HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness)
Subject: Re: CLinton Re: Question about Clinton's "didn't inhale" remark
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin TX
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:56:29 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.224631.14115@tss.com> burke@tss.com (Jim Burke) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.134136.20160@cos.com>, bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
>|> >	The real reason for two-wage earner families
>|> >	is the huge TAX load that we all pay; is that
>|> >	exclusively the fault of George Bush, or does
>|> >	the Democratic-party controlled Congress have
>|> >	just a little bit to do with it?
>
>Again, I would add that Carter inherited a horrible inflationary
>spiral from the Ford/Nixon regime.

.... of 4%.

 Do you remember Ford's "Whip
>Inflation Now (WIN)" motto?  Ford was presiding over horrible
>inflation when Carter beat him.

Carter sure improved on inflation. Made it go right up into double
digits. :-(

BTW, anyone catch Carter's latest inanities criticizing
Bush's foreign policy with Al Gore ?

He says it would be a bad thing to have Baker leave the State Dept.
at this time.  I guess he forgets that his OWN Secty of State left
during his attempted reelection year.

>	Jim Burke	"Life is uncertain - eat dessert first!"

P.J.M.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp)
Subject: Re: Which of you is 'good enough' ?
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 02:18:34 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Jul22.184643.5887@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzabel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Zabel) writes:
>In article <lzfmyk.crisp@netcom.com> crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul22.004331.15705@news.Hawaii.Edu> johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.e
>du (John Flanagan) writes:
>>>P.S. -- This is why I'm voting for Clinton.  I consider George Bush's
>>>stance on gay rights, and human/civil rights generally, to be immoral.
>>
>>Others like me consider homosexuality to be immoral, illegal and
>>disgusting. I believe the majority of Americans agree with me.
>
>Not unless the majority of Americans are idiots.  First of all, it's
>clearly NOT illegal.  Secondly, you may be included in tomorrow's

Perhaps it is not illegal at the Federal level. However my 1982
Texas Penal Code (sorry, I don't have a newer one) has cited in
section 21.06 "a) A person commits an offense if he engages in
deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same
sex. b) an offense under this section is a class C misdemeanor"
I suspect a number of other states carry similar laws on the
books.

>despised group.  It will probably take the act of soldiers coming
>into your house, tearing it apart to search for illegal drugs without
>a warrant, beating you senseless, and leaving you to die before you
>realise that civil rights protect EVERY American, not just
>today's minorities.

The action you cite is clearly prohibited under the US constitution
amendment 4: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularily
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to
be seized."

Furthermore, the use of soldiers to provide police services is 
prohibited, although I cannot name the statute.

Finally homosexuality is a perversion, is immoral, is contrary to 
the teachings of the Bible and those that engage in such practices
typically are diseased both in the body and in mind. They carry 
numerous infectious diseases including AIDS and other veneral 
diseases, have higher rates of hepatitis etc, etc. These people
are mentally depraved and are in need of psychiatric help.

-- 
Richard Crisp         Cupertino, Ca.         crisp@netcom.com
(415) 903-3832 wk    "what, me worry?"    (408) 253 4541 fax

To say that Bill Clinton's alleged successes as Governor of Arkansas
qualify him to be President of the US is like saying the shoeshine
stand operator in the airport is qualified to be CEO of IBM.
From: "lois laulicht" <lois.laulicht@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: clinton & peace divid
Date: 23 Jul 92 01:06:22 EST
Reply-To: "lois laulicht" <lois.laulicht@channel1.com>
Distribution: talk
Organization: Channel 1 Communications


There has been much criticism of Perot for not specifying his position
on various issues.  Turn about is fair play!

Can anyone post the Clinton position on defense department cuts and
the peace dividend.

Looking forward with interest.

As an aside a thought for the day.
    Subject: A thought from the past for the Dems and the GOP

From:  TFTD-L  of Connecticut College...with Thanks

                    The idea that you can merchandise candidates for
                    high office like breakfast cereal is the ultimate
                    indignity to the democratic process.

                                             -Adlai Stevenson
---
  DeLuxe/386 1.25 #10184  Crime and Politics are the same thing. GODFATHER3
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:35469 alt.politics.elections:8965
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Perot sued!!
Date: 23 Jul 92 04:11:13 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Jul22.140933.5258@panix.com> eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler) writes:
>In <DOCONNOR.92Jul21154118@potato.sedona.intel.com>, doconnor@sedona.intel.com sez:
>>
>>You can't usually sue for specific performance of personal service contracts,
>>because that would be indentured servitude. You can only sue for damages.
>>Therefor, expect the suit against Perot ( which is asking for specific
>>performance as remedy, not damages ) to be tossed out.
>
>But you *can* obtain a negative injunction barring the offender from
>performing the services elsewhere.  All the court has to do is enjoin
>Perot from running for president of any other country.
>
>
>:).  Like, duh.

Wait.  Is *that* F.2d?
-- 
                      ....................................
                      ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
                      the university of chicago law school 
                      official member of the cultural elit
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:36707 alt.politics.clinton:1130 chi.general:725
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
Subject: Re: aids conference in cuba
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:32:38 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Jul27.210242.689@tss.com>, burke@tss.com (Jim Burke) writes:
> In article <11394@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# |# Have I been tested?  Only as a consequence of donating blood.  Of
# |# course, I do something terribly perverse: monogamy.  My wife shares
# |# in this perversion.  We have nothing to worry about, unless 
# |# some AIDS-tainted blood slips through the screening system, and we
# |# are suddenly in need of blood for an unplanned operation.  But
# |# then again, that's another argument for mandatory testing, isn't it?
# |# 
# |# The homosexual community brought AIDS on themselves, by their
# |# promiscuity and complete lack of concern about STDs.
# 
# Are you absolutely sure your wife is monogamous?  How do you know?  Think
# what you want, but you don't know absolutely positively for sure.  You
# can't.  Believe me when I tell you that there are men and women out there
# who absolutely believed they could trust their spouse to practice monogamy
# as they did, and they still got AIDS from them.  How many?  What percentage?

<1%, certainly, since very few people are getting AIDS heterosexually
in the U.S. except by contact with bisexuals and IV drug abusers.

# It doesn't matter.  The number of "innocent" (i.e. non-drug user, 
# non-promiscuous) people who have gotten AIDS is in the tens of thousands, and
# possibly hundreds of thousands world-wide.  Of the 2 million infected in the
# U.S., if 5% of them are these "innocents", that is 100,000 people who are
# going to die a slow agonizing death.  Even if you have no compassion for
# the people you seem to believe deserve to die, it is sad that you are so
# blinded by your disdain for them that you would show no compassion for
# people who have done none of the things you find so bad.  Let us just hope
# that your wife is indeed as faithful as you believe her to be, lest you 
# contract AIDS yourself.  If the unspeakable did happen, I hope you find
# more compassion from others than you had yourself.
# 
# 	Jim Burke	"Life is uncertain - eat dessert first!"

I'm always amazed at the straw men the AIDS compassion brigade
brings out.  I recognize that the homosexual community doesn't 
understand or believe in faithful monogamy (perhaps because that
community can't do it); but there's a lot of people out here who
manage it just fine.

-- 
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.
From: rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: I loved Bush ...
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:42:45 GMT
Reply-To: rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent)
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

In the referenced article, deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM writes:
>> This is not true. Both median and average incomes advanced significantly fr
>> to 1990, and, as has been posted by others, gains came to all income groups.
>According to the 1990 census, the number of jobs paying wages  at or below the
>poverty level went from 7 million in 1980, to 15 million in 1990.  So out of 
>the 20 million or so jobs created during the 1980's, 40% of them were low pay
>jobs.

Either that, or the poverty demarcation line went up as fast as the
defined "cost of living" increased, but existing low wages did not
rise as quickly...(the former is certainly true by definition, the
latter may or may not be...but I suspect it is, because the mimimum
wage didn't increase as much as COL).

Honestly, though, I don't know which really happened (of course, both
might have happened, or something else entirely might have happened).

However, if both the median and average income advanced significantly,
(i.e. faster than COL) I'd tend to suspect that the new jobs paid
higher than average wages...though of course there's no way to tell.
-- 
"When you're down, it's a long way up
 When you're up, it's a long way down
 It's all the same thing
 And it's no new tale to tell"                      ../ray\..
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,alt.discrimination
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 07:15:53 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.171315.5798@clipper.ingr.com> ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date) writes:
}OK, so it all comes down to an economic bloc of bigots who are willing
}to pay more for the opportunity to shop in all-white stores, vs.
}an economic bloc of people who are tolerant / discriminated against.
}
}The anti-slavery movement began quite early in this country, at least 1750 and 
}probably before.  There have always been people here who were motivated
}by conscience and fair-mindedness.  As long as there are ANY of
}these people around, the economic effects of racism are mitigated.

Quite a bit before.  Jefferson introduced anti-slavery legislation in the
legislature of the Virginia colony, as did Madison, as I recall.  They both
worked to end slavery by 1808, and it was only when that failed that the
Garrisonian anti-political abolitionists rose.

}If the number of tolerant people plus the number of people discriminated
}against exceeds the number of dedicated bigots, then the bigots
}will be at an economic disadvantage, and will have to pay more and more,
}relatively speaking, for their privileges.  But, on the other hand,
}if someone wants to belong to an Asian club, or a black club, or an
}American Indian club, why is this a threat to society at large?
}
}Those of us who favor limited govt are wary of granting powers to the
}govt which are best left to the people, and so we tend to resist
}anti-discrimination laws as a substitution of one evil for another.
}
}
}--Al Date

Well said.  Nice to see you again, Al.

	
Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: TSONGAS: Convention speech text
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 20 Jul 92 23:24:55 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.
Summary: Neither the Bush reelection campaign nor the RP used any names

In article <1992Jul20.125436.26302@hemlock.cray.com>, rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>> ...
>> >  There are no Willie Horton ads in our souls.
>> 
>> 	I wonder where Al Gore was when this was spoken?
> 
> Gore brought up the furlough issue but he never used (or knew) the name(s)
> of these furloughed.
> 
> Bush and the Republicans used Horton's name.
> 
	That's a lie.  If you have proof, earn $50 by sending me a video of the
commercial.

	Otherwise you might want to put *your* money where you mouth is :).


Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: matt@physics2.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: SuperCollider "For" or "Against"
Date: 25 Jul 92 19:32:18 GMT
Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics2.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU's message of 25 Jul 92 02:05:00 GMT

In article <01GMRRB8AWJK001E2U@utarlg.uta.edu> B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (Stephen Tice) writes:

> Quite a formidable data handling problem arises as well, I think
> the figure being bandied around is that the SSC will generate data
> at the rate of a Terabyte per nanosecond. 

I'm afraid that this number is also false.  The Solenoidal Detector
Collaboration (SDC) estimates that there will be about 10,000 events
per second passing its Level 1 trigger.  The Level 2 and Level 3
triggers will reduce this further, probably to fewer than 100 per
second.  (See "Letter of Intent by the Solenoidal Detector
Collaboration," SDC-90-00151, 1990.)

The number of bytes per event is not yet known, but based on
experience at the Tevatron, it is likely to be much less than 10
megabytes.  So we're talking about a maximum of 1 gigabyte per second,
and it is my belief that even this figure is ridiculously high.

So even making very generous assumptions, the rate is twelve orders of
magnitude less than the one given above.  Numbers like "one terabyte
per nanosecond" just have no basis in reality.
--
Matthew Austern              I dreamt I was being followed by a roving band of
(510) 644-2618               of young Republicans, all wearing the same suit,
matt@physics.berkeley.edu    taunting me and shouting, "Politically correct
austern@theorm.lbl.gov       multiculturist scum!"... They were going to make
austern@lbl.bitnet	     me kiss Jesse Helms's picture when I woke up.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:35114 talk.religion.misc:12458
From: tom@portland.mdc.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton uses Biblical Phraseology
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:35:41 GMT
Organization: Unisys - Applied Technology

In article <l6ee53INNr69@spim.mips.com> mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>
>"New Covenant" is Christian terminology?  NOT.  It isn't even religious
>terminology.  Just because a word is used in the bible (or a translation
>of it) doesn't make it a religious term.  ...

It's hard to believe that an acknowledged Southern Baptist like Mr.
Clinton, a member of the choir in his home church, no less, would not
recall the words, "I will make a new covenant with the house of Judah and
with the house of Israel."  Unless he's been sleeping through the sermons ...

-- 
Tom Albrecht
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rab@well.sf.ca.us (Bob Bickford)
Subject: Re: Libertarian Platform
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 00:39:26 GMT

In article <visser.711507729@convex.convex.com>,
   visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) writes:
>
>I want to see a LP platform that goes after corporate privelage 
>in the same way it goes after a reduced government.  Most of the LP 
>have never seemed interested in doing that.

BTW, that's "privilege".

Could you please provide five or ten examples of abuses of corporate
privilege which did not require the collusion of agents of the
government?  Obviously, any company which was a gov't-protected
monopoly won't qualify here.  Similarly, any company whose alleged
abuses were related to special subsidies enacted by the government.
And so on.

You see, our critics are quick to make this accusation, but have
never been able to back it up with substantiated information.  Every
time one has offered an alleged example of corporate abuse, it's been
trivially easy for a libertarian to do a little research and find out,
for example, that the company in question had special privileges from
the state legislature directly related to the alleged abuse.

BTW, I am one Libertarian who is opposed to large concentrations of
power no matter what they're called.  The difference is that in a free
market this problem is pretty much self-regulating; with a government
you have to get out the weed-whacker every once in awhile.......

--
        Robert Bickford                       rab@well.sf.ca.us
 Vice-Chair, Libertarian Party    /-------------------------------------\
      of Marin County (CA)        | Don't Blame Me: I Voted Libertarian |
                                  \-------------------------------------/
From: dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Date: 22 Jul 92 05:01:47 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Jul21.180409.12174@watson.ibm.com>, strom@watson.ibm.com (Rob Strom) writes:
} In article <1992Jul20.235533.248@morrow.stanford.edu>, GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
} [what's the difference (in terms of government interest) between sex and business]
} |> 
} |> And where in this little essay have you answered my question?  If
} |> the difference is so obvious why can't you explain it to me in nice
} |> simple language that even a dumb Liberian can understand because I
} |> *don't* see any fundamental difference.
} |> 
} Sex isn't a commodity which is in limited supply.

It can be.  If you are the only one on a desert island, your chances of
having sex with anyone else is nil.

If everyone in the world denied you sex with them, your chances of having
sex with any of them is also nil.

} Usually I'm willing to have sex with a very narrow
} class of people (currently one).  The economy
} does not critically depend upon there being a sex
} industry and a means of distribution to the masses.

Maybe not a sex *industry*, but the economy does depend very heavily on
people having sex.  For without sex, eventually there will be no people,
and thus no economy at all.

} When I have sex, I haven't reduced the world supply of sex.

True.

} Housing is different.  It's in limited supply, and
} there are adverse social consequences to consistently
} denying adequate housing to certain classes of people.
} Therefore society can regulate the housing business.

Nonsense.  My having housing here in Colorado does not prevent someone else
from having housing in Colorado, or New York, or Bangledesh, or ...

} |> In both cases ou have people willing to trade something of value to
} |> them for something that is of greater value to them.  
} You're using a different meaning of "trade".  If I trade
} you my Rickey Henderson rookie card for a Yogi Berra,
} I've given up my card.

But you also gained a card -- Yogi Berra.  So, over all, you give up
nothing.

} If I have sex with you, I've given
} up nothing.

True.

} |> Obviously
} |> food, sex and money are different values but they are all values and
} |> libertarians believe that all values should be exchanged only by
} |> mutual agreement.  Do you disagree with this?
} Yes.  If you stretch the meaning of "value" so that sex
} is a value, why can't I stretch the meaning of "value"
} so that my cost of living is a value?

If I call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?  Five?  No,
four.  Just because I may call a tail a leg does not make it so.

Your calling your cost of living a "value" does not make it so either.
Why?  Because people are attracted to more value (like food, sex & money)
-- they are not attracted to more cost of living.
--
David Olson            dlo@drutx.att.com
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they
can bribe the people with their own money."  Alexis de Tocqueville
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Marrou for president
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 02:27:09 GMT

pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.001219.14032@mtu.edu> cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter) writes:
>>Why should we vote for the "lesser of 2 evils"?

>Because I don't want Clinton appointing people to the Supreme Court.
>Sorry libertarians...

Hey, as long as _you_ don't feel your vote is wasted, it isn't wasted.
-- 
Help stamp out repetition in our time!
Help stamp out repetition in our time!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:34957 alt.politics.elections:8713 alt.politics.perot:975
From: baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: PEROT HAS NOT WITHDRAWN !
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:43:01 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.

In article <1992Jul20.212902.21689@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:
>To Perot's credit, the plan does not
>increase the marginal income tax rates for either individuals or corporations,
>at least as far as I can tell.

Apparently, the plan did involve a Clintonesque tax hike for the rich; Perot
just hadn't decided on its magnitude by the time he bailed out.  Oh
well.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Perot on the issues: week of 7/13/92
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:29:33 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

>Actually, one of the best ideas I've heard goes like this.
>You can drop out of school any time you want, BUT if you don't have
>a job withing 6 months, you are put in the army.

  This is unspeakably idiotic (he spake).    If you care about
  the defense of your country why would you want the Army to get
  stuck with a bunch of uneducated losers?   One of the big
  "benefits" of the recession and the volunteer army is that
  the general quality of enlisted men in the US Army is at an
  all-time high because they can be choosy.

  The military is not some kind of social welfare program.


---peter

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.folklore.urban