HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Subject: Re: Picking and Choosing our References
Organization: Memes-R-Us
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:36:33 GMT
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.

cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>You are perfectly able to be a homosexual in private.  You don't
>have to announce everywhere you go, and thus make it an issue to
>employers or landlords.

While this is probably the fortieth time you've seen this, I thought
I'd say it again, in case, just maybe, this time, it sunk in.

Neither should they have to keep it a secret.

To keep a secret from one's friends and neighbors is to invite problems.

But that's what you'd like, it often appears.

-- richard

-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7609 talk.politics.misc:44731
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Picking and Choosing our References
Date: 10 Sep 92 16:20:24 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <95611@bu.edu>, kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
> In article <12168@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> >In article <95358@bu.edu>, kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
# 
# ##Clayton, polygamy is culturally-blessed promiscuity.
# 
# #Hmmm.  One man, five wives.  If all remain faithful to each other,
# #how do you spread diseases?
# 
# One man, five male partners. If all remain faithful to each other,
# how do you spread disease?
# 
# kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,

You don't -- but then again, the homosexual community has already
demonstrated that "faithful to each other" doesn't work.  A lot
of homosexuals insist that it is impossible to do anyway.
Remember a few months ago, when monogamy was equated to being
dead?
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7742 talk.politics.misc:45270
From: matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Picking and Choosing our References
Followup-To: ca.politics
Date: 9 Sep 92 12:10:14
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: kane@buast7.bu.edu's message of 9 Sep 92 16:30:18 GMT

In article <95610@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:

> For the tenth time, I said that many gay men were divided as to how
> to approach the age of consent. Whether it should be an absolute,
> arbitrary age (say, 18), or whether there should be other factors
> to weigh, like parental consent, relative age of the adolescents in
> question, etc.

I might add that many straight men and women are similarly unsure
about this question.  Almost everyone I've talked to thinks that a
flat, arbitrary age is, well, arbitrary, but isn't completely sure
what the law should be instead.

--
Matthew Austern                   Just keep yelling until you attract a
(510) 644-2618                    crowd, then a constituency, a movement, a
austern@lbl.bitnet                faction, an army!  If you don't have any
matt@physics.berkeley.edu         solutions, become a part of the problem!
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7512 ba.politics:5097
From: dfair@octel.com (Donald Fair)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Just a Question
Date: 8 Sep 92 21:19:43 GMT
Organization: Octel Communications Inc., Milpitas Ca.

>|    The Iowa Employment Appeal Board ruled in April that a former
>|    security guard was qualified for unemployment benefits even though
>|    he was fired. Kay Stone, 55, was a night guard at a convenience store
>|    until a fight broke out one night, whereupon he ran and hid in a walk-in
>|    cooler. Riuled the board, "Incompettence in a position is not (a
>|    disqualification)."
>

	Having missed some of this I would like clarification.
	I had a job as a sales person many years ago.
	I was horrible at the job. I worked very hard at it
	but I just couldn`t cut it. It wasn`t that I was
	stupid just not a sales person.
	Well I got the sack. Their reason incompetince.
	They were correct.
	I applied for unemployment to keep from starving
	while I looked for other work. They tried to
	stop my unemployment and the commision in NC
	ruled as above. That is I was not to get the
	job back but I could get unemployment.
	I believe the disqualification statement means
	from unemployment benefits not the Job.
	It just seems that this fine detail is being
	overlooked.
	Or do you believe that a person trying and
	failing in a job should be thrown to the
	wolfs and given no chance. I have gone 
	back to technical work and have more than
	compensated society with paid up taxes.

-- 
_____________________________________________
Donald H. Fair       Software Sanitation Eng.
dfair@octel.com
standard disclaimer
---------------------------------------------
From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: HERSCHENSOHN: Flat Rate Tax (Q&A)
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:10:22 GMT
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in <26285@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
    by: mike@fionn.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)

: Rick Eames writes:
:> Look, it's very simple.  If I sacrifice my entire life to set aside money
:> for my children, why is it that people like you think it's fine if the
:> government now steals a portion of what I managed to save for my children?

: You're using a dishonest argument here, using some propaganda-like
: rhetoric & probably some special pleading.

This is true.

: However, the same can be
: applied to your case: I object to your getting a special dispensation
: from estate taxes, because I see it as _stealing_ from me -- my taxes
: would be reduced accordingly if you paid what I see as your fair share.

This is false.

How anyone's "fair share" is computed has nothing to do with how anyone
else happens to lessen their individual tax burden.  The taxes collected
and the moneys spent have very little to do with each other.

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
The amount of funding necessary for a government program increases
in proportion to the funding already acquired.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: JUNE GENIS IN THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER!!
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: ca
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 04:32:34 GMT

In article <65257@cup.portal.com>,
Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:
>Anyways, what do you folks think about the idea of a permanent 10 year
>amnesty program, where if you get caught before 10 yrs, tough luck, but
>after 10 years, you are legal as long as you've been a productive tax
>paying citizen.
>
>Is that a radical idea or what?  What does June think?

I don't see that anyone who hasn't taken money from the government
has committed a crime.  Don't see any reason to throw anyone out of
the country who hasn't committed a crime.

/June
From: jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu (Michael Lodman)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: HERSCHENSOHN: Flat Rate Tax (Q&A)
Date: 13 Sep 92 22:10:36 GMT
Organization: CSE Department, UC San Diego

In article <athos-130992011536@kip2-13.apple.com> athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:
>I could not disagree more with you on this one.  People save up all their
>lives for their children.  It is, to me, economic *rape* to dip into that
>money once that person has slipped the bonds of earth.

This an emotional argument, not an economic argument nor one even remotely
rational. It is designed to emote images of old peasants toiling in
the field, being robbed of everything they own. This is not reality.

In reality, whenever money changes hands, the government
gets a cut. There is really no practical difference between
inheritance, gifts, or income IMHO. Now, you can argue that the
government _shouldn't_ have its hand out whenever money changes
hands, and I might even agree with you. I don't believe in these special
cases being treated any differently, such as gifts or inheritance or
game show winnings or a bag of money falling out of the sky and landing
on me. Economic rape it is not to tax income based on any of these things.

(More essentially worthless emotional rhetoric deleted to save space)

>HERSCHENSOHN for US Senate.  Just say "No" to Barbara Boxer.

While Boxer doesn't know the value of a dollar, Herschenson doesn't
know the value of anything else. Say no to both of them and vote
for June Genis.

-- 
Michael Lodman	Department of Computer Science Engineering
	University of California, San Diego
jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu		      (619) 455-1500 x2627
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7669 talk.politics.misc:44975
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: War on Drugs
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:39:03 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <pm9krbo@fido.asd.sgi.com>, dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
> This leads to the following questions in my mind:
> 
> 1.  What business is it of the government whether or not people
> are getting "high"?  Why should they care what people are doing
> in their free time?  In past days, many successful people have 
> taken drugs, including alcohol, without it being a detriment to
> society.  Why should it matter now?

But drug abuse causes social costs and suffering to many people
in our society, therefore it is the government's business.  (At
least by application of the homosexual fascist theory of the
proper role of government in telling consenting adults what they
can do in private).

> 2.  Is it fiscally responsible for the government to continue
> a massive war on drugs which has had dubious successes?

Is it fiscally responsible to increase the load of civil suits in
the courts to satisfy the homosexual fascist lobby's demands?

> 3.  Is it worth it to give up our civil rights to have a "drug
> free america"?
> 
> Jeff

Is it s worth it to give up property rights to have a society
where pedophiles can't be turned down for a job in a day care 
center?

The War on Drugs and the homosexual fascist lobby are exactly
the same mentality.



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7637 talk.politics.misc:44847
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Date: 11 Sep 92 17:47:42 GMT
Followup-To: ca.politics
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <12221@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>To quote Mr. Kane:

>>They're behaviors. Rape is not a sexual orientation. Neither is
>>child molestation. Pedophilia is a sexual orientation.

>Oh, but that's right, pedophilia != child molestation, the new
>liberal mantra. :-)

It has nothing to do with liberal politics. It's just common sense.
Action does NOT equal thought.

With all the flak you give to the supposed victimization attitude
in the country, you sure do paint yourself as being victimized.

Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cramer@optilink.uucp (Clayton Cramer): Message-ID: <12133@optilink.UUCP>
I realize it's difficult for a person as depraved as [Brian Kane].
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,
Boston, MA 02215. True personal salvation is achieved by absolute faith in
ones true self.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu (Michael Lodman)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: HERSCHENSOHN: Flat Rate Tax (Q&A)
Date: 15 Sep 92 22:31:21 GMT
Organization: CSE Department, UC San Diego

In article <athos-150992122956@kip2-16.apple.com> athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:
>You remind me a of a guy on CompuServe that has the same
>namecalling-without-explanation debate style as yourself.
>
>Facism is a strong accussation.  I ask for examples, you provide none. 
>Namecalling is easy.  Explaining positions is not.  Let's see some meat to
>your insults.

