HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Privatization
Date: 24 Jan 1993 19:47:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark 'Mark' Sachs) says:

>>       PC just swept a president into office.
>
>Oh? If you see Bill Clinton as the epitome of Political Correctness, then
>you'd have to admit that 43% of the American people (53%, if you count
>Clinton-leaning Perotistas) like Political Correctness and the evil
>leftist ideologies that come with it, and God-fearing anti-PC'ness is
>in the definite, unpopular minority in America.

     I refer to PC as a methodogy for enforcing cultural values.
     Not as an ideology.

     Besides, I agree with you now.  The American people are pretty
     much in outer space now.  It's really quite depressing if you
     take it seriously.  It reminds me a lot of Los Angeles for 
     the past 10 years.  Luckily, I've realized that *I* don't 
     have to carry the litter anymore.


     Everybody, get on-board
        Don't miss that gravy train

     All it takes is some color and a whine.

        See, REB.  I'm just the whining bitcher you thought.
        I want my FREEBIES!


>
>Seems to disprove the right-wingers' contention that they really represent
>most of the American people... they don't even have a plurality!
>
>1/2 :-)
>
>     "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets."
>[Your blood pressure just went up.]        Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
>   DISCLAIMER: Penn State University cares about my money, not my opinions.
>

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69527 alt.conspiracy:14561 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13692
Organization: The Leader Desslok School of Diplomacy
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:57:33 EST
From: Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Privatization
 <1jpr10INNlsq@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1jq7ieINN1mh@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
 <1jslq0INNb4i@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1jt93fINNm10@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>

This has nothing to do with the main thrust of this thread, but I had to
throw this in...

In article <1jt93fINNm10@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
(Broward Horne) says:
>In a previous article, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) says:

>>I think you're becoming increasingly loony.  "PC" is hardly sweeping the

>       HA!  How did you guess?

>       PC just swept a president into office.

Oh? If you see Bill Clinton as the epitome of Political Correctness, then
you'd have to admit that 43% of the American people (53%, if you count
Clinton-leaning Perotistas) like Political Correctness and the evil
leftist ideologies that come with it, and God-fearing anti-PC'ness is
in the definite, unpopular minority in America.

Seems to disprove the right-wingers' contention that they really represent
most of the American people... they don't even have a plurality!

1/2 :-)

     "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, riddle them with bullets."
[Your blood pressure just went up.]        Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
   DISCLAIMER: Penn State University cares about my money, not my opinions.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70099 misc.legal:23428
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
Subject: Re: NO! President Bill, 72% of Americans are NOT lawyers!
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:50:32 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Chicago

In article <ATAYLOR.93Jan26094626@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
><How many parents do you think pay FICA for their babysitters?
>
>	Is Smith aware of the difference between "babysitter"
>	and "live-in nanny and driver"?

Whatever difference there may be, it is not one that the law cares about.
Failing to pay FICA for either is equally illegal.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu (David Oliver)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Yuppie Vacation Bill (WAS Re: Family Leave Bill
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:14:53 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <90681@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>In <1993Jan26.035236.6898@netcom.com> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>
>|In article <2503@newsserver.cs.uwindsor.ca> bouche2@server.uwindsor.ca 
>|(BOUCHER DAVID) writes:
>
>|>And the cost in lost productivity will naturally be borne by everyone.
>
>|Haven't some studies shown that an adequate amount of vacation time
>|*increases* productivity by reducing stress?  
>
>|I say, start everybody out with a month of paid vacation, and eventually
>|work our way up to the standards of civilized countries. 
>
>Some studies have indicated that a small amount of vacation time beats no
>vacation in terms of productivity.  Increasing the length of the vacation
>produces proportionally smaller productivity gains.

This is hardly an argument for legislating short term vacations (I am not sure
that you are), or vacations of any length for that matter.  If vacations for
employees increase productivity then it will be in the firms best interest to
offer vacations to employees, but of course many already do.

-David Oliver (doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu)
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 15:16:34 GMT
Originator: joakimr@hymir.ifi.uio.no


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
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69514 alt.politics.elections:25116 alt.politics.clinton:21091
From: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: DAY THREE: Either a lie or utter stupidity
Date: 24 Jan 1993 06:40:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


After his abandonment of Zoe, President Clinton took full responsibility
(how gracious of you) and offered this as an excuse - 'I knew that she had
hired illegal aliens, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THAT SHE HADN'T PAID THEIR SOCIAL
SECURITY TAXES!'.  Oh, I guess the first thing illegal aliens do when they
cross the border is TO GET A SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER (which is required when
paying the tax).  Either he's a bold-faced liar or we need to impose an
IQ test requirement on those persons who wish to run for President in 1996.
And people said Quayle was stupid?  This man has brains enough to run the
country?  Come on Clinton defenders, let's see how far you'll stretch 
reality to excuse him on this one.

I don't know why CBS signed up Letterman to go up against Leno.  They should
have signed Bill Clinton.  He'll make more people laugh (or possibly cry)
over the next four years than either of them.

-- 
Richard Mulac                                       ck347@cleveland.freenet.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       1996 election countdown - 1381 more days         | These pontifications 
 until the Democrats are thrown out of the White House  |      are my own!
From: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu (J. Morgan Morris)
Subject: Re: DAY THREE: Either a lie or utter stupidity
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:11:19 GMT

ck347@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard A. Mulac) writes:


>OK, I'll offer some constructive criticism.  To Clinton (and Gore) - 
>resign now and save the country a lot of grief.  You weren't elected
>because the people wanted you, you were elected because the electorate 
>didn't want Bush as President any more.  Get down off your overinflated
>ego and realize the people aren't in love with you, you're not the
>reincarnation of Jack Kennedy.

I'm sure Clinton and Gore will listen to someone like you. After all, they 
need practice in dealing with dysfunctional zealots like Saddam Hussein.
(There, I'm getting better at insulting, aren't I??)

They were elected because people wanted change. Their performance over 
the next several years will determine whether the people love them or not. 
Speaking of Jack Kennedy, what was his margin of victory in 1960, eh?

>I have yet to hear a Clinton 'Mr. Rhodes Scholarship' supporter explain
>how President Genius came up with the notion that illegal aliens
>usually make sure they get Social Security numbers and pay their SS taxes
>when they work illegally.

No excuses. He took full responsibility for any errors in the search process,
and I'm glad that he did. And I believe he is indeed seeking ethical people
for the Cabinet, in order to avoid the Reagan administration's problems with
keeping people out of jail...

>-- 
>Richard Mulac                                       ck347@cleveland.freenet.edu

What the hell's a cleveland.freenet, anyway?

Later,
Morgan


-- 

John Morgan Morris
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
Georgia State University
University Plaza
Atlanta, GA. 30303-3083

Internet: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu
Telephone: (404) 651-2253
FAX: (404) 651-2246

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69115 ca.politics:10622 ba.politics:8266 alt.sex:42815
From: walsh@optilink.COM (Mark Walsh)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,alt.sex
Subject: Re: What is Clay's real motivation?
Date: 18 Jan 93 22:33:25 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

From article <1993Jan16.052356.28532@Princeton.EDU>, by niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent):
> In article <13911@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:

Regarding the age of consent:

#>...Some line needs to be drawn.  It will be arbitrary...

> I don't know Mr. Brack, and I haven't read all his posts, so I'll just
> go by what you *usually* do, which is lie.  Mr. Brack is probably
> claiming that it should be defined for each individual.  

Is Mr. Cramer usually lying? Is Mr. Brack "probably claiming"
something?  I think not.  Mr. Brack is a member of an organization
whose stated purpose is the repeal of age of consent laws.  Is
this the same as defining the age for each individual?  I think not.

> Child molestation means molesting people too young to consent.  But what
> that age is is NOT intrinsic to people.  It's being arbitrarily defined
> by *YOU* to be 18 years of age.  Amazingly enough, all over the world
> it's defined differently.  

It is not defined by Mr. Cramer to be 18 years of age.  He (and I)
live in a state where the legislature have deemed it so.  As you
have succinctly pointed out, other legislatures define it a bit
differently.  But I strongly agree, some line needs to be drawn,
and yes, it will be arbitrary.
-- 
Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh
AOL: BigCookie -- Amateur Radio: KM6XU@WX3K -- USCF: L10861
"What, me worry?" - William M. Gaines, 1922-1992
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70404 misc.legal:23492 alt.politics.usa.constitution:1581
From: spencer@cats.ucsc.edu (Michael Spencer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,alt.politics.usa.constitution
Subject: Re: Marriage in other countrys
Date: 28 Jan 1993 19:11:05 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


gws@gwssun.att.com (Gary Sanders) writes:

>	What are the legal (if any -:)) issue of two US citizen gettin
>married in another country. My wife to be has been ready about how
>nice it is to be married at some resort in Jamaica or some Caribbean
>island. From the reviews it sound nice but what leagal issue are there
>to look at? Being married in jamaica does that make me married in the
>US? Heaven forbid but what complications in the event of a divorse 
>would I be faced with.

Ugh!

This can become a real hairy mess. Short list of possible problems:
	- Is the foreign marriage valid under the laws of the forum?
		(you'd be suprised how often it is not)
	- Is there any bar to marriage in your state of residence?
		(the foreign marriage may be considered an attempt
		 to circumvent local law)
	- Do either of you have substantial wealth?
		(you can't imagine what ingenious legal theories can
		 arise from the hope of inheriting $250,000)

Ten to one odds that neither you nor your heirs would ever
have any problems, but that eleventh time is what lawyers
live for.

Believe me, I do mean to be discouraging.
The above list is representative - not exhaustive.
And the war stories can go on for a long, long time.



-- 

===========================================================================
Michael Spencer            |      2640 Borregas
spencer@cats.ucsc.edu      |      Aptos, CA   95003
===========================================================================

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.medicine,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.african.american,sci.med
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: Statement of President Clinton on Health Care Reform Task Force
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:34:57 GMT

In article <2B676CA2.20550@news.service.uci.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>In article <1993Jan28.044849.26210@tc.cornell.edu> bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
>>
>>The judicial system is bound by laws made by politicians, and
>>reflects the opinions and skills of these politicians. This system's
>>decisions are in no way a standard of thinking or making judgements, 
>>but is a _result_ of a judgement of those who made the law or appointed
>>the judges. 
>
>In one breath you say that laws aren't making judgements, but then you
>say that they are the result of judgements made by politicians.  What,
>do you think pols are Martians or something?

Read again what I wrote. I said that laws reflect the judgement
of the politicians who made them. You were arguing circularly:
You said that since the laws made some distinction therefore this
distinction is justified for us ( and politicians ) to do. I 
corrected you and said that the books are the result of 
judgements of _politicians_, and as such have no intrinic value.


Dov


Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70022 alt.politics.clinton:21325
From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Congratulatoin, Bill-Bots!
Date: 28 Jan 1993 00:58:31 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) says:

>
>pathetic.........

       Hmmm. Perhaps I sounded insincere about my enthusiam?
       Or do you now believe that those things will not come to pass?

            Here, chew on the Rod of Reality a bit:

       Congress has NO choice.  They HAVE to raise taxes.
       NONE.  It was inevitable, no matter WHAT Clinton said.
       We;h'll see spending cuts too, but only nominal ones, and
       only on those constituencies who can't defend themselves.

       I'm a-hoping and a-praying they DO pass the "Pay or Play"
       health care plan.   It will rapidly evolve into the 
       " Pay or Play or Don't Stay " health care bill. 

       The Family Leave Bill will trash THOUSANDS of jobs.

       here, some free info:

           There's probably still time to sell your house,
      and get your assets out of the country.  Congress is 
      pretty out-to-lunch now, and won't notice the capital
      fleeing until a year or two after it starts.

           Uruguay - Nice climate, culture which stresses
      education, pretty non-violent, they've already gone
      through their "freebie and subsequent junta" phase.  

          Their baby-boom won't bust until around 2030 or so,
      so their current SS system should be okay.  

 

>Norman
>
>Dr. Norman J. LaFave
>Senior Engineer
>Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company
>
>
>
>
>When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
>                               Hunter Thompson
>
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: DAY THREE: Either a lie or utter stupidity
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:11:14 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA04632; Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:17:35 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA26736; Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:17:33 -0800
X-Received: from IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU by idbsu.idbsu.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 3568; Tue, 26 Jan 93 13:19:21 MST
X-Received: from IDBSU (GCTHORNE) by IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id
 5842; Tue, 26 Jan 93 13:19:20 MST
X-To: talk.politics.misc.usenet

From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: DAY THREE: Either a lie or utter stupidity
X-Xxdate: Tue, 26 Jan 93 10:44:20 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d15

>Well Broward, if you're so sure you're right, then leave.

        See, doc?  THIS is what I'm talking about.

        All the historical data I can find, most of the theories,
    and my own common sense, tell me that the Deficit is one, big
    time bomb waiting to happen.

         Even if it DOESN'T go off, American society is still
     demonstrating some serious problems, just for betting that
     it wouldn't.  The odds are easily in favor of a blowout.

         Yet here we are, betting it won't.  How long will a society
     like that last?

          Here, look.  Since the Dawning of a New Age, we've gotten
      8,700 layoffs at McDonnell-Douglas, 11,000 at Pratt-Whitney,
      50,000 at Sears, and an CEO ousting at IBM will means more layoffs.
      What, 8,000 at Kodak?

          Meanwhile, Wild Bill Taxcut is readying an Energy Bill.
      Nobody's getting any tax returns this year.  Home equity loans
      are tapped out, driving the economy for the past 2 years.

          Congress is going on a health-care spending spree.

          Anybody betting for this to WORK, well, I would suggest
      that y'all are the ones possessing some secret knowledge...
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69784 alt.activism:21348 alt.politics.usa.misc:942 alt.politics.reform:223 alt.politics.libertarian:3929
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Preparing for the comming collapse of the federal government
Date: 26 Jan 1993 01:43:01 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <C12Myo.5op@austin.ibm.com>, alan@auntbea.austin.ibm.com (Alan R. Weiss) writes:
> >Some steps that American society might exercise include:
> >
> >1) Shoring up state and local governments to take up the slack in
> >public services that will occur with the collapse of the federal
> >government.
> 
> Unfortunately, there is no political will on the part of the
> Governors of the several states to do so.  When Reagan tried to
> move the burden of the welfare state down to the states level,
> the Governors, RepubliCrats all, bleated in unison.

Well, hell, of course they did.  Reagan's idea of "moving the burden"
didn't include moving the REVENUES the federal government is currently
collecting that were justified by being allocated to that burden.  

In other words, "here's the responsibility, state; find your own 
revenue for it; we're keeping what we're collecting from your citizens 
and spending it on something new."
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: blh@uiboise.idbsu.edu (Broward L. Horne)
Subject: This is the Dawning...
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 9:54:13 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA21682; Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:05:21 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA09873; Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:05:17 -0800
X-Received: by uiboise.idbsu.edu
	(16.6/16.2) id AA05560; Thu, 28 Jan 93 09:54:16 -0700
X-To: talk.politics.misc.usenet
X-Cc: alt.politics.clinton.usenet
X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25]


	Of the Age of Hilaryious

	Age of Hilaryious

	HilarYOUS

	Hil-LAR-ious

	Harmony and understanding
	   Sympathy and trust abounding
        No more falsehoods or derision 
	   Golden living dreams of vi-i-isioonnnn

        Mystic crystal revelations
	   And the mind's true liberation!!

       Hilaryious!
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Political Spectrum (was: Waiting for Perot (Was Re: Who's weakeining
Date: 23 Jan 93 05:14:39 EST
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics


The waiting for Perot thread has some serious distortions in it, basically
the statement that Adolph Hitler was a leftist! NOT. Here is the political
spectrum. You sort it out.


                                     1                                 2   3
Commun. Social.  Demo.          Repub.    Bush     Reagan  Dole  Quayle A.H. ??
|       |        |              |         |        |       |     |      |    |
v       v        v              v         v        v       v     v      v    v
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEFT                  CENTER                RIGHT            RUSH      FALWELL


1. Ford, Nixon, and their moderate followers

2. Dan is no Adolph Hitler... 

3. This is Adolph Hitler.


Left wing represent a government which supports individuals regardless of
their status in society. Right wing represent government which is solely
concerned with an individuals status with society along.

-Garrett






Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: an5707@anon.penet.fi (Evil Squirrel)
Subject: Just how much does the Federal Government cost us, anyway?
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: talk.politics.misc
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:16:59 GMT


Has anyone ever added up direct Federal spending, that state and local
spending mandated by Washington, the costs incurred by following Federal
regulations and laws (like paying H & R Block to do your tax forms, etc.)
and the economic disincentives caused by our Federal tax structure?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.