HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Recall Gov. Pete Wilson
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:05:38 GMT
            <SLAGLE.92Aug13005815@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com>
            <1992Aug18.171522.3923@island.COM>
            <1992Aug19.164937.5185@pacdata.uucp>
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Distribution: ca
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <1992Aug19.164937.5185@pacdata.uucp>
 by jimh@pacdata.uucp (Jim Harkins):

: In article <1992Aug18.171522.3923@island.COM> guido@island.COM (Guido Marx) 
:    writes:
:> 1)  Any fiscal year in which a budget is not in place by
:> the Constitutionally mandated July 1, the Legislature
:> and the Governor will LOSE 2% of their yearly salary
:> for each day that passes without a budget.  
:
: Problem is, after 50 days they lose all incentive to ever have a budget.
: Lets make them pay $500/day for every day after 50 that there isn't a 
: budget. And this comes out of their personal cash stash, not campaign 
: contributions.

I don't think this is enforceable.

Anyhow, all this talk of financially penalizing a legislator for not
making a budget is all well and good, but I don't think it'll work.

: 3)  A special prison be built and all legisislators and the guv be placed
: in it when there isn't a budget on time.

: 4)  If a budget is not in place by July 1 then no member of the
: Legislature, nor the governer, shall be eligible for re-election.
: Period.  They've already proven they're incompetant to do the job
: they were elected for, bar them from office for life.

Hmmmmm ... a tad extreme, I think.  The reason I think so, is that there
is more than one member involved.  I can well imagine there being ONE
solidary fellow who votes YES on every budget offered to-date, who's
being penalized for his fellow idiots.

How's this sound ... instead of financial penalties, how about effective
vote penalization?  Ie, something like every day late costs so many
votes.  Supposing after 50 days, that's 50k votes.  If they win 110k
votes in the next election, only 60k actually counts.

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
Unquestionably, there is progress.  The average American now pays out
twice as much in taxes as he formerly got in wages.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Prop. 13 and California's fiscal crisis
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 22:55:37 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: ca
  <1992Aug11.183221.11283@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>

If you want to talk about people not paying their fair share of taxes,
consider David Bailey!  He is posting from a NASA site, so I am assuming
that he works for the government.

If he were working for a private firm, he could probably earn more money,
and would thus pay more income tax.  By making less money than he could,
he is cheating the rest of us!  The only fair thing to do would be to
tax him on what he *could* earn if he went for the highest paying job
available to people of his skill level.

That may sound silly, but that's how property taxes worked before
Proposition 13.  Does anyone really think that is a fair way to
determine taxes?

--Tim Smith
Xref: sparky ca.politics:6693 soc.motss:34918 ba.politics:4435
Newsgroups: ca.politics,soc.motss,ba.politics
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Guy at Sun who got fired for nasty postings
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:37:42 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Aug10.225036.15252@ntmtv> jazanopa@ntmtv.UUCP (Patricia Jazanoski) writes:
>In article <1992Aug10.181653.3089@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>>Unless you can come up with some kind of reasonably clear rules that can 
>>be applied impartially so that we limit all kinds of political discourse
>>equally 
>>**I think you have to either accept it all or eliminate it all.***

>I disagree with your "all or nothing" argument.  No set of rules will cover 
>all circumstances, so there will always be a level "subjectivism" involved.
>You've got to draw the line somewhere, and this is where Sun has decided 
>to draw the line.

>If I owed a company, I think it would be reasonable to limit the way 
>they use resources for non-company activities, particularly when the 
>company name gets attached to it, or when it harms other employees.

So articles in support of gay rights or the KKK or against Serbia or
the US would be grounds for dismissal depending on your personal
prejudices?

Please expand on this.

Personally, I think that Oracle's rules are actually pretty cool.  No
rules whatsoever, and an automatic disclaimer.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: wayne@ultra.com (Wayne Hathaway)
Subject: Re: Prop. 13 and California's fiscal crisis
Reply-To: wayne@ultra.com (Wayne Hathaway)
Organization: Ultra Network Technologies
Distribution: ca
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 20:39:39 GMT

Not hardly on the subject of Prop 13, but I just can't let the
following go by without comment:

 > You should be more concerned about the group 65 and up with average
 > incomes of $67k and up who are collecting Social Security out of
 > YOUR POCKET.

Let's say that you go down to your friendly neighborhood bank and open
a savings account, and then you dutifully make regular deposits into
it for something like 40 years.  But then when go in to withdraw all
your hard-earned savings, the bank manager says "I'm sorry, but you
have entirely too much income for us to give you this money.  Instead,
we're going to give it away to people who've never saved a penny."

I don't know about you, but I've been paying *INTO* Social Security
for better than 30 years, and I will be very much pissed if somebody
says I can't have my money back just because I might be lucky enough
to still have some other income at 65!

    Wayne Hathaway               domain: wayne@Ultra.COM
    Ultra Network Technologies     uucp: ...!ames!ultra!wayne
    101 Daggett Drive             phone: 408-922-0100 x132
    San Jose, CA 95134              FAX: 408-433-9287
From: steiny@steiny.com (Don Steiny)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Prop. 13 and California's fiscal crisis
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:58:44 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Don Steiny Software, Santa Cruz CA

asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:

>But, as I said, the legislature got creative.  Prop 13 forbids creating
>specific taxes for specific purposes without a 2/3 popular vote.  So, 
>they came up with "bond issues."  Bonds need only the simple majority 
>(50.1%) to pass.  We won't have to pay for today's pork until tomorrow, 
>or next tuesday, wonderful.  How are we going to pay for it tomorrow,
>without increasing taxes?

	Inititives are responsible for many bonds issues.   Special interest
groups of all sorts write inititives.    

-don
-- 
Don Steiny
Don Steiny Software
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
(408) 425-0382
From: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: media
Date: 18 Aug 92 23:01:22 GMT
Reply-To: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Distribution: usa
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab

In article <1992Aug18.204412.19912@jack.sns.com>, jsb@jack.sns.com (Jim Best) writes:
|>  If you believe that there is a maker, a maker that made your car, and yet
|>  you think you can do anything with that car that's dirty, evil, or wrong,
|>  then the fault lies with the manufacturer.
|> 
|> The liberal way of avoiding any responsibility for anything they do or say.

Awww, whatsa matter Jimmy boy?  Can't think of anything useful to say
so you attack my .sig.  I am just SOO impressed.


-- 
If you believe that there is a god, a god that made your body, and yet
you think that you can do anything with that body that's dirty, then the
fault lies with the manufacturer.
					Lenny Bruce
From: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Stereotyping
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:58:28 GMT
Reply-To: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab

In article <11795@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
|> Or thinks he initiated.  Child molesters frequently insist that the
|> child was "coming on" to them.  Why?  Because it absolves them of
|> responsibility (in their eyes) for what happened.  Why do I suspect
|> that Jeff has turned the nature of initiation around?
|> 
Bwahahhahahahahahahha.

Oh, sometimes Claytoon, you're even better than Bugs and Daffy.

|> He did explicitly advocate that adults having sex with children is
|> perfectly OK.
|> 
Liar.

|> I have posted a SMALL sample of the garbage I have received, and
|> that which was most concise.  I have since told Dave where to
|> find the rest of #200K of similar postings, many of which dance
|> around the subject, usually along the lines of, "If 16 is OK,
|> then 12 is OK, in which case, no law at all."
|> 

You've posted your selected bullshit.

Run along child, your momma's calling.
-- 
If you believe that there is a god, a god that made your body, and yet
you think that you can do anything with that body that's dirty, then the
fault lies with the manufacturer.
					Lenny Bruce
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: guido@island.COM (Guido Marx)
Subject: Re: Recall Gov. Pete Wilson
Organization: Island Graphics Corp.  San Rafael, Ca.
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:15:22 GMT

In article <SLAGLE.92Aug13005815@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com> slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>In article <55671@olivea.atc.olivetti.com>, ses@flash.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Darlene Wiedman) writes:
>
>> What are your views on this matter.  Is it worth my time to try to get this
>> initiative under way?
>
>Why don't you recall Willie Brown instead?

Rather than recall any particular politician, I would rather see
an initiative which would change the current system so that we
would be less likely to ever have this happen again.  

Allow me to suggest just a couple measures which would go a long 
way toward ensuring timely passage of a budget in future years.

	1)  Any fiscal year in which a budget is not in place by
	    the Constitutionally mandated July 1, the Legislature
	    and the Governor will LOSE 2% of their yearly salary
	    for each day that passes without a budget.  

	2)  There shall be NO "per diem" or any other "expense" 
	    payments to members of the Legislature or the 
	    Governor while there is no budget.  These payments, like
	    the salary, will be forfeit (ie: won't be paid back
	    once the budget is in place). 

There you go, end of problem - in the immortal words of George Zimmer
"I Guarantee it !!!"

Guido
From: ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Prop. 13 and California's fiscal crisis
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:35:20 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Intergraph Advanced Processor Division - Palo Alto, CA

In article <1992Aug17.215343.22479@nas.nasa.gov> dbailey@wk49.nas.nasa.gov (David H. Bailey) writes:
>Much of the defense of Prop. 13 so ardently advanced in this column
>and elsewhere focuses on the following premise:
>
>PREMISE: Only Prop. 13 can protect limited income homeowners such as
>the elderly from unexpected increases in property tax, increases that
>they may not be able to afford.
>

You must have missed the point.  The justification of Prop 13
is that it puts limits on the growth of govt.  The fact that this will
also assist people on fixed incomes is a nice side-effect.

>
>If a time of desperate fiscal crisis is not the time to change our
>crazy property tax system, when is?
>

I think it is perfectly rational, moral and ethical 
to put limitations on govt growth,
by whatever means possible, so I dont accept your premise that the
current system is "crazy."

There is no time that is not a good time to put limitations on how 
far the govt can screw you, which Prop. 13 did and does.  

To repeat the bottom line at the risk of being redundant:
The problem with the state is not a lack of revenue, but one of too
much spending.


--Al Date
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: foy@aero.org (Richard Foy)
Subject: Re: Homosexual marriages
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:43:30 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.012355.16406@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
...
>
>None, but wouldn't it be much better to have the state recognize
>marriage as a domestic contract for the purpose of sharing a
>household and/or the rearing of children between two (or more)
>individuals of any sex the terms of which are set entirely by those
>individuals bound by the contract and over which the state has no
>say expect as the interpreter of common law where a challenged
>contract lacts adequate specificity?
...
>
>/June

I agree.

How did the state ever get involved in marriages? What possible 
justification is there for the government laws on the subject?

Richard Foy           Standard Disclaimer


Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Clayton and NAMBLA
Organization: LLNL
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 02:36:05 GMT

In article <HVuLPB2w165w@batpad.lgb.ca.us> mike@batpad.lgb.ca.us (Mike Batchelor) writes:
:In spite of being absolutely insane, you seem to be fairly
:intelligent.  Remember "The Last Temptation of Christ?"  Remember how
:much extra revenue was generated by the protests against it calling
:attention to the fact that the movie was not liked by the fundies?

:The same thing happened recently with (forget the movie's name), but
:this time it was lesbians, not Xians, who were portrayed in a manner
:other than what they would have wished.  The protests served to
:increase the attentionthe movie got, and filled the pockets of those
:who made it.

	The movie was "Basic Instinct" where the lead female character
was supposed to be a bisexual and a murderer.
From: dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Homosexual marriages
Date: 19 Aug 92 15:36:43 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

In article <1992Aug19.012355.16406@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>In article <oo5vans@fido.asd.sgi.com>,
>dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
>>
>>Given that the government sanctions unions between a man and a woman,
>>what legal reason is there that they should not sanction a union
>>between two men or two women?
>
>None, but wouldn't it be much better to have the state recognize
>marriage as a domestic contract for the purpose of sharing a
>household and/or the rearing of children between two (or more)
>individuals of any sex the terms of which are set entirely by those
>individuals bound by the contract and over which the state has no
>say expect as the interpreter of common law where a challenged
>contract lacts adequate specificity?

The only reason that I think that the state should have any say in this
process is that they are going to want to tax people differently that
are in these unions.  They are also going to want to know important things
concerning child care/adoption and so on.  Though I do not want the state 
to impose on my life more than they have to, if they are going to impose,
it should be done in an easily specified manner (because they have trouble
with any variants...)


Jeff
-FWA
From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: More Evidence of How Homosexuals Are "Oppressed" In America
Date: 13 Aug 92 08:54:53 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

In article <11713@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

> One difference: I have found "homosexual = liar" to be true far more 
> often than not.  I have repeatedly made it clear that not all 
> homosexuals are child molesters, and some are quite hostile to 
> child molestation, and yet many of the homosexuals on the net keep
> claiming that I said that all homosexuals are child molesters.  I
> keep correcting them, and they keep saying it.  

I just can't let this one pass.  You're the liar, Clayton; you *did* say that
all homosexuals are child molesters.  Well, actually, what you said was that
there was "overwhelming evidence" that homosexuals were child molesters.
Then you backed off (slightly) by claiming that "the overwhelming majority"
of homosexuals supported child molestation.  These were lies when you said
them, and now you're denying that you ever said them?!  Who's the liar here?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov   |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: NORML California <canorml@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Date: 20 Aug 92 23:53 PDT
Subject: Re: Recall Willie Brown (was Recall Gov
Nf-ID: #R:92225.43198.J056600@lmsc5.is.lms:-76321125:cdp:1333300012:000:1044
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!canorml    Aug 20 23:53:00 1992


    Us drug reform people are more than ready to join the recall Wilson
drive.  We're hopping mad at his recent call for a "Smoke a Joint, Lose
Your License" bill, as well as his idiotic insistence on increased 
spending on prisons, cops, and punishment.  
    Like most Republicans, Wilson is a spendthrift on law and order issues.
He recently proposed a bill that would have effectively doubled the time
serve by all state prisoners, without so much as submitting a cost estimate.
    At least Willie Brown and friends have blocked Wilson on this and
other civil liberties issues.  As long as Lungren and Wilson are there,
we need a Democratic legislature.
    We are waiting to see whether Wilson signs the needle exhcange bill.  If
not, he is a sufficient menace to public health that he should be removed
from office immediately, like his Republican mentors in Washington.
   It takes 840,000 valid signatures to remove Wilson.  There are at least
800,000 state employees who are hopping mad enough to sign it.  Wilson is
a  class-A jerk.

Xref: sparky ca.politics:6934 ba.politics:4659
From: mikea@zorba.gvg.tek.com (Michael P. Anderson)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: An innocent and simple request.
Date: 19 Aug 92 04:30:35 GMT
Followup-To: ca.politics
Distribution: ca
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA


Hi everyone. I'm looking for some information on NAMBLA. Could someone
please send me e-mail about this organization? I've heard that this
newsgroup has been engaging in a thought-provoking and informational
discussion about man / boy love. I'd really like to know what everyone
thinks.
								(-:
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics
From: guido@island.COM (Guido Marx)
Subject: Re: Guy at Sun who got fired for nasty postings
Organization: Island Graphics Corp.  San Rafael, Ca.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 00:18:29 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.225036.15252@ntmtv> jazanopa@ntmtv.UUCP (Patricia Jazanoski) writes:
>I disagree with your "all or nothing" argument.  No set of rules will cover 
>all circumstances, so there will always be a level "subjectivism" involved.
>You've got to draw the line somewhere, and this is where Sun has decided 
>to draw the line.

Exactly, I think that we are allowing the fact that a computer
network was used to cloud the issue.  What if the individual in
question wasn't using a computer network, but was having political
arguments with other employees around the coffee pot.  If he 
started to say things that were offensive, the company would be
completely within its rights to warn him, and then terminate him
if the behavior persisted.  No company is bound to accept rude and
obnoxious behavior from any of their employees.  


Guido
From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: More Evidence of How Homosexuals Are "Oppressed" In America
Date: 13 Aug 92 20:01:16 GMT
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA

In article <193246@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov>, pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) writes:
> In article <ohbj36c@fido.asd.sgi.com>, dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
> > The child resorts to his final tactic, when losing an argument.  "You are
> > lying" screams the child as he stamps his feet.
> 
> God, I hope that's his final tactic.  I'm very much afraid, though, that
> Clayton is not through spewing hatred and lies onto the net.

  Actually, my theory is that Clayton is in a manic phase right now,
which is waning into a depressive stage. Haven't you noticed that
he comes on really strong on the beginning of a rampage and becomes
more and more irrational until he disappears for a while? It's all
suspiciously cyclical.
  Hmmm.
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Clayton and NAMBLA
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:22:52 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <HVuLPB2w165w@batpad.lgb.ca.us>, mike@batpad.lgb.ca.us (Mike Batchelor) writes:
> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> 
> > In article <1992Aug9.012644.21208@amhux2.amherst.edu>, twpierce@amhux1.amhers
> > > In article <11645@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writ
# # # #You mean that ... the non-net evidence of
# # # #homosexual support for NAMBLA should just be ignored?
# # # 
# # # Gosh, Clayton, to hear you say it, there is no non-net evidence.
# # 
# # Just the parades that they march in;
# 
# The parades where they get booed and hissed at.

And where their supporters carry signs, decrying "yellow journalism"
that reports on NAMBLA's activities.

# # the ready availability of
# # NAMBLA's bulletin in gay bookstores throughout San Francisco (according
# # to the reports on KRON-TV a few months back).
# 
# NAMBLA's bulletin is available by US Mail.  Is the Post Office
# involved, too?  You've posted them to this newsgroup, so you share in
# the responsibility for propagating NAMBLA's views.

You don't honestly understand that if gay bookstores are carrying
it, it's because they expect to get some sales?  Do you honestly
not realize that carrying NAMBLA's bulletin is equivalent to carrying
a publication by Aryan Nations?  Do you know of any bookstores
that carry neo-Nazi publications without some level of agreement?

# [] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.ca.us



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
I can make myself popular on USENET again -- all I have to say is that I'm not 
disturbed by the support for North American Man-Boy Love Association in the 
homosexual community.  Being popular at a child's expense isn't worth it.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:6853 talk.politics.misc:40026 misc.legal:16071