HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hillyard@msc.cornell.edu
Subject: One-Third can't spell potato
Originator: hillyard@tiger.msc.cornell.edu
Reply-To: hillyard@msc.cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 01:59:55 GMT

From today's NY Times.

Nearly a third of voters cannot spell "potato", according to an ABC 
News-Washington Post poll.  Four percent said they did not know or 
had no opinion, while the rest were able to spell the word properly.
The question was added to the poll after Vice President Dan Quayle
encouraged a 12-year old Trenton boy to put an "e" on the end of the
word last month.  Mr. Quayle said a flash card he was holding spelled
the word incorrectly.
_________


What a masterful move by Quayle, courting the third of the electorate
that can't spell worth beanes. :)

SEH
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Full text of bills
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 22:32:25 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.221828.14842@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bu525@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul Schmidt) writes:
>
>Does anyone know of an FTP site containing the full text of
>bills currently before Congress?
>
>Thanx in advance

Please post.  This would be interesting info to have.



Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Libertarian Platform
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:52:35 GMT

In article <l6ubb8INN3p9@spim.mips.com> mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:

>In article <archer.160@utkux1.utk.edu>, archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
>|> In article <l6trcbINNqgp@spim.mips.com> mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>|> 
>|> >T. Archer writes:
>|> >|> Michael Polen writes:
>|> >|> 
>|> >|> 
>|> >|> >|> I wouldn't have any problem with that, other than that if she abused
>|> >|> >|> it then my introducing her to responsible drinking had failed, and
>|> >|> >|> that she was disobeying me.  That's our problem, not his.  In either
>|> >|> >|> case, legislation isn't going to stop it.
>|> >|> >|> 
>|> >|> >So you can't concieve of a case where you would rather not have someone
>|> >|> >pressing alcohol or drugs on your children before you have developed them
>|> >|> >to the point where the can be responsible.
>|> >|> 
>|> >|> Sure.  But if my children are in a situation where they are getting access 
>|> >|> to alcohol or drugs before they are able to be responsable, then I am not 
>|> >|> supervising them closely enough, and it is MY fault.  I maintain that it is 
>|> >|> a parent's responsability to raise children, not the state's.
>|> >|> 
>|> >Have you raised children to the age of responsibility?  The only way to
>|> >"supervise them closely enough" is to be a jailor, not a parent.  Not
>|> >on my watch.
>|> 
>|> Whether or not I have raised children is irrelivant to the issue of where 
>|> the responsaiblity for it lies.  By being unwilling to supervise ones 
>|> children closely enought to prevent them from being abused abrogates ones 
>|> responsibility to the state, where it does not belong.

>A tremendous leap of logic.  I have no intension of asking the state
>to supervise my children.  I expect the state to help me protect them
>from murderers.  In the case of drugs and alcohol, I consider anyone 
>who would hook young children on drugs or alcohol to be a murderer.
>I consider anyone who liquors up a 16-year old and puts them into a
>car a murderer if the 16-year old kills someone.

This in itself is a tremendous leap of logic.  Someone who vends alcohol is 
not trying to murder anyone.

Nor can you "liquor up" a 16 year old.  THEY make the choice to drink.  If 
they are not mature enough to be unsupervised.  This is bad parenting.

-=-=-
T. Archer  PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu
University of Tennessee
"Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking." -- Unknown
-=-=-
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:35448 alt.politics.clinton:377
From: heath@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Which of you is 'good enough' ?
Date: 23 Jul 92 02:59:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Jul22.214926.29893@centerline.com> thomaso@centerline.com (Thomas Andrews) writes:
>
>Oh, but George Bush wouldn't count some Americans as Americans.  Read
>his off-the-cuff comments about atheists...

True. This is what bothers me about Bush and the Republicans. It is
nearly impossible for them to come up with a vision of America that is
inclusive of all Americans. They can only feel good as long as they've
got someone to bash, someone to leave out.

Sooner or later we must wake up and realize that if America only works
for some of us, then it isn't working at all.

I know what Bush's vision of America is, and there is no place for me
it in. There shouldn't be an American for whom there isn't a place in
this country.



-- 
"Black men loving black men is THE revolutionary act!"
			-Joseph Beam_
Terrance Heath 
heath@athena.cs.uga.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:36783 alt.politics.elections:9412
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Republican Dream tickets (was Re: California Fields Poll)
Date: 31 Jul 92 17:58:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: SPSS Inc.

pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) writes:

>Imagine the energizing effect of a Jack Kemp/Vin Weber ticket...

Nah, I think Jack Kemp/Tommy Thompson would be better...Ol' Tommy's the
welfare reformer Guv'nor of Wiscosin...that ticket would play well, I
think.

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558
From: esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism,alt.activism
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Date: 27 Jul 92 16:20:22 GMT

In <1992Jul24.000019.29847@NOC.Vitalink.COM> Rick Buchanan wrote:
> In article <nlkrssk@fido.asd.sgi.com>, dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
> 
> > I don't think that white heterosexual males are inherently bad people.  I
> > just think that they have much less understanding of discrimination than
> > any other group.
> 
> I'm sure most white heterosexual males _with disabilities_ would disagree.

Quite.

I'm a heterosexual white male.  I grew up with cerebral palsy.  You'd better
believe that *I* understand discrimination --- I have too many memories of
being beat up, intimidated and ostracized because I was "different".

My experience of attempting to cope with this taught me everything I needed
to know about the limits of politics.  `Affirmative action' for me would
only have made the problem worse.  Punishment didn't change the behavior
of the bullies; they just took it out on me next chance they got.

Only two things ever worked to lessen my burden.  One was a convincing
use of counter-force against an individual bully, so some of them got
scared to hassle me for a while.  The other was individual bullies
growing up enough to develop some ethical sensitivity.

Me, I learned my libertarianism in the schoolyard.
-- 
					Eric S. Raymond <esr@snark.thyrsus.com>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pssres12@ucs.usl.edu (Vignes Gerard M)
Subject: A Hollow Shell
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 14:45:25 GMT

	The Democratic Party is like a hollow shell,
	the Old Confederacy awaiting Sherman and his March to the Sea.

							Gerard Vignes


-- 

                Mai, y'all hab'en lisd'nen ta d'voice ah

                         RADIO FREE LAFAYETTE
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: veal@utkvm1.utk.edu (David L. Veal)
Subject: Re: Which of you is 'good enough' ?
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 21:33:38 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.022427.1893@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:

>Not only that, the republicans are responsible for the floods caused
>by El Nino, the explosion of Mt. Pinatubo, and the California
>Earthquakes. Hey - let's face it - everything is the fault of
>Ronald Reagan and George Bush!

     You're forgetting the meteor strike that killed off the dinosaurs
and the fall of the Roman Empire.
 
     I mean, really, let's get all their crimes out in the open...


===========================================================================
|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
| Statistics are any data which can be twisted to support your posititon  | 
===========================================================================

QUIT
=====================
From: mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: What is Bush's veto record?
Date: 22 Jul 1992 16:49:42 GMT
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: gelato.mips.com

In article <veal.107@utkvm1.utk.edu>, veal@utkvm1.utk.edu (David L. Veal) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul20.215036.5932@sequent.com> bills@sequent.com (Bill Sears) writes:
|> 
|> >I have heard that Bush has vetoed more bills than any other president in
|> >U.S. history.  
|> 
|>      Not even close.  I don't think Bush has even gotten into double digits 
|> on his vetos.  FDR had *hundreds* of vetos.
|> 
|> >In addition none of these vetoes have ever been overridden.
|> 
|>      That's because he's very careful not to veto anything he thinks the 
|> Congress can override.  That way his veto looks more powerful than it 
|> actually is.
|> 
Which is why he signed the Clean Air Act, and then had the gaul to claim credit
for it.  He doesn't give us enough credit for brains.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: blais@milo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Kristin Blais)
Subject: Re: Perot's October Surprise
Organization: Institute for Astronomy, Hawaii
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 07:39:08 GMT

In article <3967@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
{speculation about Perot running deleted}

In many states (Hawaii is an example) the candidate needs to sign a 
statement of intent to run to stay on the ballot.
I would think that publically stating you are not running 
legally nullifies that statement of intent. Any lawyers 
out there who know for sure???
:-)
Kristin


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Stop the Hypocrisy of the One
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 04:14:01 GMT

Well, while we're all arguing Clinton and Bush, we can always take
time to laugh at Brown and his latest quote:

  "Stop the power of the few."

Oh yes, this was while he was being honored at a champaigne breakfast.
Paid for by Arco and SoCal Edison.   He was railing against special
interest groups.

-- 
The more things change, the more they stay insane.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Subject: Re: Fear or loathing?  So what?
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
In-reply-to: dauber@sgi.com's message of Thu, 30 Jul 1992 15:52:19 GMT
Organization: You wouldn't ask this if you'd seen my desk.
	<nuqqpg8@fido.asd.sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 20:33:45 GMT

In article <nuqqpg8@fido.asd.sgi.com>, dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:

> In article <11468@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>>But you are the ones denying our right to choose who to associate with.
>>I'm prepared to live and let live.  You aren't, you want the government
>>brought in to tell me who to rent to, who to hire.

> Live and let live as long as you keep away from me, my family, my schools
> my churches, my organizations, my government, my pets, my business and my
> home is not "live and let live"... It is "keep away from me".

As long as he doesn't use the government to enforce his
wishes, you have no legitimate cause of action.  He is
allowed to do any number of silly things and hold any
number of unreasonable attitudes.  You don't have to like
it, but you have no right to force your likes and dislikes
on him by force of government.
--
----
Mark E. Slagle                                 PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com                       Sunnyvale, CA   94088
408-756-0895                                   USA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Clinton Says Bush Has Failed to Take Responsibility on Economy
Organization: Echo Beach
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:29:22 GMT


Press release from Clinton/Gore Campaign
 
 Clinton Says Bush Has Failed to Take Responsibility on Economy 
 To: National Desk, Political Writer 
 
   NEW ORLEANS, La., July 29 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Gov. Bill Clinton 
went to the Louisiana Superdome -- the site of George Bush's 1988 no 
new taxes pledge -- and blasted George Bush for "failing to accept 
the responsibility of the presidency." 
   "On the day when consumer confidence plunged to an all-time low -- 
and at a time when homebuying is going down and unemployment is going 
up -- Mr. Bush sent his leading economic adviser to Capitol Hill," 
Clinton said.  And Richard Darman denied that the president bears any 
responsibility for the "sluggish, stagnant economy." 
   "Mr. Darman pointed the finger of blame everywhere but at the Oval 
Office," Clinton said.  He blamed the nation's lenders for the credit 
crunch, the Federal Reserve for the slow growth of the money supply, 
Saddam Hussein for invading Kuwait and Congress for failing to enact 
Bush's economic program, "a limited version of trickle down economics 
cooked up for election after three years of neglect." 
   "Four years ago, the president not only promised 15 million new 
jobs, no new taxes, and a kinder, gentler nation.  He promised to 
take responsibility," Clinton said. 
   Clinton said that Bush was still "in the grip of a failed idea" 
that the only way to make the economy grow is to cut taxes on the 
wealthiest one percent, raise taxes on middle class families, let the 
deficit explode, and reduce our investment in the future. 
   "Let's face it: When Mr. Bush stood in this stadium four years 
ago, he didn't mean: 'Read my lips -- no new taxes.  What he meant 
was 'No new taxes for the rich.' 
   "We're tired of excuses and blame.  Let's move to responsibility," 
Clinton said. "If George Bush won't use the power of the presidency 
to help people, I will.  George Bush doesn't know how to get the 
economy moving again but I do: put our people first, invest in the 
American people, their jobs, education, health care." 
 -30- 

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: thomaso@centerline.com (Thomas Andrews)
Subject: Re: Which of you is 'good enough' ?
Organization: CenterLine Software, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 21:49:26 GMT

In article <adams.711838030@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore) writes:
>
>>In article <lzfmyk.crisp@netcom.com>, crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
>>> Others like me consider homosexuality to be immoral, illegal and 
>>> disgusting. I believe the majority of Americans agree with me.
>
>>As usual, you believe incorrectly.  A CNN poll several months
>>ago found that 60% of the Americans polled believed that
>>sexual orientation should not be the basis for discrimination.
>
>Polls are notoriously inaccurate...look at what's going on in specific
>jurisdictions...Oregon, Colorado.
>
> -Steve
>--

This is just plain stupid.

Polls are inaccurate, but they are better than saying: "Look, over there.
In these places, gays are disliked."  Sure, you might be able to convince
me that people in No-Blow, Oregon, believe gays should be discriminated
against.  So what?  I can point you to any of a number of communities
where the majority would decide that gays shouldn't be discriminated
against.

Oh, but George Bush wouldn't count some Americans as Americans.  Read
his off-the-cuff comments about atheists...
--
Thomas Andrews
CenterLine Software
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:34881 alt.politics.clinton:106
From: thompson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Heidi Thompson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Question about Clinton's "didn't inhale" remark
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:04:25 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Jul20.141309.7567@ms.uky.edu> fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis) write
s:
>>
>>It came from a single columnist in the daily newspaper
>
>Arkansas netters: what's the journalist's name?

His name is John Robert Starr and is well known in Little Rock as a small-minded curmudgeon, in the worst sense. Little Rock, until a few months ago was one of those cities fortunate to have two newspapers. One, the _Gazette_ was well known as a thoughtful, moderate voice in Arkansas politics.  The other, the _Democrat_, (Starr's paper) was a bastion of yellow journalism.  The two had a newspaper war, and guess who ended up winning?  Starr now is one of the major editorial voices in Arkansas.  The good new


s is that many of the people who failed to give the Gazette the financial support it needed are now full of remorse at what the Democrat has become, and the best journalists from the Gazette are forming a new paper that promises to be better than the original.

- - Heidi Thompson
Displaced Arkansan
 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:35924 ca.politics:6009
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Why the Schools are Broke
Date: 24 Jul 92 23:25:13 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <rdippold.711945649@cancun>, rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
> Why the Schools are Broke
> Lance T. Izumi in National Review West
> 
> Keep in mind a fundamental point:  In California, only a relatively
> small portion of the $16 billion that state government spends on
> public schools actually gets to the classroom.  For instance, in
> 1990-91, of the nearly eighty specialied, "categorical" programs (to
> which state education dollars go for narrowly defined purposes such as
> computer training), only ten were designated as "classroom
> educational" programs, and those ten received less than 10 per cent of
> all the spending on categoricals.  A telling comparison: in 1990-91,
> the state spent more for desegregation efforts ($517 million) then on
> all ten classroom-instructional categoricals combined ($509 million).

Let me give you an example close to home.  My wife has been involved
in tutoring a 6th grader in reading.  When my wife started working
with this kid, words more complicated than "the" or "that" were
usually beyond his abilities.  He was in a special education class
(those with mental retardation, learning disabilities, and physical
handicaps).  My wife was unable to figure out why.  With a few
weeks of work, this 6th grader was reading at about 2nd or 3rd grade 
level.  He was pretty smart, learned quickly, and seemed very
interested in improving his skills.  What does he do in that
special education class?  Mostly, they sit around and play.  My
wife made several attempts to get hold of the teacher, and find out
WHY so little effort had been made with this kid -- and the teacher
was unreachable. The kid's parents are blue collar, not stupid,
but not smart, VERY intimidated by teachers (exalted creatures
that they are), and reluctant to actively pursue the cause of their
son being pushed off into a backwater.

My wife talked to a friend who teaches for one of the local school
districts.  So what was this teacher's reaction?  That special
education classes get higher funding levels than mainstream kids.
Why get them functional?  That lowers funding, and reduces demand
for "special education" teachers, who have a specialty.

I don't mean to imply that special education is a bad idea.  The
problem in this case seems to be a particular teacher, and perhaps
the school district administration not being particularly interested
in mainstreaming kids that ARE educable.  But let's not kid ourselves
that the public schools are above looking out for their interests,
not the kids -- even when the result is take a potentially normal
kid, and destroy his self-esteem, and insure his illiteracy.

Just say "No," to the public school disaster.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"Well, maybe the Holocaust was right *for that culture*." -- a moral relativist
with whom I work.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Let's Blame Reagan (was Let's Not Blame Bush For the Mess)
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:00:37 CDT


In article <1992Jul20.232821.2998@desire.wright.edu>, demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
> In article <1992Jul20.130314.26990@hemlock.cray.com>, rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
> > In article <1992Jul16.162758.2909@desire.wright.edu>, demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
> >> In article <NEERI.92Jul16132355@iis.ethz.ch>, neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher) writes:
> >> ...
> >> >>True conservatives would not "let" the government go into debt out of spite,
> >> >>they would cut spending.  Explain why most, if not all, expenditures presented
> >> >>to Congress usually come back to the President several factors higher in cost.
> >> > 
> >> > Can you provide some examples for this ?
> >> > 
> >> 	1990: The scene, House Appropriations Committee.  At the request of
> >> the navy all appropriations for F-14D "Super Tomcats" have been removed by the
> >> White House in their version of the budget.  A powerful Dem member, from the
> >> district where the factory happens to be, gets his friends to reinstate money 
> >> for 14 planes.
> >> 
> >> 	The navy doesn't want them.
> >> 
> >> 	But Congress insists otherwise.
> > 
> > Tell the rest of the story.  Congress instead cut B-2 and "Star Wars" spending
> > to get total DoD spending to the level Bush proposed.
> 
> 	What they should have done is cut F-14, B-2, Seawolf, Star Wars, SS,
> Welfare, ...

Maybe so, but your alleged example of congress spending more than the president
wanted is refuted.

> > Congress recently passed FY1993 DoD spening at slightly less than Bush proposed.
> > 
> > Your point that Congress protect current production (assembly line jobs) over
> > future generation projects (R&D) is generally true.
> 
> 	But since those jobs have incredibly high overhead, we'd be better off
> paying their salaries and killing the programs.

The issue is whether Congress passed spending "several factors higher" than
what the president proposed.  There may be examples, but DoD is not
one of them.

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc