at almost every turn.  Eric supports the status quo.  He opposes most
>of the reforms in Bush's America 2000 proposal.  He supports the NEA.  He
>=is= the problem.  We need fewer Eric's kissing the asses of groups like
>the NEA.

FACT:  The NEA's budget gets 62 CENTS out of every tax payer.  NOT 62
cents out of every dollar, just 62 CENTS.  If you feel that the NEA is
destroying the country, or is draining the budget, try the defense
department or the interest we pay on the dept.

The NEA got about one hundredth of one percent of the taxes I paid last year.

Big deal.

Find another scape goat.

Tom
-- 
Tom Limoncelli -- tal@warren.mentorg.com (work) -- tal@plts.uucp (play)
"I like Bill Clinton tremendously.  I know him from the governors' conferences.
The Democrats nominated their best person, a very able fellow.  The country is
well served by that choice." -Bush's re-election chair in NJ (Thomas Kean)
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5698 alt.politics.clinton:7407
From: lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies (was: Re: Legalized Theft)
Date: 28 Sep 1992 01:54:20 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigbang.berkeley.edu

In article <21630@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
 
>Catholic schools accept almost 100% of all applicants.  I believe the
>number is closer to 97%, but I'm sure you get the idea.

Reference please? I don't believe it.

John Haugh II mangles almost 100% of all statistics. I believe the
number is closer to 97%, but I'm sure you get the idea.

andy
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Subject: Re: Clinton Policies (was: Re: Legalized Theft)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:31:22 GMT

In article <1a5okcINN791@agate.berkeley.edu> lazarus@ocf.berkeley.edu (Andrew J. Lazarus) writes:
>John Haugh II mangles almost 100% of all statistics. I believe the
>number is closer to 97%, but I'm sure you get the idea.

	I think statistics pretty much come pre-mangled. John's free to use
his, and you to use yours. Neither means jack....but they're legal
rhetoric, and this is a political newsgroup.....




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"They say 'David, what shall I do? They wait for me in the hallway'.
I say 'Don't ask me- I don't know any hallways."- David Bowie, "Scary Monsters"
From: curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch/131072)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: liberal sex education in GA for 6th graders
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:01:17 GMT
Reply-To: curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch/131072)
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin, TX


       =====  GOAL THREE:  CORE COURSE PROFICIENCY  =====

*3   SEX EDUCATION:  HOW EARLY IS TOO EARLY?
     Ga.'s sex education review panel yesterday added
requirements to the state sex-education curriculum (White,
ATLANTA CONSTITUTION; See DRC 9/4, #2).  The panel voted to teach
sixth-graders that condoms can help prevent the spread of AIDS.
Seventh-graders would learn about birth control.  In addition,
the panel agreed, with almost half the members dissenting, to
require school districts to establish a committee of parents to
review its sex education curriculum and materials.
     The panel, which includes "conservative" parents and an
official from Planned Parenthood, also voted yesterday to
emphasize teaching abstinence "as the most effective method to
prevent AIDS and pregnancy."  However, the panel also concluded
"that teaching abstinence isn't enough," writes the CONSTITUTION.
Teacher Irma Works noted that Ga. children get pregnant as early
as fourth grade.  Thus, a majority of the board said condoms and
other forms of birth control should be introduced before H.S.
     But some parents, school board members and school
administrators said some of the lessons may "be too explicit" for
some students.  They said individual school systems and schools
should have more discretion to decide at what grade level to
introduce such topics.  Parent and committee member Linda
Hamrick:  "You are overlooking the outrage the average parent is
going to have when they find out that their children are being
exposed to this against their moral, religious value system."
     The State Board of Ed is expected to vote on the
recommendations next month (10/2).

--
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |       Austin, TX
 There'll be too many elderly in 30 years for your kids to afford all the FICA.
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
From: wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Rick Russell)
Subject: Re: Sex Education <fairly long, but good!>
Keywords: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Distribution: tx
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:13:30 GMT

In article <BvAzCp.H89@rice.edu> gamble@owlnet.rice.edu (Ben Gamble) writes:
[in reply to Patrick Taylor's posting]

>Going a little farther into speculation, your argument in previous
>postings has been that kids can figure out the pleasure on their own,
>but they need some guidance regarding the dangers.  My argument here
>is that kids, when presented with a program that talks about sex and
>mentions danger but not desire and pleasure, will immediately conclude
>that said program is out of touch with reality, and moreover insults
>their intelligence, because it doesn't reflect their own experience
>with desire and pleasure.

Ben has successfully articulated a point that I tried (unsuccessfully)
to articulate.

While teenagers don't typically have an overabundance of common sense,
they are smart enough to know when 'suits' (read: authority figures)
are force-feeding them one side of the argument. Showcase only the
dangers of sexual activity, and they'll dismiss it as irrelevant.

Link the dangers with experiences they are familiar with, and then
you're on to something.

>Is anyone still reading?  Anyone?

Yep!
-- 
#      Rick Russell | TAMU Meteorology | wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu       # 
#     "I want to Krazy Glue my head to the bottom of a BIIIG           #
#      steel girder!" - Weird Al Yankovic                              #
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5690 alt.politics.clinton:7375
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Prove it!
Organization: Texas Instruments, Inc
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 13:28:38 GMT

In article <mBN4RB1w164w@n5abi.hou.tx.us> gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy) writes:
>talking about. Your concept seems to be, "If you act like a kid,
>I'll act like a kid". Mirroring behavior you disagree with makes 
>no sense to me.

In my experience, people who act like John does almost invariably
dislike being treated as they so often treat others.  If they dislike
it ENOUGH, they will often modify their behaviour once they figure out
what is going on.  Of course, that assumes they are ABLE to figure out
what is going on; not always a good assumption.

Just consider it as a sort of lemma to the Golden Rule.  ;-)

-- 
"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: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Prove it!
Date: 4 Oct 92 15:20:06 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <mBN4RB1w164w@n5abi.hou.tx.us> gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy) writes:
> It's not an "either/or" choice. My mother had a saying when I was 
>a kid, and the concept applys here (though not the thought). She 
>said "If you act like a kid, you'll be treated like a kid". No, 
>I'am not saying John acts like a kid, it's the concept I'am
>talking about. Your concept seems to be, "If you act like a kid,
>I'll act like a kid". Mirroring behavior you disagree with makes 
>no sense to me.

Mirroring disagreeable behavior is sometimes effective in demonstrating
how stupid the behavior is.
-- 
John F. Haugh II           [  TSAKC  ]       UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151    [ DoF #17 ]            Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
From: johniac@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: BullShit
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 92 18:02:33 GMT
Distribution: tx
Reply-To: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstation Division, Austin, TX

In article <1992Oct3.042322.25896@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
|> Seems to me that someone who
|> states plainly that they will lie whenever it is convenient shouldn't
|> be trusted even when they give sources.  After all, they could lie,
|> selectively interpret, or selectively edit what they see.

The nice thing about sources is you can look them up, and quite easily
determine whether he is lying, selectively interpreting, selectively
editing or whatever.

-- 
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"It takes a big man to cry.  And it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man."
                                                              -- Jack Handey
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: kossack@owlnet.rice.edu (Jordan Marc Kossack)
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Followup-To: tx.politics
Reply-To: kossack@qvi.com
Organization: Practice Safe Government ... Use Kingdoms  
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 03:19:38 GMT

In article <21654@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
- The facts are simple.  The amount of money you pay a teacher is NOT
- related to the quality of the teacher.  Teacher pay is already very

	To an extent this is true.  However, it is also true in many 
   other professions.  For example, the ammount of money we pay a 
   police officer is not based on the quality of the individual cop. 
   The idea, as I understand, behind paying public school teachers 
   more money would be to entice folk to choose teaching as a career, 
   rather than becoming a physician or lawyer or working in some 
   other field which pays well, or has the perception of doing so. 

	Personally, I believe that if teaching, as a profession, has 
   difficulty attracting high quality folk, the problem lies in image 
   rather than financial reward.  Again, for comparison, let's consider 
   law enforcement.  Not too long ago, police officers were respected 
   (as were teachers) but in many cases that is no longer true.  Why? 
   The American people did not wake up one morning and, en masse, say 
   "police are scum."  However, these days that is not an uncommon 
   sentiment (nor is it universal either) - if you know any police on 
   a social basis, ask them how the public treats them.  

	If a profession does not recieve respect, I contend that it is 
   less likely for our "best and brightest" to choose that profession 
   as a career.  With less qualified applicants, the overall level of 
   competence will likely decrease.  This decrease is unlikely to be 
   rewarded with increased respect, and may worsen the public image, 
   perhaps fueling the downward spiral.  Getting back to teaching, the 
   "education reforms" may have hurt the public image.  However, just 
   as the US education system didn't decline overnight, the system can 
   not recover overnight.  But I digress.  

- job security that a teacher has compared to a non civil service worker,
- and there is quite an argument to be made that teachers are paid on par
- with other college graduates.

-- 
 Jordan M Kossack  |  Why change Bush in the middle of a screw?     
  kossack@qvi.com  |  Re-elect George in '92!    
  +1 713 240 2073  |       
  
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 92 23:14:58 GMT
Distribution: tx
Reply-To: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX

In article <1513@airgun.wg.waii.com>, miller@hmsp04.wg3.waii.com (Griff Miller X7114) writes:
|> While I don't think private schools should receive government money, I would
|> like to say that a tax exemption is not exactly the same thing as a subsidy.
|> With a tax exemption, you get to keep $X. With a subsidy, you might pay $X 
|> in taxes and receive $Y in subsidies, where Y could be more or less than X. 

Whatever.  The point is they have fewer expenses than secular private schools,
who have to pay taxes, which is why most private schools are run by churches. 
After all, they know a good deal when they see one.  Not to mention the access
to lots of impressionable young minds to mold, thus ensuring years of
future collection plate opportunity. 

|> Also, churches are not-for-profit organizations, so income tax does not apply
|> to them.

Oh SURE they are.  All they have to do is buy another parcel of land, or build a
"charity" hospital, and they magically become "non-profit" (even if the parcel
of land happens to have a revenue-producing theme park on it).

|> They are tax-exempt because they don't use much in the way of 
|> government services.

They use the same police, fire protection, roads, etc. as any other business.

-- 
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"It takes a big man to cry.  And it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man."
                                                              -- Jack Handey
Xref: sparky tx.politics:5852 alt.politics.clinton:8475
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 17:33:11 GMT

In <21649@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:

>Uh, I'm not complaining about the amount of money that the NEA extorts from
>its membership.  I'm complaining about their politics.  The NEA is

>	* Anti school choice
>	* Pro abortion
>	* Pro drug
>	* Anti family

John, do you have any evidence for this statement?  I can understand
why you would say the first one, although I'm curious about whether
the NEA is against ALL school choice, or just the version you want so
you can send your kid to a religious school at my expense?  Do they,
for example, favor PUBLIC SCHOOL choice (like what they have in NYC)?

As for the rest of that, it sounds more like the sort of thing you'd
hear at the Republican Convention (in between speaches by Pat
Robertson and Jerry Falwell) than from someone who was seriously
discussing issues.

>It's interesting what some people think is interesting.  I think Bill
>Clinton is also a fine candidate for President from the Democratic Party.
>And I'll give you a clue why - when Clinton first started running, he was
>chastised for being too conservative.  One person commented that why should
>they vote for Clinton - why not just for for a Republican instead.  That
>person was a Democrat.  Get the picture?  He is much more qualified than
>Edward "Keep abortion legal or I'll drive your daughter off a bridge"
>Kennedy.

I heard that comment a lot more about Tsongas (who I voted for in the
primaries) than I have about Clinton.

>As for liking Clinton, when he was still sticking to his "principles", I
>liked him.  I remember seeing him and the DLC on C-SPAN one morning and
>thinking that with a new generation of Democrats like him, the old liberal
>Democratic party was dead.  Ross Perot's presidency allowed Clinton to
>show that Clinton was really a liberal.  We should thank Ross for exposing
>another Clinton lie.

>Now we know that he DID inhale, he DID sleep with Flowers, he DID dodge the
>draft, he DID cover up his mother's malpractice, and he IS a liberal.

Well, you and the people you hang out with may 'know' that, but I'd
like to know from where.  Calling Bill Clinton a liberal is like
calling Teddy Kennedy a conservative.  Of course, the Republicans
still seem to think they're running against Carter and Mondale, so
they are what we hear about.  After all, hard to bash Clinton as a
'tax and spend liberal' if you start off with the fact that he isn't a
liberal (in that sense).

-- 
"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: jeff@cpvax.cpses.tu.com
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Quality of Public Education.
Date: 2 Oct 92 09:02:37 CDT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas Utilities, Glen Rose TX 


> |> As the son of two public school teachers, I can tell you that one thing that is hurting
> |> public education is the immense amount of paperwork they have to do as required by the 
> |> state. They say that there is very little time left to actually teach anything anymore. 
> |> It gets harder and harder every year just to do their jobs, what with all the paper they
> |> have to wade through.

> I'm curious about this, because I've heard it before.  Exactly what
> kind of paperwork does the state require, and for what purpose?  Why
> aren't the "overpaid administrators" doing this paperwork?

 About a year ago I met a lady who is an elementary teacher in Dallas.  We
 started talking about the current situation in American education and 
 she mentioned one of her problems with paperwork.  She told me that it
 is a major pain in the butt to fail a student.  If a student does poorly
 and a teacher decides not to pass the student, then the teacher has to
 fill out "a mound of paperwork, arrange for tutors, summer school, etc.".
 And after all of this work, the parents still have veto rights.  If the
 kid's parents don't want their child repeating a grade, then they can
 refuse to let school hold him/her back.  As a result of all of this
 red tape, she said that most teachers will take the easy way out and just
 push the kid through.

 I don't know how widespread this policy is: school, district, state,
 whatever; but it does show one instance where a teacher can be subjected
 to needless paperwork.  Whether this is a good policy or not and whether
 most of these teachers actions are justified is debatable (like everything
 else in this newsgroup ;-) ).  Just my $.02 (after tax) worth.


                      j-squared


Newsgroups: tx.politics