HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ac999273@umbc.edu (ac999273)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,talk.religion.misc,soc.college,alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Shocked Beyond ALL BELIEF!!!!!
Date: 25 Jan 1993 22:19:08 -0500
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
NNTP-Posting-Host: umbc5.umbc.edu

In article <90641@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>In <1993Jan25.151635.659@st-andrews.ac.uk> ccjm@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin Charles James MacDonald) writes:
>
>|Would you be more shocked to learn that prostitution is legal here in stuffy 
>|old Britain? It's only *soliciting* that is illegal. What's the difference?
>|How should I know? Solicitors are prostitutes that get caught?
>

	Soliciting is asking someone to buy/sell a person.  Solicitation
in general is attempting to sell.  So the act of exchanging money for sex,
assuming what you say is true, is legal, yet the act of asking for that 
business deal is not.




Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: At least he is consistent...
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:29:12 GMT

In article <randall.728182486@seashore> randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea) writes:
}Also, let's wait for Clinton to be in office for a few more days
}before saying that he's retreating on all of his promises.

I don't recall anyone saying "all of his promises".  I do recall people specifying
which ones he has, giving the promise (quoted) and the specific of the break.

Let's keep in touch with reality, and leave the strawmen in the field.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik,snake)
Subject: Re: Why can't the liberals just admit that public education has failed? (Re: The New Education President)
Reply-To: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com
Organization: Research & Technology
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 18:17:15 GMT

In article 26427@m5.harvard.edu, borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden) writes:
>...
>Those who oppose school choice should ask themselves what their priorities really
>are, and what they should be.  Is the fundamental priority to save and improve
>the public schools?  Or is the priority to provide a quality education to all
>children, rich and poor?  I see nothing sacred about the public school system; if
>children can get a better education attending a reasonably priced private school,
>a private school whose cost per student is comparable to the public school
>system's cost per student, then we should send the children there and pay for it
>if necessary.

How many times does this have to be said?  Opposing vouchers does not mean that you
oppose choice.  Choice already exists.  The voucher scheme would simply give every-
one, including people who currently send their children to private schools, a chunk
of money to throw at the school of their choice.  A bidding war over educational
resources would ensue.  Who do you suppose would win that war?  A rich person with
a voucher or a poor person with a voucher?  The public school system would remain
in place as a warehouse of last resort for the losers in the bidding war.  And 
would the government then kick in money to reduce class sizes, raise salaries, and
improve physical conditions in the schools?  Don't bet on it.  After all, they
"solved" all our problems with the expensive voucher system.

-----
Disclaimer:  Opinions expressed above are not those of my employer.

    Rick Wojcik   (rwojcik@boeing.com)   Seattle, WA

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.president.clinton
From: robart@agora.rain.com (Joe Bob)
Subject: Re: Libertarians/programmers
Organization: a gora
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:49:37 GMT

In article <C1BoL2.83y@dscomsa.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
>
>Ah so the "Libertarian" cause is reduced to a squalid excuse for draft dodging?
>
>It is one thing to object to a war as immoral as Clinton did over Vietnam, quite
>another to justify draft dodging on mere self interest.


  Clinton's self-interest was quite clear - he wanted to maintain
his "political viability".

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Hillary in Charge of Task Force
Keywords: Health Care, Hillary Clinton
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:03:22 GMT

In article <C1IKK1.A1n@world.std.com> rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker) writes:
>I read in the newspaper the other day, that President Bill is putting his
>spouse in charge of a task force to come up with ideas for reforming
>health care and health insuranse in the U.S..  
>
>Question: Is Hillary qualified. Does anyone out there know if she has a
>clue to the issues of broad based health care and insurance. Is there
>anything in her past career that remotely qualifies her for the task. Or
>is this another symbolic gesture on the part of Fuhrer Willy to impress
>the politically correct folks and the radFems?
>
>If anyone has any ideas about this, please share them.
>

Well, look at it this way...if the Clinton's don't solve the health
care problem, people will know exactly who to blame...they have taken
responsibility for the problem, and will not be able to escape that
responsibility easily now.

Gerald
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70053 soc.motss:58633
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss
Subject: Re: Yuppie Vacation Bill (WAS Re: Family Leave Bill
Date: 26 Jan 93 17:08:58 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1k1ogvINNlai@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:


|In a previous article, bouche2@server.uwindsor.ca (BOUCHER DAVID) says:

|>>would allow a worker to take up to 12 weeks of
|>>UNpaid leave per year for the birth or adoption of a child... [or for
|> ^^^^^^
|>"illness" of a family member]
|>
|>And just who, do you suppose, can AFFORD to take 12 weeks of unpaid leave?
|>None of the "working families" I know of can afford a three-month unpaid
|>leave of absence.  They should call this bill the "Yuppie Vacation Bill".
|>
|>And the cost in lost productivity will naturally be borne by everyone.


|     Only those still working.  Come on, get with the ticket here.
|     
|     "We're in this together!".    

|     This is a perfect example of how out-to-lunch our government is
|      now.  For them, this is a benefit.

Actually it is probably just a case of the camel getting his nose in the
tent.

A couple of years from now, somebody will do a study that shows that only
rich people have been able to take advantage of this law.
Some sympathetic congress critter will then propose that anyone taking
maternity/paternity leave should be given some small fraction of their
income during the leave.

This will help, but not enough.  So somebody else will propose that the
percentage of income be increased, but only a small amount so that it won't
be a burden on businesses.

This cycle will keep up until the desired results have been acheived.
-- 
Mob rule isn't any prettier merely because the mob calls itself a government
It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
Wilson's theory of relativity: If you go back far enough, we're all related.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69972 alt.politics.clinton:21309
From: psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Reality is a b!tch
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:29:36 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1993Jan27.164612.25132@advtech.uswest.com> steven@advtech.uswest.com ( Steve Novak) writes:
>> = (Gary Blumenstein) writes:
>
>60% of draft age men did something to dodge the draft.  (This from a
>book by Margaret Tuchman.)  Clinton indeed knows who he is.  

True but only ONE of those asked if he could be President and the 
overwhelming majority of us, 57% , said NO!

>The
>American people voted Clinton into office knowing damn well his actions 
>concerning the draft.
>

And I'll remind you again and again and again, the American people DID NOT
vote Bill Clinton into office.  A record 100 million voter turned out
last year and most of said no to more taxes and more spending.

All the American people got short changed this year, all of us, no matter 
who won.

PSG.



-- 
Looking at the condition and politics of the public
school systems and Hollywood in the 90's, it seems in
retrospect that the only mistakes Joseph McCarthy made
were; not uncovering the right people and not finishing the job.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69184 alt.sex:42839 talk.religion.misc:27237
From: zed@cats.ucsc.edu (Francis Edward)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.sex,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Murder v. Sex
Date: 22 Jan 93 09:35:18 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


cavalama asks:

	Heres a hypothetical question for you.

	Who is the injured party in prostitution?

	Cavalama.

what makes you think there is an 'injured party' in
prostitution? ok maybe the john gets rolled then he
is the injured party but the crime isnt the paid sex
or maybe the john gets a little rambunctious and the
girl/boy gets damaged again it isnt the pros. that is
the crime here. look at nevada, they got legal houses
out in the desert there. i think maybe pros. is a crime
most places for one of a coupla reasons depending on
the location:
	1 the gov't aint gettin its cut. 
	  kinda makes ya wonder when dc has 
	  lottsa gov't and lottsa pros.
	2 it 'goes against the good book!'
	  well its my life and its gonna be
	  my afterlife so up yers preacher!
	  i got nothin against religion as
	  long as its not shoved down my craw
	  cause i fuck back and my dicks bigger-n-yers
	3 it offends somebody for non religous
	  reasons( they are out there)
	  well pretty much the same as above
we got lottsa laws making crimes out of things that
don't injure anyone. 
	speed limits - its not the goin that
		gets ya it the rapid uncontrolled
		deceleration that does it.
	gambling     - if you want to risk your
		money step right up folks.
	various sexual acts - we all know (or we should)
		about this.
	taking risks to self - thats right folks
		here in way out santa cruz its a
		$1000 fine to walk on cliff edges
		in some areas cuz they don't wanna
		pull yer body outta the surf.
i oughta find this book i read once called
'it's against the law' put out by readers digest i think
bout early seventies. thats got lottsa stuff in it
like in cleveland its illegal to give someone a glass
of water without a permit. heh. thats a local
ordinance thats been on the books for a long time
any way thats enough blabberin fer t'nite.
			see ya |} zed

_____________________________________________________________________________
|   |      \     ha! | "something witless this way cumz."                   |
| \ | /    / |\      |                                                      |
|---|---   \ |\ |\   |  [ insert favorite video clip here ]                 |
| / | \  the  \ | |  |                                                      |
|   |    man w/  \|  |                                                      |
|   |    no plan     |"1Adam 12 see the man at rear of AppSci. on the ledge"|
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
| This message is being brought to you by the makers of SLUDGE              |
|   The Breakfast food that makes you wish it was Lunchtime.                |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69728 alt.atheism:26996 talk.religion.misc:27538
From: bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Madeleine Murray O'Hare
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:41:58 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <CINDY.93Jan25204702@solan10.solan.unit.no> cindy@solan10.solan.unit.no (Cynthia Kandolf) writes:
>Question to the net at large:  Was there anyone else other than Mr.
>Kaldis who thought my post about "posting in everyone's native
>language" was intended SERIOUSLY?
>
  
  Probably not.  I wondered at the incredible amount of turmoil one
  person seemed to create.  Then I got to see a couple of his posts
  firsthand and some wonderful archived stuff, and realized that Ted
  is, in Romulan terms, a complete waste of skin.

  BTW, were you on sabbatical or something?  Haven't seen anything
  from you in months.  Waiting for the sun to reappear?

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ 

Bob Beauchaine bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM 

"Look, I tried the cat experiment.  On the third trial, the cat was
dead.  On each of the subsequent 413 trials, it remained dead.  Am I
doing something wrong?"
			James Nicoll

Q.  How many Heisenbergs does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A.  If you know the number, you don't know where the light bulb is!
From: schebel8133@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Question
Date: 23 Jan 93 16:13:05 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

Does anyone know (or wish of) a newsgroups that focuses on political philosophy
or, specifically, classical political philosophy?

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.pagan,talk.religion.misc,talk.abortion
From: joakimr@ifi.uio.no (Joakim Ruud)
Subject: Re: Freedom of Religion
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:10:47 GMT
Originator: joakimr@hymir.ifi.uio.no


In article <1993Jan27.151634.18443@ifi.uio.no>, joakimr@ifi.uio.no (Joakim Ruud) writes:
> 
> In article <2B65766E.14980@news.service.uci.edu>, cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
> > In article <adams.728062684@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
> > >mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
> > 
> > [deleted]
> > 
> > >Not so...Luther's priests were permitted to marry...and Lutheran's continue
> > >to do so today.  Luther himself married...
> > 
> > Gosh, I wonder who the lucky little woman was.
> > 
> > Blessings,
> > Janis
> > 
> > 
> Right. Especially since Luther wasn't really such a nice guy that people want
> to believe. For example, he was a dedicated anti-senite...
> 
> Jokke

I'm sorry... I mean *anti-semite*.....

Jokke
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Read my lips
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:25:48 GMT




		REMARKS BY GOVERNOR BILL CLINTON
		    WSB-TV Town Hall Meeting
		       Atlanta, GA
			 June 21, 1992


GOV. CLINTON, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO STAND HERE TODAY, AND PROMISE
THE MIDDLE CLASS THAT YOU WILL NOT RAISE TAXES IF YOU WERE
ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?

I will not raise taxes on the middle class, in fact, I have a
proposal to provide some modest relief.

..........................................................................

Wanna bet?



--
James W. Meritt:  m23364@mwunix.mitre.org - or - jmeritt@mitre.org
The opinions above are mine.  If anyone else wants to share them, fine.
They may say so if they wish. The facts "belong" to noone and simply are.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Libertarians
Date: 22 Jan 1993 13:35:28 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <ARCHER.843.727640423@utkvm1.utk.edu>  
ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
> In article <1993Jan19.170536.17243@Princeton.EDU>  
niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
> [snip]
> 
> >Well, lets see.  There was the plant in South? Carolina where all  
those
> >workers died in a fire because the owners locked the doors.  You  
know
> >why those people worked there, despite the reportedly *horrible*
> >conditions AND low pay?  Because it was the only job available.
> 
> No.  They did have two other choices:  start their own business, or  
leave 
> the area and look for work elsewhere.
> 

It's not that easy!!

Perhaps some of the folks who say things like this should switch
places with poor, uneducated folks who are stuck in low paying
blue collar jobs.  For the vast majority of these people, 
just getting up and moving is out of the question, as is
starting their own business.  Either proposition takes money
they don't have, and often takes education they don't have.
Furthermore, they have families that they can't simply uproot
and have them ride the rail with them.  Often their only
real alternative is to quit and go on welfare, which most
people really don't want to do.

It is relatively easy for folks in professional careers to change
jobs, and it is very, very easy for people in college to 
talk about how the world should run and what THEY would do
if they were in such a situation.  But this is simply not
the case for many of the working poor and the lower middle class,
who are struggling to stay alive.

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: blh@uiboise.idbsu.edu (Broward L. Horne)
Subject: Mike Kinsley, in the Crossfire!
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 17:09:51 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA11686; Tue, 26 Jan 93 18:21:03 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA11144; Tue, 26 Jan 93 18:20:52 -0800
X-Received: by uiboise.idbsu.edu
	(16.6/16.2) id AA02795; Tue, 26 Jan 93 17:09:51 -0700
X-To: talk.politics.misc.usenet
X-Cc: alt.politics.clinton.usenet
X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25]



	Okay, okay.

	You guys have GOT to start watching Kinsley.  He's turned into
	an absolute riot.  I'm SERIOUS.

	Gone are forceful, aggressive attacks!

	Hey, you gotta feel for the guy.  He's liable to lose his
	job now.  :)


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
From: radzy@sradzy.uucp (T.O. Radzykewycz)
Subject: Re: Freedom of Religion
Organization: The Radzykewycz Clan; Newark, CA
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 01:14:04 GMT

cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
> Speaking as one who has been baptized, had comunion, and been
> confirmed (gak), ....  The priest gives you the usual line about
> it being the actual body and blood of christ, and the little
> kids all say that it's not possible and HOW is it done, and why
> does God(tm) want us to eat somebody's skin and what does blood
> taste like ...

Hi Janis

If you had communion offered to you when you were young, then
you probably can't imagine the *horror* I felt when I was first
offered communion as an older teenager.  I was baptized, but the
church I went to didn't "celebrate" communion.  So when I visited
the church of a friend (not catholic, btw), I was totally
unprepared for it.

> Everyone considers it to be symbolic only; ask a catholic about
> it, and see if they don't get vague and just kind of say
> something like, "Well, it's got christ's spirit in it," or
> something.  They aren't being deliberately evasive, and many
> truly do think that the spirit of christ is in the cracker.
> They just don't take the transubstatiation terribly seriously.

So why is symbolic cannibalism any less serious a moral crime
than physical cannibalism?  I realize that legally it isn't the
same thing, but the legal system and people's moral systems
are usually not quite the same -- it's possible for people to
do legal things which are morally reprehensible, and I think
this is one of them.

Grrrrr.

			-- radzy

------------------------------------------------------------
	T. O. Radzykewycz		|  An it harm none,
	The Incredible Radical Cabbage	|  do as ye will.
					|
	radzy%sradzy@jack.sns.com       |
------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal Mother was old, and lay ill on a bed of moss and
fern.   Her hair was long and grey.   Her face was very
wrinkled.    Tamura'nun-pa thought:   How beautiful you
are, Mother, so old and wise.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Privatization
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 02:36:54 GMT

In article <1jnh0mINNls0@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>In a previous article, gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) says:
>
>>an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>>>
>>>         i)  Privitiztion is happening most everywhere but HERE
>>
>>That's because so much in America is already privatized, or never had
>>strategic state industries in those areas to begin with.  Also, the
>
>     Note that your posting doesn't refute what I've said.

Yes it does.

Britain is privatising its electric industry.  We can't -- it's already
private.

Phone system?  We're private, everyone else is government owned.

Health care?  We're private, everyone else is public.

Air travel?  We're private, almost everyone else is public.

What would you have us privatize that other countries are?  They're
just privatising stuff that's been private here all along.  How can
we implement the same privatization programs as them?  Unless we
nationalize everything and *then* privatize it, but I suspect you'd
be unhappy with that situation.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69886 alt.pagan:15881 talk.religion.misc:27618 talk.abortion:58039
From: era@csn.org (Ed Arnold)
Subject: REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE
Originator: era@teal.csn.org
Keywords: Extremists, Christian Right, Amendment 2
Reply-To: era@csn.org (Ed Arnold)
Organization: Citizens Project; Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:48:02 GMT

We of the Citizens Project (Colorado Springs, CO) are looking for people
who could assist us in re-distributing the Citizens Project Newsletter
to non-Internet computer services.  If you have an account on any such
services (CompuServe, FidoNet, Genie, Prodigy, America Online, and others)
and are willing to help us, please let us know via return email to
era@ncar.ucar.edu.

The Citizens Project is a Colorado Springs, CO - based group of volunteers
who seek to prevent extremists from eliminating our fundamental freedoms,
in the face of growing political and religious intolerance in Colorado.
--
Ed Arnold * Boulder, CO * 303-497-1253(voice,weekday) * 303-494-6949(voice)
internet: era@csn.org * compuserve: internet:era@csn.org * bitnet: era@ncario
-- 
Ed Arnold * Boulder, CO * 303-497-1253(voice,weekday) * 303-494-6949(voice)
internet: era@csn.org * compuserve: internet:era@csn.org * bitnet: era@ncario
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: goykhman@apollo.hp.com (Red Herring)
Subject: Re: Hillary in Charge of Task Force
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:21:30 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <C1IKK1.A1n@world.std.com> rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker) writes:
>I read in the newspaper the other day, that President Bill is putting his
>spouse in charge of a task force to come up with ideas for reforming
>health care and health insuranse in the U.S..  
>
>Question: Is Hillary qualified. Does anyone out there know if she has a
>clue to the issues of broad based health care and insurance. Is there
>anything in her past career that remotely qualifies her for the task. Or
>is this another symbolic gesture on the part of Fuhrer Willy to impress
>the politically correct folks and the radFems?
>
>If anyone has any ideas about this, please share them.

    Hillary should have gone through a Senate confirmation process.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Follow the money" Deep Throat
Disclaimer: Other opinions are mine only
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy