HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: elections
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:24:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: grover.MARTINC.92Nov9172405
	<15335@auspex-gw.auspex.com> <MARTINC.92Nov6104428@grover.cs.unc.edu>
	<BxBCyE.EC1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
	<MARTINC.92Nov8145223@grover.cs.unc.edu>
	<BxFDxv.Bso@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu's message of 9 Nov 92 01:39:31 GMT

In article <BxFDxv.Bso@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:

   >I'm with Tsongas and Rudmann (sp?) on this one: either
   >the Republicans will become what you suggest, or the Democrats will--
   >or a third party will, and *they'll* have a lock on the presidency for
   >your lifetime.

   I think it will have to be a third party, the right wing will never
   let the Republican party go and the Congressional Democrats move
   further and further to the left every year, it seems.  

Depends.  After all, the Left let Clinton in -- of course, the papers
are filled with the Left saying "Now we have to make sure Clinton works
for our side instead of what *he* said" but let's give him the benefit
of the doubt for the moment.

   >>Yup.  A little present from Reagan and Bush. 
   >Look up who had the last balanced budget.

   I don't think it has been balanced in my lifetime, but I thought it
   skyrocketed in the Reagan years.  This could be a myth, of course.

Depends on when you were born, of course.  Eisenhower had them, and I
vaguely recall Nixon having a balanced budget, perhaps in 68 or 69.
Reagan actually submitted balanced budgets on a couple of occasions, but
they didn't pass.
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: What do you Am men think about Am wome
Date: 10 Nov 92 03:54:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: sol.1992Nov10.035428.24416
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

In article 92Nov8174535@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu, julie@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright) writes:
>atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik) writes:
>
>>Good topic! This thread hits on the fundamental psychological difference 
>>between the sexes, IMVHO:
>
>>Women look for love and find sex while men look for sex and find love!
>
>Guess I'm just demanding.  I look for love AND sex AND Scrabble, myself.

Is two out of three all that bad?

dreas
From: rkf@wildrose.infoserv.com (Ray Fink)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Ridding the Third Wheel
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 17:20:27 -0700
Distribution: usa
Organization: Wild Rose Refugee Camp

rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer) writes:
>In article <73972@apple.Apple.COM> stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones) writes:
>>rll1@kepler.unh.edu (Robert L Lamothe) writes:
>>
>>>He calls her on a dailey basis,
>>>often drops in unnanounced and uses any cheap shot he can pull at her.

>>She is trying to run his recovery ('she wants him to realize...' it is up 
>>to *him* to realize things, she can't do it for him). Furthermore, she is 
>>being deceitful. It's  supposedly in the service of helping her ex,
>>but it doesn't seem like a good idea. It appears she is still very
>>emotionally involved with him. (I'm not saying 'in love,' but 'involved.')
>>
>>Her ex won't get out of her life until she tells him in no uncertain terms
>>to leave her alone. IMO, he will not recover or get over her until she does
>>this. However, it may be difficult for her to realize this and to break her 
>>emotional attachment to him.
>>
>>Are you willing to put up with this process for however long it takes? 
>>Is your emotional support allowing her to continue trying to help her ex?

>     I agree with Stef's advice.  I would like to add some more.  If I
>was in a relationship with this lady, I would suggest that she change
>her phone number and possibly move without telling her ex.  That way
>he would be out of her and my life for good.

I understood Stef to be saying that this woman is a (perhaps subconsciously)
*willing* participant in the hassles with her ex; I agree with that.
My guess is she might not be interested in pulling a vanishing act.
But I'd be very wary of of a woman who felt she had to disappear to
escape an ex; she's trying to run his recovery and she's letting him
continue to run/ruin her life.  Aiiiyeee! Exit stage right, in a hurry.

-- 
-- Ray

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: a question in search of an answer!!!
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:42:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.235149.8720@ac.dal.ca> brentaa@ac.dal.ca (brent, eh?) writes:
>In article <644@ka2qhd.de.com>, bill@ka2qhd.de.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:
>> I went to a dance and danced with my male friend. Since I am a man I was
>> called queer. question: why can two women dance together and be friends,
>> but when two men do the same they are two homos? Can someone answer this
>> question? WHY!!!

Probably because the women are not doing the lambada.
 
================================================================================
 Ipsissimus of the Inner Order of Sesquipedalian Fruitcakes - I set'r free.Nyuk
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: a question in search of an answer!!!
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:36:17 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Keywords: men
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <644@ka2qhd.de.com> bill@ka2qhd.de.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:

>I went to a dance and danced with my male friend. Since I am a man I was
>called queer. question: why can two women dance together and be friends,
>but when two men do the same they are two homos? Can someone answer this
>question? WHY!!!

To the letter, this is the same question you posted something like
four months ago.  I suspect the answer is the same now as it was then.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
"I get so tickled debunking bad personal philosophy." - Milquetoast
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cjp8b@dayhoff.med.Virginia.EDU (Chris Penington)
Subject: Is anyone going to the boink from/via Washington?
Followup-To: poster
Summary: Looking for a ride from Washington to Philly on Friday 11/20
Originator: cjp8b@dayhoff.med.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:45:11 GMT

Is anyone going to Phillyboink from or via Washington DC? I don't have
a car so I'm going up by bus. It looks like I will have a long wait in
Washington for my connection to Philly and will get in there rather
late. If anyone is planning to drive up from or via DC on the evening
of Friday November 20th I'd like to hitch a ride. I guess it's too
much to hope anyone will be going from Charlottesville but if you are
please get in touch with me! I'll gladly pay for gas, tolls, snacks
etc. 


Chris
-- 
Chris Penington (cjp8b@virginia.edu)             .A---------.        My
Biochemistry Dept., Box 440                     /o           `   Favourite
UVa Health Sciences Ctr,                       (_,           7   Marsupial
Charlottesville, Va 22908   (804)924-8210         \>~~~~~~z7
Xref: sparky soc.singles:30069 ba.singles:2074
From: bob@netcom.com (Bob Becker)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
Subject: Re: What is attractive
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:50:02 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

>>What do you find attractive in MOTAS
>>
>>1. when you meet them?
>
A set of knockers the size of Cleveland.

>>2. once you have known them awhile?

A eagerness to expose a set of knockers the size of Cleveland.

>            AND 
>
>>3. once you think you know them well?
>
<See above>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: That wacky electoral college
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:30:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.204041.16253@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith) writes:
>I can really only think of one advantage, and even so it never occurred to
>me until someone pointed it out at lunch today. It prevents a candidate from
>campaigning (read "promising things to") a few specific high-population areas
>and ignoring everyone else. Although, when I think about it...DOES it do that?
>I wonder, is it possible for someone to get enough popular vote out of, say,
>CA and NY to be able to ignore the rest of the country? And if so, does the
>electoral college really prevent this? Hmmmm...I haven't really thought this
>one through, but it's the only possible reason I can think of. Certainly, the
>possibility of the popular vote winner losing the election is unacceptable.

Here's an exercise.  Find the minimum number of states that must be carried
to accrue 270 electoral votes (Hint: Begin with California).  Thursday's
newspapers should have tables showing the popular vote broken down by states.
For each of the critical states, total up the popular vote, divide by two,
and either round up or add one.  Next total up these razor-thin majorities,
and compare the sum to the total popular vote

Here in Maryland Clinton had 50% of the popular vote compared to 36% for
Bush, and this wide margin had been reflect in the polls all through the
campaign.  Despite what Larry Billing might say, I'd maintain that Clinton
had a "lock" on Maryland's 10 electoral votes.  If I remember correctly, 
Clinton made one appearance here, and Bush made either one or none at all
(helicoptering between Andrews Air Force Base and the White House doesn't
count).

-- Herb Huston
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: a question in search of an answer!!!
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:32:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: grover.MARTINC.92Nov9143213
	<1992Nov8.223644.9213@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
Distribution: na
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com's message of 8 Nov 92 22:36:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.223644.9213@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:

   In article <MARTINC.92Nov8152512@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
   >In article <644@ka2qhd.de.com> bill@ka2qhd.de.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:
   >
   >   I went to a dance and danced with my male friend. Since I am a man I was
   >   called queer. question: why can two women dance together and be friends,
   >   but when two men do the same they are two homos? 
   >

   Could social standards (the norm) have anything to do with this?