Having trouble reading or hearing AND understanding, Rick? Or maybe 
Herschensohn is spouting the kind of crap you like to hear? Frankly,
I have better things to do than try and bail someone out of the
intellectual and moral poverty they are in if someone like Herschenson
is considered a viable candidate. Certainly no one I know has any 
intention of voting for that fascist. You aren't worth the time or the
trouble.

-- 
Michael Lodman	Department of Computer Science Engineering
	University of California, San Diego
jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu		      (619) 455-1500 x2627
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Candidates for Phil (Re: What Here!?!)
From: mike@batpad.lgb.ca.us (mike batchelor)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 19:25:49 PDT
Distribution: world               
Organization: The Batchelor Pad

lpb@florida.swdc.stratus.com (Len Bucuvalas) writes:
>
> Okay...I won't pretend that I know them all but I'm sure that we
> can list a few so...for Mr. Phil...let's give him a list of
> alternate candidates he can vote for as he does seem to be stuck
> in a "clinton vs bush" rut..I'll start:
> 
> 			NOTE
> 	Not all listed candidates may be on the ballot in this
> 	state.
> 
> 	Bo Gritz ... populist party
> 	Lyndon LaRouche ... God Only Knows Party ;^) 
> 	Ross Perot ... independent party

Andre Marreau ... Libertarian Party (ever heard of them, Phil?)




[] ---
[] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.ca.us
[] Long Beach, California
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7654 talk.politics.misc:44908
From: bruce@godzilla.swdc.stratus.com (Bruce Overby)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Picking and Choosing our References
Date: 11 Sep 92 18:54:48 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., San Jose, CA

>> In article <12168@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>> >In article <95358@bu.edu>, kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
># 
># #Hmmm.  One man, five wives.  If all remain faithful to each other,
># #how do you spread diseases?
># 
># One man, five male partners. If all remain faithful to each other,
># how do you spread disease?
># 
>You don't -- but then again, the homosexual community has already
>demonstrated that "faithful to each other" doesn't work.  A lot
>of homosexuals insist that it is impossible to do anyway.

You don't -- but then again, the heterosexual community has already
demonstrated that "faithful to each other" doesn't work.  A lot
of heterosexuals insist that it is impossible to do anyway.

-------------------------------------------------
Bruce Overby
Stratus Computer, Inc.
San Jose, CA


"Get at dem beans!"  -- Hoss Cartwright

My opinions may not reflect those of my employer.
--------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber)
Subject: Re: War on Drugs
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:27:17 GMT

In article <23274@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM> tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker) writes:

>Didn't someone say the street price of marijuana was somewhere north of
>$20/oz.?


You are not even close... Street price of marijuana is closer to $400-$500/oz 
at this point...

This is why I thought a 100% tax would still make it cheaper...


FWA
From: tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: War on Drugs
Date: 11 Sep 92 22:23:03 GMT
Reply-To: tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker)
Distribution: ca
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <1992Sep10.184133.415@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:

>I do not want to see drugs legalized only to provide more revenue
>fodder for a spend-thrift Congress.  I think there definitely will
>be protests about any taxes on the order of 100% although it's
>inevitable I suppose that there will be some tax.

Didn't someone say the street price of marijuana was somewhere north of
$20/oz.?  The stuff is trivial to grow, so retail value of dried leaves
would probably be a couple of dollars an ounce.  A 100% tax seems very
reasonable, probably about the proper level for revenue maximization.
More complex drugs would probably support higher tax rates.  I see no
problem with taxing those things for maximum revenue unless the price
gets so high it creates crime like we have now.  The revenue should be
earmarked for education and treatment, absolutely NONE for law
enforcement aside from sanitation inspection, etc.

	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com
South Central LA - solidly Democratic - a few million.
Florida          - close race         - $7 billion.
Too many Quayludes.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: Help protest exclusionary Senate debates
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: ca
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 14:55:32 GMT

In article <37758@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>,
jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu (Michael Lodman) writes:
>Who is holding the debate? Can we flood them with phone calls to
>try and get the exclusion reversed?

