HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: Term Limits For All
Reply-To: pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:55:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug29.174031.24718@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug27.164618.11575@kadsma.kodak.com>, 
>pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) said:
>
>> One thing that you think carefully about: the right to vote an
>> incumbent out is empty unless there is a plausible alternative. In
>> today's big-money campaign system, many incumbents run either
>> totally unopposed, or with opposition only from fringe candidates.
>> This is because the accumulation of huge campaign 'war chests', in
>> advance of the campaign, effectively serves to discourage worthy
>> opponents from entering the race. The only way to neutralize this
>> effect is by introducing term limits.
>
>The *only* way to neutralize this is by introducing term limits?
>This seems a bit dubious to me.  How about the various forms of
>campaign reform that have been proposed over the years?
>
>Changing the rules to enforce a more level playing field for all the
>candidates is a good thing.  Changing the rules to make it impossible
>for people to cast valid votes for the candidate of their choice is not.
>
>-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>

Your question is reasonable. However, there is some good evidence that
any attempt to level the playing field through campaign reform is likely
to run afoul of the First Amendment. This includes such obvious ideas
as media spending limits.


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Shrugging off an aborted pregnancy (was Re: Another good reason 
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:32:18 GMT

In article <Btq1vz.9sK@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> 
russ%rsi.uucp@destroyer.rs.itd.umich.edu writes:

>c60a-zg@volga.Berkeley.EDU (Martin Guerrero-LabA) writes:

>> Perhaps you forget that the unborn may, in fact, be human life? 

> Perhaps a petri dish of skin fibroblasts from my arm is human
> life?  (What else would it be, a flatworm?  You're saying these
> cells are not alive, not human, or what?)
>
> Perhaps you're so clueless you can't distinguish between mere
> cells, mere living matter, and a human being?  There is nothing
> special about cells, you kill and shed millions every day.


  "It was easy to shrug off an aborted pregnancy as nothing more than
   a sack of blood and globs of tissue--as many pro-choice activists
   did--if one never saw fetal remains, or products of conception (POC),
   as they were known in medical circles.  But the nurses, medical
   assistants, and doctors who worked inside procedure rooms knew
   that while an eight-week POC was indeed a sack of blood and
   globs of tissue, an eleven-week POC harbored tiny arms and legs
   and feet with toes.  At twelve weeks, those tiny hands had tiny
   nails.  Although the fetal head was too small at that stage to
   withstand the evacuation machine's suction, pieces of face--a nose
   and a mouth, or a black eye (all fetal eyes are black in the
   first trimester) the size of a pea--were sometimes found in
   the aftermath.

   Later abortions spawned even more gruesome fetal remains.  Between
   the twelfth and the sixteenth week, early in the second trimester,
   the fetus almost doubled in length as its body caught up to its
   large head, and it filled out to the point where it looked like
   a human baby for the first time.  Since the fetal skull was 
   still soft, the head did not come out whole during the evacuation,
   but the legs and arms and rib cage made it through intact.  The
   hand of a second trimester fetus, as a Preterm doctor described
   it, seemed big enough to shake.

   Most of Preterm's abortion staff didn't volunteer to work ``seconds''.
   Late first trimester POCs were hard enough.  The counselor/medical
   assistants (CMAs) met regularly to discuss their feelings about
   their work, and often the discussion focused on the POC.  Inside
   a procedure room, facing the contents of the uterus, there was
   no denying what abortion was." 

   Sue Hertz, _Caught in the Crossfire: A Year on Abortion's Front Line_,
   Prentice Hall Press, 1991, pg. 104.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
From: dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Roe v. Wade and abortion (was Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 03:24:32 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.191507.17372@ncmicro.lonestar.org> 
ltf@ncmicro.lonestar.org (Lance Franklin) writes:

> What annoys me is that, although the "anti-choice-to-abort" people seem
> to think that their arguments are superior, they evidently do not trust
> women to see this for themselves. 

You make it sound as if every woman is pro-choice.  Women are individuals 
who have a variety of opinions on abortion.  Please don't ignore their
individuality.  

And abortion is not a matter of "trust", it's a matter of what's "right".  

> They seem quite unwilling to place their arguments on the anvil of time
> to see if they are indeed superior, and prefer to assert the superiority
> of their arguments by government fiat.  Exactly what they complain about
> when government decides that school prayer is not constitutional.  

I'd be quite happy to overturn the "government fiat" known as 
Roe v. Wade and have the abortion issue returned to the states
where it rightfully belongs.  Let the people decide the issue.

> If they truly believed in Democracy, they would work, not to block abortion
> clinics, 

I don't block abortion clinics. 

> but to change enough people's minds to gain the support they
> need to change the laws. 

The laws can't be changed until Roe v. Wade is overturned.  Until
that time, the people of this country will be forced into accepting 
the Supreme Court's edicts on abortion.

>Lance T. Franklin


Doug Holtsinger

      "My logic is based on ... a religious perspective which says
 that personhood begins at birth (actually a month after birth if
 we want to be precise)..."
   -- Gloria Feldt,
      chief executive, Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona

  "I see nothing extreme or reprehensible about this statement."
    -- garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) <BtnDAw.Iwo.2@cs.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.bush
From: anne@cco.caltech.edu (Anneliese Lilje)
Subject: Re: US Public Schools: Get Rid of All the Bureaucrats!
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 21:46:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.161601.26317@kadsma.kodak.com> pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) writes:
>In article <BtJuFo.9Dq@world.std.com> pjs@world.std.com (Paul J Schmidt) writes:
>>...I have found good and bad teachers in
>>our schools.  But unfortunately the government monopoly makes it almost
>>impossible for me to take my child elsewhere....
>>-- 
>>Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government, Davy Crockett Chapter President

>And even the basic education function has become problematic. Here in NY State,
>the Board of Regents is mandating multi-cultural history classes. Thomas
>Jefferson and friends are no longer to be portrayed as the 'Founding Fathers',
>but rather as slaveholders. The American Revolution itself is to be shown as
>a highly ambiguous event.

Well, they were slaveholders, so the truth is part of history. I would
say that it would be good to teach the american revolution IN CONJUNCTION
WITH other happening of the times such as the slaughter of the eastern
indians by Christians and disease, and also the importation of blacks
as slaves. History is full of good AND bad things. To tell a child that
america in the years 1750-1800 was only populated by white looking
at obtaining freedom from England is missing 1/2 the population.

anne

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Fiscal Responsibility
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:34:24 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.214327.28247@ncar.ucar.edu> gary@colossus.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes:

>sc> Scott Cromar
>gs> Gary Strand
>
>gs> Why not share the "pain" equally?
>
>sc> Because some programs are worth fully funding (like the immunization pro-
>sc> gram that Reagan gutted).  Others are worth junking entirely. There's no
>sc> good reason that we can't set priorities to govern our spending. 
>
>  Priority 1 should be justification of the program's existence. 

     Nobody justifies the existance of a program better than a bureaucrat.
Ask them to justify their jobs and you'll get a hundred pages why they,
and only they, are absolutely vital to the success of the United States.

>sc> But I do favor things like Oregon-style rationing for Medicare and Medi-
>sc> caid,
>
>
>sc> In fact, the lobbying groups for the disabled have signed off on the plan.
>
>  Meaning what? They approve (not unexpected) or disapproved?

     Meaning, apparently, they don't mind being exempted from rationing.
 
     I wouldn't.

>sc> means-testing for Social Security,
>
>gs> Not politically tenable as long as there are baby-boomers around. Besides,
>gs> I would rather get all the money I've put in so far as a check right now, 
>gs> and I'd renounce any and all claims to any SS money in the future.
>
>sc> There ain't no money in the fund to write you a check with.  
>
>  Oh yes, there is. Inflow has exceeded outgo for quite some time now. That's
>  why they use the SS fund to cover up the true size of the deficit, since it's
>  so far into the black.

     On paper it's in the black.  Lot's of paper IOU's from the general
fund.  Lots of loans at *healthy* interest rates.  But the borrower is
four trillion in the hole, and who knows whether it will be able to
make good on those IOUs.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42186 alt.politics.elections:11674 alt.politics.clinton:3145
From: garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
Summary: Europe
Date: 27 Aug 92 01:41:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

In article <92239.161749DART@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, DART@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (4 writes...
>Oh my God!  Ya, we're responsible for winning the cold war and
>the downfall of the Soviet Union...uh, and Cuba, Haiti, Veitnam, Lybia,
>Iraq and China are holding up because we're, uh, not reeealy trying as hard.
>Eyah, that's the ticket, not trying as hard in those places..eyah.
> 
>To say that economic pressures *WE* brought to bear on the Soviets
>are what forced change is nonsense.  If the leaders of the XUSSR
>would have wanted to they could have maintained their grip on the
>people the same way the Chinese, Lybian, or Iraqies-(sp?) do.  To
>think that they couldn't is contradictory to whats happening in
>the world today.
> 
>Marty Dart.
>My opinions are mine and mine alone.

One other factor to include. WE were'nt the only country to be involved
in the Cold War. Remember all of western Europe did just about as much as
we ever did. Plus there is all the countries that actually fought on our
side in Africa, South-East Asia, and Latin America. These people actually
fought, starved, and died in the fight against Communism. And then there
are people in Eastern Europe (ie the Hungarian Revolt 1956, and the 
Solidarity Movement 1980, ect.). And don't forget Afghanistan, and the
fact that China and Russia fought a border war in 68'.
	Here's Bush claiming that he won the Cold War when there 
were literally MILLIONS of people that died fighting Communism on 
their OWN SOIL. I'm not going to get into the "whether we should have
fought, or how much" arguement. I'm just saying that America did'nt 
actually do as much to bring down Russia as we like to think, or that
politicians will tell us this year.
	Just my .02 cents

-Garrett
From: Chris.Holt@newcastle.ac.uk (Chris Holt)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: US Public Schools: Get Rid of All the Bureaucrats!
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:15:06 GMT
Organization: University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, NE1 7RU

cote@cs.ucsd.edu (Brad Cote) writes:
>ednschmi@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (John Schmidt) writes:

>>The trouble with a voucher system is that it creates even more opportunities
>>for marketing than it does for education.  Consider the proposition:
>>Marketing is basically lying.

>Wrong. Marketing is about communication and differentiation. Bad
>marketing which lies about the attributes of a product results
>in more problems for a company than the slight increase in
>sales helps. A company which consistently lies about its
>products will not be in business very long.

Ho ho ho!!!  IBM: Our products are the best!  Marlboro: You too
can have Clint Eastwood's sex appeal!  Budweiser: We sell beer! :-)

A problem with education is that measuring how well a school is
doing is *very* tricky, so the potential for selecting misleading
statistics is high.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Chris.Holt@newcastle.ac.uk      Computing Lab, U of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Still shone the candlelight on the empty screen, after the power went.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43695 ca.politics:7425
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Selectivity vs Objectivity in the Media
Keywords: Bronze Age, anal sex, press cover up
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:49:42 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <95202@bu.edu>, kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
# This bizarre story out of recent reports from Austria:
# 
# Remeber "Otze"? The 5,500 old Bronze-Age hiker who froze to death during
# a snowstorm in the Tirolean Alps in Italy, and was found almost completely
# preserved last year?
# 
# Well, it seems that a part of the story that was originally reported in
# Austria, Switzerland, and Italy, "somehow escaped attention" here in the
# United States.
# 
# What the press here declined to mention, in order not to offend our delicate
# sensibilities, was that during the autopsy, researchers found human semen
# in "Otze's" rectum. The frozen sperm was dated at the same age as the man's
# body.
# 
# The world's first known "bottom".
# 
# Perhaps the press wanted to avoid certain individuals jumping to conclusions.
# After all, Otze was wearing a leather outfit, black jewelry, and had tattoos.

# kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,

Or the world's first known homosexual rape victim?

Considering that all the items with him indicated that he was on
an extended journey, and it's not clear exactly how he came to
be in the glacier, I wouldn't discount the possibility of rape
and murder.
-- 
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.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Why I cannot vote Democratic
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:28:35 GMT

In article <37285@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> cote@cs.ucsd.edu (Brad Cote) writes:
>golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>
>>The international and domestic business community voted on Bush's
>>economic plan this week...taxs cut and vague spending cuts...the
>>bottom has fallen out of the US dollar in international markets...
>>a freefall which may yet force the Fed to begin raising interest 
>>rates.
>
>The reason for the fall in the dollar is that international
>financial investors feel that Bush's call for lower taxes
>and lower spending means only one thing - a bigger deficit.
>No one believes that congress will limit spending. One report
>I read quoted an investor from Britain saying that Bush's
>econimic package would not persuade enough voters to win
>him the election. He fears runnaway deficits with Clinton and
>a Democratic congress. As do I. 
>

So exactly what would be new...the Bush administration has produced
nothing but runaway deficits, and then propose he tax cuts, without
itemizing spending cuts...no wonder the dollars falls.

>Prediction - If slick willy wins, runaway deficit spending will
>crush growth, unemployment will skyrocket, and inflation will
>rise to double digits. The reasons: the deficit will push up
>interest rates, eliminating funds needed for REAL (not pork
>barrel) investment in industry. His health care policy will
>require employers to cut back on workers in order to pay the
>increased per employee costs. Expensive (and according to
>some reputable scientists, but not Al Gore, unnecessary) 
>limitations on CO2 emmisions will cripple industry's ability
>to expand. If willy caves into the Gephart protectionist
>wing (he will owe the unions), NAFTA will become meaningless,
>further eroding our industrial base, and missing a great
>opportunity for all three countries.
>

Runaway deficit spending during the Bush administration has crushed
growth, and seen unemployment skyrocket.

Health care reform could result in $100 billion dollars in savings
for business and government...the health care dividend is greater
than the peace dividend.  Health care reform is essential for
business competitiveness, deficit reduction, and workforce upgrading.

Japan and Germany will continue to take the lead in energy 
efficient environmental technologies if the US maintains its
massive subsidization of the fossil fuel industry.

If the US were interested in free trade, it would work harder for
a successful GATT round.  The US is interested more in protectionism,
and Canada really has no choice but to go into NAFTA as a defensive
measure against protectionist sentiments in Europe and the US which
are jeopardizing the GATT and which may lead to a trade war.

Many of the provisions of NAFTA are
rather protectionist, and the US is using this as a threat against
Europe and Japan and the GATT.

Gerald
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Subject: Re: why progressive tax rates (was Re: Clinton's
Organization: Wayne State University, C&IT
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:08:55 GMT

In article <n75eifx@Unify.Com>
ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan) writes:
 
      [...I said:]
>>Excuse me? Adjusting for inflation is "voodoo"? Tell me, if your income
>>goes up 20%, and inflation is 30%, will you be out celebrating your raise?
>
      [...and Carolyn responds:]
>And if my income goes up 0% (as it did), it doesn't matter what level infla-
>tion is at, my wage has not increased.  If my income goes up -5%, or whatever
>the average wage did since 1980, then it doesn't matter what level inflation
>is at, my wage has declined.  I'm out celebrating because, unlike the national
>average, my income did not go up a negative percentage.
 
Yes, but the overall health of the country does not depend on your particular
circumstances. Some do better; some, like you, do worse. If your income
doesn't keep pace with inflation, of course, that's all the more reason
inflation hurts you.
 
The point made was that when all these effects are factored in, OVERALL the
American worker made positive gains in the 80s. You can't assume evryone
in the country had the same experience as you, or that you would have
gotten a raise under a different administration.
>
>
>My bank doesn't look at my paycheck and say, "here, the level of inflation is
>10%, so we'll just add 10% to your paycheck and put that into your account."
>The grocery store doesn't look at the cash I give it and say, "today's level
>of inflation is 10%, so the $40 you give us will cover $44 of your food bill
>today".
>
Well, yes; we've established that inflation is bad. How does that adress the
question at hand? Do you have statistics that dispute the ones we've
introduced?
 
>I'm talking about the numbers on the paycheck and the bills in the pay envel-
>ope.  The US Census is talking about the numbers on the paycheck and the
>bills in the pay envelope.  It says that for the average wage earner, the
>numbers on the paycheck DECREASED in value, that the bills in the pay envel-
>ope added up to a SMALLER total, during the past ten years.  What's real:
>abstract numbers that have been calculated using other abstract numbers, or
>the digits on the paycheck?
>
>If you lose one job paying you $1000 a month, and get a second job that pays
>you $800 a month, do you go out and celebrate your raise because the level
>of inflation is 30%?
>
>
I'm not sure you understand the argument.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43163 talk.politics.mideast:19456 misc.headlines:6130
From: eggertj@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines
Subject: Re: Eggert vs. Livni
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:38:21 GMT
	<1992Sep1.034152.23793@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
	<EGGERTJ.92Sep1095349@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Sep1.171757.26427@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
Reply-To: eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41

In article <1992Sep1.171757.26427@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   In article <EGGERTJ.92Sep1095349@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu> eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu writes:
>   # What about the holes makes them other than holes?  Are they a special
>   # shape that only a rabbi's drill could make?  Are they lined with
>   # rare materials?
>
>	   This is part of the point.  There is something special about them,
>   including (but definitely not limited to) the fact that they are a
>   rather common occurence in certain neighborhoods.

That is not a special characteristic.  Graffiti is a rather common
occurence in certain neighborhoods, but they do not constitute proof
or even evidence of ownership.

>   # Not that I know of.  I did not say that the holes are
>   # not valid evidence, I merely said that they were not proof of
>   # ownership.  This for two reasons:  They can be faked, and they are not
>   # easily removed in case of legal transfer of ownership.
>
>	   They cannot easily be faked (you make yourself look silly
>   everytime you try to claim otherwise).  You might have a valid point of
>   transfer of ownership but only under three conditions.  Proof of
>   transfer of ownership from those living there at the time the holes
>   were made, proof that those who lived there at the time the holes were
>   made were not the owners (and have no rights of receivership), or
>   proof that those living there at the time the holes were made somehow
>   lost their rights (or gave them up) legitimately.  None of these
>   conditions apply.

I guess I don't understand why you think that a hole cannot be made
and claimed that it is an older mezuza hole.  You admit that none of
them have been tested for actual age, as far as you know.  Do you
claim that a mezuza hole can be made to mount a mezuza, but not just
to make a hole?

As far as you string of conditions, they simply amount to requiring
legal proof of ownership of the property, and really have nothing to
do with mezuza holes at all.  Further, if proof of ownership is
available, then the mezuza holes would carry no legal weight, being as
they are easily faked, at least to an accuracy which would fool the
average observer.
--
=Jim  eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)