'ere now.  Don't get me tied up in this.
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: What is attractive to women?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:34:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.010800.18585@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>>Hanging out in bookstores or libraries is a good sign!  :-)  I also
>>tend to look for absence of bad signs such as wedding rings,
>>cigarettes, alcohol, slobby appearance.  It's not 100% infallible, but
>>I also consider wearing a suit and/or tie to be a bad sign (conformity).
>
>Know what? I hate libraries and bookstores but read HUSTLER,
>I smoke, drink, don't shave AND wear a torn construction vest...
>
>And SHEEIT! I was about to ask you out. :+)
>
>dreas
>
Know what? I hate libraries and bookstores but read HUSTLER(for the articles)
I smoke, drink, don't shave AND wear a torn condom...
And SHEEIT! I am about to ask you out. :+#@*)

 
================================================================================
 Ipsissimus of the Inner Order of Sesquipedalian Fruitcakes - I set'r free.Nyuk
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Married Men
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:13:40 GMT

In article <lfei4fINN3ua@news.bbn.com>, ahsiung@bbn.com (Anita Hsiung) writes:
> Ever have the kind of conversation where what you said was perfectly
> innocuous and it didn't matter who was listening, but the nonverbal
> language was overpowering in its intent?  Sure, you discussed work,

I think WE just did!!  :)

> 
> 	-- Anita --

Larry Billings
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: elections
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:31:55 GMT
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: dks@sr.com's message of 4 Nov 92 23:12:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.231240.5270@sr.com> dks@sr.com (Dave K. Sprow) writes:

   Just think...  Clinton ends up doing a good job and gets re-elected. Then
   Gore runs and wins.  we could have Reagan/Bush in reverse. 12 (or 16)
   years of Democrats.  Oh well, what are you gonna do?

As I said, so long as they really are more or less pro-business and pro
economic growth, willing to use force when force is necessary (and
reasonably good at knowing when it *is* necessary), and don't mash
people's initiative by massive new taxes and regulations, they're
welcome to the job.  (And this was more or less Clinton's published
position).

And if not, then the Republicans will be back for the turn of the
century.  A win either way.

(P.S.  Today's rumor is that one of the first plans of Clinton's
administration will be to reduce or eliminate the tax on long-term
capital gains.)
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: Education and the Single World
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:20:38 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.212218.3329@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:
|> I have a question for you all -- how important is formal education
|> versus native intelligence and self-education in those that you are
|> romantically interested in?
|> 
|> Here are a couple of scenarios:
|> 
|> 1.
|>   You meet someone who is articulate, well-informed, and
|>   knowledgeable on several diverse subjects.  After spending some
|>   time with them and getting to enjoy their company how do
|>   you feel about pursuing them as a romantic partner given that:
|> 
|>   A) They have a significant amount more formal schooling (ie,
|>      degrees) than you.  
|> 
|>   B) have approximately the same amount of education as you
|> 
|>   C) they have never finished college (or for the younger readers
|>      high school).
|> 
|> Do any of those scenarios affect your willingness to date that
|> person -- especially given that you already like them.

I don't think so. Certainly not at first. The only way it ever would have
an affect is if as I got to know this person, I found we had very little
in common (and really, this could happen with A, B, or C) or if the case
were C and I sensed the reason was a lack of any personal ambition or drive.

|> 
|> 2.
|>   You meet someone who has a difficult time expressing themselves,
|>   isn't aware of the world beyond their immediate sphere of
|>   influence, and appears not to know an awful lot about
|>   much of anything (except perhaps a narrow area). After spending
|>   some time with them and getting to enjoy their company how do you
|>   feel about pursuing them as a romantic partner given that:
          
           [same choices]

Once again, I don't think A, B, or C makes much difference. I would say I
would prefer 1, however, simply because I may never get to know 2 as well.


|> 3
|>     Now, what if the person in the first scenario never finished
|>     college and the person in the second has a PhD.  Which one

It really makes no difference in and of itself. I've known plenty of people
who have finished college and done quite well but who are very boring people.
In general, I feel that education itself is important...far more so than how one gets that education.

jds

***************************************************************************
                               * Health and knowledge and wealth and power,
Jeff Smith                     * Passion and poems and sex
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * I wear a smile like a leather glove,
                               * I won't shut my mouth for less.
                                                - shriekback
***************************************************************************
From: wkaufman@us.oracle.com (William Kaufman)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Date: 11 Nov 92 06:22:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Redwood Shores CA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Nov9.010922.11400@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker) writes:
] 
] Okay...clarify something for me...(if you can do it politely, that is...) As
] I understood things, it was James Baker III, not Bush that apporved the keynote
] speaker for the convention. If this is the case, why is the hate and bilge
] spewed by that *idiot* being laid at Bush's feet? 

    This is true: Baker was not being elected President, he was simply
running foreign policy.  And domestic policy.  Otherwise, Bush was in
charge.

    But this question remains.  Bush was given a sound approval from his
party, thrashing Buchanan two-to-one.  Why did he feel it necessary to
even let that fool into the convention, much less let him and Robertson
speak?  He certainly seemed comfortable with them, at least as long as
they supported him.

] It's distressing that people can't differentiate between one person and the 
] group as a whole. It is even more distressing that Republicans for Choice
] and other such groups within the party as well as Bush himself didn't speak
] out against such extremist views. Had he, he might have been returned to 
] office. 

    What I'm finding distressing is that rational Republicans (a
majority of them, to be sure, yourself included) haven't tossed the
extremists out.  Or walked out themselves.

    (Personally speaking, I *wish* I had been given a choice other than
Boxer this year.)

]   Tyger
] Republicans for Choice, Santa Clara

    I'm tempted to ask about Herschenson, but you did ask for
politeness,...

] >       /  Voting For: Perot, Boxer, Feinstein, 161 (Dr. Assisted Death) /
] >      /  Voting Against: 164 (Term Limits), 165, 166                   /
] > /   //  W. David Rohwer   // Amiga       UUCP: apple!netcom.com!rohwerwd |
] 
] Well, we seem to agree on the measures anyway...:)

    Makes three of us.  But 164 still passed.  *And* incumbents across
the country who ran did quite well.  What does this mean?

                                           -- Bill K.

Bill Kaufman,          | "Hush my darling / Be still my darling /
Corporate Lackey       |  The lion's on the phone,..."
wkaufman@us.oracle.com |              -- "The Guitar", They Might Be Giants
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:02:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.184030.15406@netcom.com>, tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker) writes:
> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
> >aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:
> >> 
> >> Because Mr. Baker, as former President Bush himself put it, would be
> >
> >He is NOT former President Bush until mid Janurary.
> 
> Larry,  it's over. We lost. It's time to regroup and look to 94 and 96.

OH, I absolutely agree, but this is the group of NET-CORRECTNESS so if you
misspell anything (as I do often), you get blasted, if you misquote something,
you get blasted, if you make a correct statement two months early, you get
blasted.  :-{)} (smiley with beard and mustache)

> 
> Tyger
> 
> -- 

Larry Billings
*******************************************************************************
*    Sometimes I think it's a shame,     *                                    *
*    when I get feeling better,          *                                    *
*    when, I'm feeling no pain.          *   Should not have got on this      *
*    Sometimes I think it's a sin,       *   FLIGHT, TONIGHT.                 *
*    when I feel like I'm winning,       *                                    *
*    but I'm losing again.               *                                    *
*******************************************************************************

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: That wacky electoral college
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:28:24 GMT

In article <thurlow.721239946@convex.convex.com>, thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
|> In <1992Nov5.174602.21218@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
|> 

|> >4. Line item veto!
|> 
|> Sounds good to me, but doesn't this put the president into the budget
|> process where he isn't constitutionally supposed to be?

How?  It seems to me that all the line item veto does is prevent Congress
from stringing meaningless or downright bad items along with larger bills.
The effect would be that when a bill goes before the president, it would
be cohesive, logically. I don't understand how this could be bad.

jds

***************************************************************************
                               * Health and knowledge and wealth and power,
Jeff Smith                     * Passion and poems and sex
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * I wear a smile like a leather glove,
                               * I won't shut my mouth for less.
                                                - shriekback
***************************************************************************
Xref: sparky soc.singles:30180 ba.singles:2087
From: charleen@net.bio.net (Charleen Bunjiovianna)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
Subject: Re: Where to meet women?
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:04:55 GMT
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Biology

In article <1992Nov10.002512.22431@netcom.com> bob@netcom.com (Bob Becker) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.215104.2308@ads.com> charleen@ADS.COM (Charleen Bunjiovianna) writes:
>>
>>On the other hand, guys who show up for the sole purpose of meeting hot
>>babes are spotted immediately.
>
><slapping forehead> Ouch! Is that the problem?

No, it's that palm print on your forehead that's the problem.

Charleen

Newsgroups: soc.singles