HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: don@xray.phys.uh.edu (Duck aka D. Harper)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Calling all Houston Denizens and other rec.motoists
Date: 18 Dec 92 01:39:04
Organization: Ducks R Us
Distribution: usa
	<1goe52INN48t@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <jcn.724640895@helix>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xray.phys.uh.edu
In-reply-to: jcn@rice.edu's message of Fri, 18 Dec 1992 01:08:15 GMT

In article <jcn.724640895@helix> jcn@rice.edu () writes:

   mparsons@fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu (Mark Parsons) writes:

   >And yes, I'm gonna ask her the first chance I get if she
   >speaks English!! bwahahaha!! ;-)

   You mean that matters now?  Should she also be a wishy-washy 
   waitress? ;-)


That is if you can even get her hair colour right. :-)  Maybe she can bring
her pet rats for you to play with, Mark.  =8-O

--
Don Harper  don@xray.phys.uh.edu
'82 XJ750RK	DoD # 0520		I didn't say it.
From: don@xray.phys.uh.edu (Duck aka D. Harper)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Calling all Houston Denizens and other rec.motoists
Date: 19 Dec 92 13:51:08
Organization: Ducks R Us
Distribution: usa
	<3176@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xray.phys.uh.edu
In-reply-to: joe@woody.mpd.tandem.com's message of 18 Dec 92 21:53:34 GMT

In article <3176@devnull.mpd.tandem.com> joe@woody.mpd.tandem.com (Joe Senner) writes:

   ]I DON'T REMEMBER(*hint* *hint*)
   ]Am I FORGETTING something?!?!?! ;-)

   forget it mark, you aint gettin' one.

But, Joe...I thought he _was_ supposed to forget???

Don
--
Don Harper  don@xray.phys.uh.edu
'82 XJ750RK	DoD # 0520		I didn't say it.
--
Don Harper  don@xray.phys.uh.edu
'82 XJ750RK	DoD # 0520		I didn't say it.
From: joe@woody.mpd.tandem.com (Joe Senner)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Calling all Houston Denizens and other rec.motoists
Date: 18 Dec 92 21:53:34 GMT
Reply-To: joe@mpd.tandem.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc., Austin, TX.

]I DON'T REMEMBER(*hint* *hint*)
]Am I FORGETTING something?!?!?! ;-)

forget it mark, you aint gettin' one.

-- 
Joe Senner                aDoF#105                  joe@rider.cactus.org
Tandem Computers Inc.                               joe@mpd.tandem.com

        mcad.dunham-frodo[ 10 ]%make witches\ burn
        Make:  Don't know how to make witches burn.  Stop.
     Ergo, it must be the wizards." -- Jerry Dunham
From: captain@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Bran Muffin)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Mexico on Motorcycle
Date: 13 Dec 92 23:54:24 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

I've been told that driving through Mexico is dangerous at best, and that
riding a bike there is suicidal.  What's the deal?  Is it really that bad
down there?  I assume they were referring to corrupt police, but I don't
know, maybe it's rabid chickens or something.  Has anyone actually done
a Mexico road trip by bike, and what was the adventure?


-- 
|The opinions expressed above are merely the result of chaotic synapse firings|
|Electrics and electronics work on smoke. If you let the smoke       -   O    |
|out, they stop working.   --   Fight AIDS.  Play safe.                |      |
|captain@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  (Brian Murfin)  DoD# 0690  nt650gt     \_^___/   |
From: mparsons@fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu (Mark Parsons)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Calling all Houston Denizens and other rec.motoists
Date: 16 Dec 1992 23:29:38 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: mparsons@fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu (Mark Parsons)
NNTP-Posting-Host: fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu
Originator: mparsons@fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu


And yes, I'm gonna ask her the first chance I get if she
speaks English!! bwahahaha!! ;-)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
From: jcn@rice.edu ()
Subject: Re: Calling all Houston Denizens and other rec.motoists
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 01:08:15 GMT

mparsons@fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu (Mark Parsons) writes:

>And yes, I'm gonna ask her the first chance I get if she
>speaks English!! bwahahaha!! ;-)

You mean that matters now?  Should she also be a wishy-washy 
waitress? ;-)


--
*  Jeff Nichols                 |   I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay. * 
*  It's a dog-eat-dog world out there, and I'm wearing milkbone    *
*  underwear--  Norm Peterson					   *
From: joe@rider.cactus.org (Joe Senner)
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Calling all Houston Denizens and other rec.motoists
Date: 17 Dec 92 03:57:30 GMT
Reply-To: joe@rider.cactus.org
Distribution: usa
Organization: NOT

mparsons@fleming.csc.bcm.tmc.edu (Mark Parsons) writes:
]And yes, I'm gonna ask her the first chance I get if she
]speaks English!! bwahahaha!! ;-)

but mark, what makes you think you'll be able to understand the answer???

-- 
Joe Senner -- joe@Rider.Cactus.Org           aDoF#?                Austin, TX

    'When I asked Unix to make the witches burn I got:
         mcad.dunham-frodo[ 10 ]%make witches\ burn
         Make:  Don't know how to make witches burn.  Stop.
     Ergo, it must be the wizards.' -- Jerry Dunham
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
From: bade@austin.ibm.com ()
Subject: Re: Insurance
Originator: bade@athena2.austin.ibm.com
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 16:26:58 GMT
Reply-To: bade@wombat.austin.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Austin


> 
> Was trying to scope out things for the next Splat with Feisty and Brakes and
> I Splatted all by myself. Luckily Joe managed to dodge my body parts rolling
> down the road.
> 
Hey I resemble that...... :-)

> Maybe Joe will post his view, but it happened when I crested an over-the-hill
> right turn with a little blip at the top. Me and Front Tire went as expected,
> but Trunk took off in the wrong direction due to the lack of rebound damping
> in those little doo-daas Honda calls rear shocks. I quickly realized that
> when my Slinky(tm) trunk hit the end of it's extension, it was gonna come
> crashing back down on me at a very inappropriate time. So I yanked the front
> tire upright and hit the brakes. Rear brakes weren't of much help due to
> aforementioned Slinky effect.
> 
I can't say much since by the time I got there kent was walking arround 
cursing.  I did see the PC on its side and said Oh Shit, Kent's rear shock
finally went up and did not come down.

> Would have kept upright if I had had two more feet of road, but hit gravel so
> laid it down and bailed out to keep from pushing the bike on down the hill.
> Saw Joe's tires go by my leg in Slo-Mo as I was rolling away. Good job, Joe!
> 
Would have been interesting to get a guy with 2 broken legs back from where we 
were considering 5 bikes...
Thank goodness Joe missed you.

Steve
-- 
Regards,

        Steve
	   "A good programmer, as a function of what he does,
Newsgroups: tx.motorcycles
From: mbrown@testsys.austin.ibm.com (Mark Brown)
Subject: BMW System II helmet and Tank Bag
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 14:57:19 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: IBM Corp., Austin TX


  Well, I sold my K75, and my adoption is proceeding....but I still have
for sale:

  USED BMW System II helmet (yes, the 'clamshell' helmet)
	white and blue, size 7 3/8.
	I know a used helmet is a risk. I also know that mine's in
	good shape, and you can't get these anymore.
	$100.00 OBO

  BMW tank bag
	huge. all sections, rain cover.
	$100 OBO

cheers,
mark
-- 
Mark Brown       IBM PSP Austin, TX.| Fear the Government
(512) 838-3926   VNET: MBROWN@AUSVMQ| that fears your privacy.
MAIL: mbrown@testsys.austin.ibm.com | Keep personal cryptography legal.
       DISCLAIMER: My views are independent of IBM official policy.
From: langston@frontier.lonestar.org (Kevin Langston)
Newsgroups: tx.test
Subject: Test (like,duh)
Keywords: Cole Weslock Master Grayhill
Date: 17 Dec 92 03:15:34 GMT
Reply-To: langston@frontier.lonestar.org (Kevin Langston)
Followup-To: tx.test
Distribution: dfw
Organization: Frontier Information Systems


    This has been a test of the, um, something. Had this been a real
    article there would likely have been at least as much content as 
    a cancel cmsg or one of Eric's sendsysess (sendsysen?)..

-- 
    Kevin Langston   
    WORK: langston@convex.com             
    PLAY: langston@frontier.lonestar.org   
    FIDO: Kevin.Langston@f2107.n124.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: tx.test
From: bill@leeweyr.sccsi.com (Bill Lee)
Subject: Testing
Organization: Lee Aerie
Distribution: tx
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 23:00:31 GMT


Testing...Testing....1.2.3.... Can Ya'll hear me back there?

Let me know if this gets to you.   Please?? Please??

Testing.....testing.....esting...sting......ng.......g........
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: John Haugh's Brain redux (was - Re: Clinton has won...watch your
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 23:14:43 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Griff Miller X7114 (miller@hmsp04.wg3.waii.com) wrote:
: But John, this has nothing to do with babies. To compare an unborn child 
: to an uninvited guest is completely ludicrous.

Why?  The "parents" didn't want to conceive a child, they wanted to have
sex.  I didn't want you to come into my house, I left the window open to get
some fresh air.

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"Look, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a
 system of government"
From: wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Rick Russell)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Government Fiscal Responsibilities?
Date: 15 Dec 1992 14:17:11 -0600
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Distribution: tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: tamsun.tamu.edu

In article <1992Dec14.152653.14694@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

>Asserting that doesn't make it so, Jay.  There are any number of
>government programs that work quite well; in fact, many that do things
>that the private econommy can't or won't do for itself. 

On this same tack, what is the typical fiscal conservative/Libertarian
approach to handling some of the current government responsibilities
which would 'revert' to private industry?

Hmm. That question doesn't make much sense. I guess what I mean to ask
is this: The government currently does lots of things that
Libertarians and others think should be in the domain of private
industry. What is the Libertarian/fiscal conservative plan for
transferring those responsibilities back to the private sector?

Personally, I've got a very Libertarian bent, but at the same I'm a
graduate student who will probably be getting government
money/grants/stipends of some kind for the rest of my life. I worry
that a truly Libertarian administration would dismantle or seriously
cripple existing programs of scientific funding (the NSF, the NIH, the
CDC, NASA, Natl Weather Service, NOAA, etc etc ad infinitum) to the
point where professional scientists (such as I hope to become) will be
put out of business, or we'll be working in the DoD (which I would
prefer to avoid, given the choice). Heck, without government
scientific funding, this whole network probably wouldn't exist (okay,
I guess the UUCP side would, but the university/educational side
wouldn't).

So let's say I vote with my pocketbook. How would a Libertarian
administration assure me of a smooth transition of govt research
funding to private industry? Or would they just not bother, and cast
professional scientists to the wind?

As a related side note, perhaps some of the fiscally conservative
readers of tx.politics might help me answer this question:

What are the real responsilbities of the federal government?

I know the Constitution specifies several, and I know the stock
responses of defense, judiciary, legislative, etc. Is there a core
list of government responsibilities which (most) everyone can agree
on? 
-- 
#      Rick Russell | TAMU Meteorology | wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu       # 
#     "I am Elfy of Atlantis." "I am Jo-Jo of Munchkinland."           #
#     "We are Elfy and Jo-Jo!"                                         #
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally)
Subject: Re: John Haugh's Brain redux (was - Re: Clinton has won...watch your
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: tx
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:34:43 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.113742.21191@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>
>With regard to 'potential', just how far back is it reasonable to go?
>After all, ever sperm cell and every egg cell has the 'potential' to
>become a baby (with real brainwaves).  Just where is it reasonable to
>draw the line, and just what makes that stage 'magical'?

	This is probably why a lot of folks oppose birth control.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Mullally (rocky@sugar.neosoft.com) PH:713-681-2495
"We need stronger death penalties..." George Bush, debate #2
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Subject: Re: Protectionism and Japan
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:25:10 GMT
Distribution: usa,tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin

In article <1992Dec14.224133.25319@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806 (curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com) wrote:
>: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:
>: >Have you read Louis Leclerc's paper, "Does America Say Yes to Japan?"?  
>: >Somebody recently passed it on to me, and I found it fascinating what they
>: >do in Japan to keep out foreigners.
>: 
>: I read it.  It's the worst kind of emotional xenophobic protectionist
>: ramblings.  Just exactly the kind of arguments we don't need if we want
>: to improve our economy.
>
>Aside from his conclusion which is basically an appeal to US consumers not
>to buy any Japanese products (interestingly enough, he doesn't advocate 
>government-imposed protectionism), are you criticizing his description of
>the way things work in Japan?  Is it inaccurate?  Is he being paranoid, or

In some cases it is inaccurate or exaggerrated yes.
For example their much admired MITI controlled 5th generation computer
project has been a big waste of money but you don't see that in his
report do you?  

>do the Japanese companies conspire with their government in a united
>effort to take over world markets?  Do our trade policies enable them to 
>succeed?

It doesn't matter if they do.  How could they possibly do so anyway.
The world is just too big for this to possibly work.  What have they
tried to take over?  VCRs?  They created the industry when noone else
was even interested.  TVs?  They took over all right, but their TVs
are cheaper and better than ever.  They didn't take over and then
raise prices.  They LOWERED them.

Just what is it that they've done that's so bad other than sell us
thing at a low cost and high quality?  What is wrong with that.

We should send them a Christmas Card.

Can you come up with just ONE INSTANCE where they took over a market,
substantially raised prices, and damaged us for any long period of
time successfully?  

NO.  Before we go hammer away at the Japanese for our own shortcomings
we should at least point to some historical damage that they've cost
CONSUMERS.  Producers will always claim damage.  They have nothing
to lose by doing so.  YOU DO!  



-- 
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to my employer's    |        Austin, TX
 There'll be too many elderly in 30 years for your kids to afford all the FICA.
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: Protectionism and Japan
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa,tx
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:35:06 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.151917.14345@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> As a general principle, certainly.  But the assumption there is that
> EVERYONE is doing it.
 
No Fred, I'm saying that the vast majority of economists support free
trade in the world we live in right now.  The imperfect world with other
countries that don't believe in free trade.
 
> You need to look at the overall effects on the economy, which simply
> isn't quite simple enough to say, "Uhg!  Must pay more for steel!  Bad
> Wampum!"  What happens once domestic steel production goes under?
> What impacts does that have?  Why isn't the biggest steel user in the
> country out there against this if they're damaged so badly by it?
 
First of all, there is no evidence that every steel maker would go out of
business in the US.  You would see a rapid re-organization in the market. 
Weaker companies would fold or consolidate.  Companies would have to get
better terms for their unions.  But smart innovative companies like Nucor
will continue to flourish.
 
Some workers would lose their jobs, but calculations a few years ago show
that the US could give $100K/year to each steel worker and still benefit
from free trade in that market.  Which means that even if 50% went on
welfare the US would have a net gain.  
 
I'm amazed by your constant reliance on this strange logic which says that
if people aren't taking to the streets it must mean that protect doesn't
really hurt people.  The commerce dept, which support some protect,
calculates itself that protection has added hundreds of dollars to the
price of the average american car (and thousands to the average truck). 
Why don't Americans care?  Maybe they don't know, maybe they think it's
worth it to bash Japan, who the hell knows.  But it doesn't invalidate the
data.
 
Finally, it's simply a fantasy to believe that one country is going to 
take over a market like steel and once they've driven everyone out, raise
prices through the roof.  It just isn't going to happen Fred and to keep
claiming that as a claim against free trade just makes your argument look
like it doesn't have a leg to stand on.
 
I'm still waiting for you to introduce some facts Fred.  ANY facts.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: John Haugh's Brain redux (was - Re: Clinton has won...watch your
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 00:03:41 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

fred j mccall 575-3539 (mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com) wrote:
: Ah, once again the anti-abortionists' favorite comment.  She may have
: had NO brainwaves, since they aren't necessary to something being
: 'alive' in the way that you mean it.  Did the babies born with only
: brainstems down around Brownsville have human brainwaves? 

I think so.  Their brain stems produce electrical activity that can be 
uniquely identified as coming from homo-sapien brain stems.  Why can't these 
be called "human brain waves"?  As Chris said, it's not cow brain activity or 
alien brain activity.  What do YOU call it?  Your argument is backwards.  
You've decided that something is not human, so therefore it can't emit human 
brain waves.

: However, what has been said (and what John Haugh disagrees with) is
: that "genuine brainwaves do not occur until the third trimester",

Of course, because you're defining "genuine" brainwaves to be that produced by
a completely developed brain.  So it's no surprise that under that definition,
"genuine" brain waves don't appear until the brain is completely formed.  That
is already assumed in your definition.

Let me ask you something:  If you had a severe brain injury and had to have
part of your brain removed, would you no longer emit "genuine" human 
brainwaves under your definition?

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
"Look, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a
 system of government"
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: John Haugh's Brain redux (was - Re: Clinton has won...watch your
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:21:15 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Dec11.233629.26706@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti) writes:

>fred j mccall 575-3539 (mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com) wrote:
>: However, if you rip me to shreds in the process of 'removing' me, that
>: DOES constitute deadly force and you are likely to find yourself in
>: front of the grand jury.

>That's a technology limitation.  If a fetus could be removed intact, I suspect
>we would do so.

Sorry, but whether we have the techonology to remove it intact is
irrelevant once you start wanting to treat it as a person violating
property rights rather than as an undesired growth in the mother's
body.  It's rather like saying, "Gee, I have this tenant I want to
evict and I'm only 5'4", so the only way I can get them out of there
is to shoot them."  It still isn't legal.

>: Do you propose calling the police and
>: arresting the foetus for trespassing, or what?

>No, but then I don't propose doing that when you walk into my house either.

Well then, I suggest you either be prepared to commit perjury or to
serve time for murder, because once you invite me in I don't think you
can legally use deadly force to remove me unless I'm threatening you.
Of course, neither can I legally resist leaving, but you have to call
a cop to remove me.

>: The argument can be
>: made that the women invited it in, if you want to resort to property
>: law.

>If she invited it in, it wouldn't be an unwanted pregnancy, in which case this
>would all be moot.

Oh, no.  She invited it in; she just didn't want it to stay.  If she
hadn't 'invited' it, it wouldn't be there (unless she was raped).

>: Personally, I think this isn't the best approach to this issue. 

>But it gets away from the slippery slope of "what is a human being?", which
>as you've seen is very debatable and arbitrary.

But it puts you into a position where you can't legally perform an
abortion without first calling the police, getting court orders, etc. 

>: Prove that the FOETUS attached the umbilical cord.  The mother is
>: cooperating in this, and if you want to treat it under property rights
>: you're going to have to take the foetus to court.

>I disagree.  If I leave my front door unlocked and you come walking in, I don't
>have to take you to court to get you to leave.  I never agreed to let you in
>to begin with.  The same goes for an unintended pregnancy.

Sorry, but that's not the case.  She invited the sperm in; she just
didn't like what they did once they got there.  This is NOT a good
basis for determining this.

-- 
"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.