There are multiple sponsors and I don't know who all of them are
although I do know that th4e League of women voters is involved.
Since they claim to be non-partisan they're a good organization to
protest to.  I don't have their phone number at here at home but
I'll post it on Tuesday.

The first event is being held at the First Congregational Church,
241 Cedar Street Long Beach, so I guess you can complain to them
too.  For those who want to do their protesting during the actual
event, tickets will be available at the church on Thursday September
10th from 2 to 6 pm.

/June
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7787 talk.politics.misc:45449
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Picking and Choosing our References
Date: 14 Sep 92 23:07:13 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <95790@bu.edu>, kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
> In article <12246@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> >I'm happy being monogamous, but I assure you that meeting the
> >"unbridled and unmatchable" demands of several wives would be not
> >be a problem.
> 
> If you were happy being monogamous, meeting the demands of several
> wives WOULD be a problem.
> 
> kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,

My, this posting tells me a lot about you.

You see, for a healthy, well-adjusted person, if you aren't 100% 
satisfied with your sex life (that is, you don't get to make love
every single time you want, in exactly the way you want, etc.),
that doesn't mean you are unhappy being monogamous.  There IS
more to a healthy relationship than JUST sex.  It is possible,
even likely, that there may be times when due to illness, the
pressures of work, etc., you may actually have to be less than
perfectly satisfied with some aspect of the relationship to your
spouse.  This is one of the reasons that the traditional marriage
vows say, "in sickness and in health," and a number of other
opposing conditions.

I pity anyone whose spouse's sexual needs have to be 100% 
perfectly met in order to be happy with the relationship.
Of course, that's what public restrooms and gay bars are for,
isn't it?
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
From: jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu (Michael Lodman)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: HERSCHENSOHN: Flat Rate Tax (Q&A)
Date: 11 Sep 92 04:53:44 GMT
Organization: CSE Department, UC San Diego

In article <1992Sep9.200449.14047@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>Not quite.  First off, tax is paid when the money is originally
>earned.  Secondly, dividends are currently double-taxed becasue the
>corporation paying them is taxed.  This proposal would replace that
>with taxing them only once.

Personal income tax isn't paid when the corporation pays taxes. Stretched
to its logical conclusion, sales tax should be abolished as well, 
because I've already paid taxes on the money I'm spending.
I'm sure most other taxes can be eliminated under this scheme as well.
This proposal is yet another attempt by the rich to get out of
paying their fair share on what THEY EARN, however they earned it.

>As for the rest, it really isn't clear to me at all why income from
>savings accounts and capital gains should be taxed.  As for the estate
>tax, don't you think it is a bit unreasonable to even tax death?

Income is income is income is income. All income, from whatever source,
should be taxed at the same flat rate. This includes income due to 
inheritance.

>>I would also like to point out that the federal estate tax is only
>>charged on estates larger than $600,000 dollars.  Again, this is
>>something that would benifit the very rich.
>
>That's a laugh.  Most homes are worth something approaching that range.

Even in the overly inflated Bay Area market the average is probably much 
less than that.











-- 
Michael Lodman	Department of Computer Science Engineering
	University of California, San Diego
jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu		      (619) 455-1500 x2627
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Hot Young Neutron Star
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:01:35 GMT
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <1992Sep15.004625.29151@gordian.com>
mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:

>Actually, I think that a neutron star is the burnt out core of an exploded
>star (red giant?) which has collapsed upon itself. [I'm sure that the
>*real* Hot Young Star could elaborate far more eloquently than my pseudo
>understanding from Scientific American articles...]

That's essentially correct. Stars survive by balancing self-gravity with
gas pressure. By and large the pressure comes from thermonuclear reactions.
When the fuel runs out, the core collapses until other forces come into
play. In the case of a neutron star, that force is nuclear degeneracy, which
is a weird quantum mechanical scenario in which neutrons (the result of
squashing protons and electrons together) can only occupy so many energy
states per unit volume, thus preventing total collapse. However, with enough
mass, even this state can be bypassed, leading to a black hole.

...which may indeed exist in the vaults of the US Treasury...

...returning you now to politics...

Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cramer@optilink.uucp (Clayton Cramer): Message-ID: <12133@optilink.UUCP>
I realize it's difficult for a person as depraved as [Brian Kane].
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,
Boston, MA 02215. True personal salvation is achieved by absolute faith in
ones true self.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: ca.politics