HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: politics@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 10:51:10 -0500
From:         ANTHLAL@UMNACVX.BITNET
Subject:      ba-da-boom, ba-da-bing

jimbo,
you thought *kerry* would give you anything less than a *straight*
answer?  you been reading the list lately?  (ba-dum-tsching)

                          * * anneliese, arbiter of bad taste in sexual
                              orientation jokes
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 12:08:37 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: read my lips: I have family values

>Well, maybe.  It depends (it seems) on the specific voucher proposal.
>Currently, we provide funding for public schools (mostly with state funds)
>in three ways:  (1) we provide the physical facilities; (2) we pay the
>teachers and other personnel; and (3) we provide some number of dollars per
>pupil (usually a baseline amount with supplements for kids with special
>needs -- gifted or LD or whatever).  I don't know the extent to which funds
>in (3) are used for the purposes of (1) and (2).
>
>Now, how do the vouchers work?  Bush would seem to be advocating an
>additional category -- a $1K voucher that can be used anywhere.  If it used
>for a private school, then we are essentially double-funding:  we are still
>paying (1) and (2),

Huh?  If students leaving for private schools results in excess public
school capacity, why would we pay for it?  If it doesn't result in
excess capacity, then we're just making up a shortfall.  Either way,
there's no double funding.

>>For example, the voucher amount could depend on end-of-previous-year
>>test scores; lower scores get more money.  Bad schools wouldn't get
>>repeat biz because their students would be sucked away.
>
>MacPhil identified the problem here.  Bad schools would be favored, which
>is not what we're trying to do, right?

MacPhil was wrong.  Bad schools aren't favored; they generate more
money for good schools and drive themselves out of biz.

>Um, improvement was what I was aiming at.  We need to determine whether
>privatizing would be better than what we have.  And, to the extent that we
>require kids to go to school, I think we still have an obligation to be
>sure they have access to a place that will at least cover the basics.

Interestingly enough, the voucher-advocates haven't advocated
privatization.  They've merely asked for less of a funding disadvantage.

If you really think that everyone in your area would flock to private
schools and abandon the public ones, what's your argument for
maintaining them?  (If they LIKE where there kids are going, they're
probably more likely to vote for adequate money.  The "we'll ruin the
public schools unless you cough up" approach doesn't work.)

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: @POL
X-VMS-Cc: CDELL
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:48:04 -0500
From:         "VALENTINE M. SMITH" <CDELL@UMKCVAX1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: vote early, vote often ...

I guess I've just continued plodding along with issues discussion, without
touting DuncaN/ValentiN much, figuring if you thought our thinkings had
merit, you'd vote for us. We apparently are not as humorous as Tim, Gary,
Jimbo or Jaime. A poll might be good, I recall Brni did that before and did
fine - I nominate him to be poll-taker. On the "jerk/idiot" idea, I cannot
in good conscience paricipate, though I find many of the ideas put forth by
these two, and at least three others, almost completely repugnant, more than
a little sanctimonious, and often seeming so far out of the mainstream as to
startle me when I read their posts. I feel bad that the Right feels only the
evocation of Jesus is necessary to vaildate their arguments, and that the
rest of us, regardless of political leaning, can be basically dismissed on the
grounds we don't give Jesus and Bible primacy in our lives. I'm not a Christian,
   rejected the religion to practice 33 years ago, but I agree that there are
principles in Christianity that are useful guides for life, as is also so
from the tenets of Hindu, Islam, Taoism, and Judaism. I practice none of these
religions, finding institutionalized religions of ANY KIND basically "using"
their followers to perpetuate their existence. But, labelling this person or
that the "list idiot" only makes for bad blood, stirs up animosities that
asren't necesary, and uglifies our exchange even more than is already so. I
find the strategy a few of us are in apparent agreement about - to not
respond to the worst and/or most ludicrous of these posts - much more in
line with my "virtual election" claim, that DuNcaN/ValeNtiN is the ticket of
"reasonableness." Vote, but only once, VMS
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:01:05 EST
From:         macphil <IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: read my lips: I have family values
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

On Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:55:28 EST Kerry Stephenson said:
>toddddd (and Kerry--what the heck, everybody):
>
>Teacher input is a nice idea, but part of the problem is that the
>majority of a teacher's efforts these days is wrapped up in paperwork.
>Teacher's *don't* have autonomy in the classroom because the
>administrators and the teachers' unions keep telling them how to
>teach, regardless of what works.
>
>Teachers who go beyond the call of duty and spend extra time with
>students, *teaching* them should be rewarded and appreciated.  Right
>now, they are just given more administrative and committee work, which
>reduces the amount of time they can actually spend *teaching.*

I disagree.  This sounds like teachers have become paper shufflers
in a redtape bureaucracy.  Most of the teachers I know (as well as
those who have left the teaching profession) are frustrated because
students lack the discipline to belong in a classroom where teaching
is attempted...teachers have the child but 6.5 hours a day and the
parents practically expect this person to raise their child but won't
allow them to do so.  Those persons also spend no outside time grading
papers, etc. as they do so on their lunch hour (prep period if it's
available), while the kids are @ PE, etc.

Most of the (ex-) teachers I know left from a sense of futility from
spending most of their time playing policeperson and not being able
to accomplish anything because they have no authority because anything
that works would be grounds for a lawsuit or disciplinary action
against them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The lesser of two evils is still evil." - Winston Churchill

MacPhil / iqti400@indycms.bitnet / iqti400@indycms.iupui.edu
From: SWEDE@DRYCAS.BITNET (i'm voting for harry truman)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: vote early, vote often
Date: 15 Sep 92 04:27:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"

Fred:
>The various tickets have been strangely quiet in recent days. Should we
>take a poll to give the list members a feel for the front runners and
>the dark horses in the virtual election?

According to a recent poll taken among myself and a few friends, the
johnsoN/olsoN ticket leads by an overwhelming margin.  Truly, it's staggering.

Additionally, I must claim the mantle of harry s. trumaN for myself.  Let
me tell you, I know what it's like to be the sheriff of a small northwestern
town, and find a body wrapped in plastic...

Wait.  Wrong harry trumaN.  Lemme start again.

I know what it's like to hold a newspaper up in the air and grin like an
idiot.  I wear glasses, sometimes.  I have a bland midwestern accent.  Need
you look further?  Hardly.  The ticket of johnsoN/olsoN is the ticket of
trumaN.

>fred

Gary W. OlsoN, who never
  took the SAT test          "The federal government is basically one enormous,
SWEDE@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU  ongoing Meeting From Hell." - Dave Barry
50 days and counting down...
From: 92price@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: Re: Where Carolyn left off
Date: 11 Sep 92 09:41:10 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU writes: 
> Interesting question.  I've given it a few minutes' thought, and here's
> what I came up with :)  *If* prostitution has a detrimental effect (one
> counter to the interest of the state -- like maybe prostitution leads to
> increases in STDs that the state winds up paying for, or something), then
> we do not need religious reasons to ban it.  Right?  If, on the other hand,
> it has *no* detrimental effect (other than to appear immoral to some), and
> *if* the only reason to oppose it is a religious doctrine, then . . . yep,
> I'd say we have a first amendment-type reason to *not* to outlaw it.

A lot of perfectly legal things can be said to have some sort of detrimental
effect--shouldn't the important question be, if there is a detrimental effect,
does the prohibition of prostitution produce a clearly preferable effect to
simply regulating it (considering the health risks, tax revenues, etc.)?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does G"od have a penis?  If so, how big is it?          |      Kai Alexis Price
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: RE: dear collegiate, alma mater; our loyal hearts we raise
Date: 15 Sep 92 03:49:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"

While you're up, get me a grant.

No, pick me up a Glenfiddich.  Good stuff.  Serious.  Barb doesn't like me
to get it until after the election, but hey, I won't say anything if you
don't.

George.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN::"politics@ohstvma.bitnet"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:51:39 -0400
From:         KILBURN@WVSVAX.WVNET.EDU
Subject:      not to change the subject or anything . . .

but what do y'all think about the Family Leave Act?  I've been trying to
ponder it a bit, but wound up with more questions than answers.  Maybe
y'all can help.

First, I find the *idea* of unpaid leave attractive.  Personally, I'd freak
if I had to risk losing my job to stay with a sick child or parent.  And it
seems reasonable to expect that, with more and more two-income families and
fewer folks living in extended families, the number of people potentially
facing that choice is increasing.  But I'm not real convinced that this
bill provides the best mechanism.

I can see why businesses would worry about the expense.  Paying and
training temporary replacements, or just reshuffling the work load around,
seems to be a real cost.  But I wonder -- how often could a business expect
to have to do this?  Obviously it depends on the size of the business, and
maybe on the nature of its workforce.  But has anyone seen estimates?  Or
even have a gut-level feeling?

On the flip side, would such a business realize a long-term advantage by
providing a leave policy -- one that would outweight the temporary expense?
In countries that have these policies, is absenteeism lower?  Productivity
higher?

Help.
Kerry
(liese -- is perot *really* on all those ballots???? I've gotta check the
news!)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 10:24:45 -0500
From:         MARTIN FOX <FOXML@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: clinton and college

  Reply to Missy etc.:

  The point is that with computers and increasing effects of the 3rd industrial
revolution that we're in the adolescence of now (2nd one was in the 19th cent.,
   in case you missed it.), jobs will be dissapearing and taken up by computers,
and the first ones to go will be the menial jobs that lower education is
taking care of now.   This can't last - robots will be flipping burgers in a
few years - pretty soon, most businesses will be run almost completely by
computer.
  Conclusion:  For the time being, the only way to escape this trend is edu-
cation.  Clinton, although he's not near as progressive as I'd like him to
be, is at least moving this forward instead of backwards.
  Further Conclusions (Straying from the topic here):  We can basically
choose to be, in the future, to do 3 things: 1. Be Socialistic 2. Be Luddites
3. Ignore the problem, as most are doing now and prob.  end up with a
revolution of some thype which could end in one of the 2 upper possibilites,
totaltarianism or a chaotic anarchy.
  More on this later.  Let me define here, though, my ideology:  I've got
a mixture of Socialistic, Civil Libertarian, and Liberal views. (Just wanted
to make it easier to characterize me... Stereotype away - I'll defend myself).

Martin
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:20:24 -0400
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
Subject:      Re: democratic platform/homosexuality

 *** Resending note of 09/04/92 15:25



 >      Are you suggesting that AIDS is a homosexual disease?  Did you know
 >   that statistically, heterosexual women are at the highest risk (outside
 >   intravenous drug users) of contracting AIDS?  And that following them
 >   are homosexual men, heterosexual men, and homosexual women?  AIDS IS NOT
 >   A HOMOSEXUAL DISEASE.  I'm sorry, I have to get emphatic -- I may be

 Tell ya' what.  Pick an AIDS case, oh just any one of 'em.  Trace the chain
 ALLLLLLLLLLLL the way back to its origin.  Just what did you find?

 >   saving your life.  The reason the homosexual population was so hard-hit
 >   in the beginning of the epidemic is due to promiscuity, not the kind of
 >   sex they were having, but how much.  Part of the reason that homosexual

 This is more nonsense.  Homosexuals are so promiscuous because they refuse to
 accept the existence of sexual morality.  If you insist that sex with light
 sockets is fine, what difference does it make how you screw (pun intended) ?
 Sorta' gives new meaning to "three-way" doesn't it?

 ...more nonsense deleted

 >               --G. Racz

 ---Robert
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:00:54 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Bad v. Harmful

No, brni:

It is *always* bad to lie (bear false witness.)

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 15:22:00 EST
From:         linda <SABOE@VUVAXCOM.BITNET>
Subject: re: real solutions for real problems

chris said:

>>I was supposed to pay $5,000 to get invited to lunch with Bush, and that was
>>just to get on to the grandly-named committee that had the lunches, the
>>cost of the lunches was extra.

then macp asked:

>Just to give equal time (in the interest of fairness), what was the
>cost to see Clinton?

what i want to know is...how much was the food?

-linda
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 11:02:53 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

G. Racz:

No, only those who can afford *expensive* art deserve *expensive*
art.

--Missy P 2 B

PS:  People "deserve" art?  Is this another one of those "rights?"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 17:56:46 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Is homosexuality immoral?
              13 Sep 1992 20:50:44 GMT from <jwales@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

Jimbo:

If the phrases you quote are evidence of the wit you claim to have
fathered, I think you have a very good basis for recalling your
genetic material.  The product is irreparably defective.

See your dealer for details.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 09:56:39 -0400
From:         SPRG0002@TULSAJC.BITNET
Subject:      Re: what to do in a world that trivializes intelligence

 *** Resending note of 09/14/92 23:38

 >Robert, I notice that you say "Christ-centered" rather than "God-centered".
 >Chris Morrison

 I give up.  Are you wanting a prize?  OK, you win the observation award!

 ---Robert
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: politics@ohstvma.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"politics@ohstvma"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:42:00 EST
From:         ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Interest Rates

>From: Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>

>>But now that the Fed Chief is in place, it's out of Bush's hands as well, no?

>Well, yes and no.
>Technically, the Chairman of the Fed serves at the president's pleasure.
>Bush can replace the Chairman whenever he wants to. But it might
>look really bad to do it about now. Fed Reserve Chairmen have
>substantial de facto power, because presidents are reluctant
>to replace them.

Good observation.

>But in any case, KAT is right that Bush wants interest rates
>to be really low. By now maybe he's given up, but low interest
>rates looked to be one way to give the economy a shove. Conventional
>wisdom says that in the long run, a shove like that will be worse
>than the recession, but on the other hand conventional wisdom in
>economics said the recession would be over now.

One potential problem is that lowering interest rates any more would be more
likely to increase inflation down the road, which would actually *raise*
nominal rates in the long run.  Interest rates have already been cut so far (at
least in people's minds) that further reductions would probably just feul
inflationary expectations instead of spurring investment.

As far as KAT's original post goes, the discount rate is the rate that the Fed
charges member banks when they borrow federal funds.  Obviously, banks are
going to mark up their own interest rates charged on loans (such as credit
cards) above the rate they have to pay to borrow funds (when they need to do
so).  In other words, the discount rate is is the "base" interest rate which
keeps getting marked-up until you wind up paying market-level rates on loans
and credit cards.

I'm just taking Money & Banking, so I may be wrong.  By the end of the
semester, I'll be able to answer this better.

>Jamie

Jason
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:18:07 EDT
From:         Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: getting blood from a turnip

>From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET

>         I have to take my books back after work, at around midnight,
>and drop them in the night suppository.

Oooh. You KNOW how painful THAT can be.

>Chris Morrison

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:42:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: An easy answer to a little question

Well, another welcome voice!

I think she might point to the famous endorsement by John the Baptist,
among others.  The Goddess has made similar guest appearances but I don't
think they have been documented quite as well.  She needs a better press
agent.

                                                   Chris Morrison
                                                  CMorriso@SNYESCVA.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"POLITICS@OHSTVMA.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:59:00 EDT
From:         CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: getting blood from a turnip

Don't they usually have a date somewhere in them?

Chris Morrison
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
Subject: Re: peter schledorn, where are you?????
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:55:30 GMT

Ah, the tragic life of an ex-con.  Our society is so unforgiving.

Here I am, fresh out of prison, and already I'm being accused....

CMORRISO@SNYESCVA.BITNET writes:
>I was just going to ask Jimbo where the love of my life was...

I didn't take her!

--Jimbo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:23:10 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: God's Country

JB:

Oh, right.  So now Pat Buchanan killed Alan Berg.  Cool.

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 19:54:27 CDT
From:         Titivillus <T9AA@SDSUMUS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: It's always the money

>>Now this is a good thread to develop. I reckon precious metals will
>>always have value but, for instance, we have already seen the market
>>in classic cars bubble and burst. My money in the longer term is that
>>the treasure will be water - we keep increasing our per capita
>>consumption from a limitted supply.

>>What do other readers think ?

>  I think the next big thing will be alternative energy resources, like
> solar power and wind power, for two reasons.  When we finally run out
> of oil, everone's going to need it, and in the meantime, oil companies
> keep buying out companies that deal in alternative energy for
>  large sums, to eliminate the competition.

Well, there will always be a premium on liquid fuels because, as my
uncle said, "they can't fly a plane on anything else."

The *MEANS* to solar/wind power may be expensive, but as long as there
is wind or sun, they is power.

ARCO Solar used to be one of the largest solar companies in America,
with about half the market it its pocket. They sold it to a German
company.

>>Dunstan- "Sorry honey I can't water the garden, there's not enough water"

>G. Racz

Dave
t9aa@sdsumus.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU