HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dev@barley.ecn.purdue.edu (Larry Weeks)
Subject: Re: Necessary and Proper
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 20:11:23 GMT

spencer@cats.ucsc.edu (Michael Spencer) once wrote: 
> There are good arguments against "presentism".

I can think of no good argument for "presentism." It destroys what it
touches, transforming it into something new every time. It is totally
subjective. We *need* metrics for reading a document, and the best
metric I have ever found is to read it as the author wrote it, to
take away the thoughts *he* encapsulated, and to add your own, not to
take only the thoughts you placed between the lines. If you don't
have metrics, the document has no meaning, other than that which you
already decide it has before bothering to read it. When the topic is
law, something as important as a nation's constitution, its legal
framework, "presentism" seems ridiculous.

The rational alternative is to re-write the document when its meaning
becomes unpalatable. The U.S. Constitution includes an amendment
process for just this purpose. Instead, we have taken almost all
meaning from the document, and let the courts decide it anew at
nearly every sitting. Why should they have this awesome power? The
courts should be servants of the law, not the makers thereof.
Moreover, a constitution should be the yoke of a government, not a
gilded collar which it can remove and resize to its whim when wearing
it becomes uncomfortable.

But this discussion is merely academic. To the victor goes the
spoils. "Presentism" is *the* practised theory of constitutional
reading in this nation.

Larry
--
Larry Weeks        | "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty--power
dev@ecn.purdue.edu |  is ever stealing from the many to the few."
-------------------+   -- Wendell Phillips
"In the long-run,   +-------------------------------------------------
 every Government is the exact symbol of its People, with their wisdom
 and unwisdom." -- Thomas Carlyle
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70476 ca.politics:10733 ba.politics:8389 misc.legal:23517
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Pedophilia as sexual orientation
Date: 28 Jan 93 21:48:24 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

More defenses of the abolition of age of consent laws, from again,
soc.motss:

In article <1993Jan27.065742.18620@news.ysu.edu>, ah505@yfn.ysu.edu (Brian Quinby) writes:
> Bill (snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass) (again, I don't know
> how to make all those funny marks)
# quotes Maria:
# 
# "  Both involve acts of
# #violence and/or abuse of power." and adds "nonconsent."
# 
# WRONG.
# 
# This sounds like typical breeder crap the likes of which
# Dworkin and the other mavens of the kiddie victemization scam
# would like everyone to beleive in.
# 
# Unfortunately it is not always true.
# 
# Minors can and do give consent. If it is for streight sex, it
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
# gets glorified. If it is for gay sex it is a totally different

No, it gets prosecuted.  Have you opened a newspaper lately?
Today's local paper had one story of a man being sent to prison
for 12 years; another story involved a prosecution just starting.

# story. As one who has been sexually active since I was 12 and
# actively persued several adults as well as agemates, I know
# from whre I speak.
# 
# Nonconsensentual sex is rape. No arguement. It doesn't matter
# if there are gender or age differences or similarities. Rape
# is a violent crime deserving of far harsher and more frequent
# punishment than it actually gets. Consentual sex ought not
# to be punished.
# 
# And don't bring up the "two year old" arguement, please.
# 
# 	Brian

Why?  Drawing a line is supposed to be bad, from this argument.
Yet he doesn't want to discuss "two year old" problems.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"When freedom destroys order, order will destroy freedom." -- Eric Hoffer
Not a goal, just a statement of reality.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.guns
From: pyotr@halcyon.com (Peter D. Hampe)
Subject: Re: Mike, Because You're such a guy...
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc. (206) 455-3505
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:05:12 GMT

drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

>ciao
>drieux

>ps: Personally I like the Longer form....
>But who is Going to Argue about Existentialism
>in a fire Fight......

The Paul Sarte Heavy Weapons Platoon?

didn't you ever read the section in the Hitchkiker series
where they were doing just that?

Remember: Franco ,may have won the war, but
we had all the good songs!

chus
pyotr

-- 
Pyotr aka Peter D. Hampe : eka pyotr@halcyon.com
Nothing says loving like a bun in the oven.
EOF
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,misc.legal
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: NO! President Bill, 72% of Americans are NOT lawyers!
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 05:45:22 GMT

In article <13949@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>In article <1993Jan17.061634.6084@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
># Thirteen out of eighteen have law degrees.  One might more properly
># ask what happened to the other five, given the importance of a law
># degree to dealing with the field of law, but let's look at Ipser's
># objection more closely.
># 
># All of the eighteen graduated college.  Presumably, Ipser would wish
># that only nine of them have, and that two or three of the others have
># failed to graduate high school.
>
>Clinton's liberal quota ideology claimed that the Cabinet should
>"look like America" but for some reason, this same reasoning
>doesn't apply about education.

Clinton never had a quota.  He had a goal of diversity.  Diversity by
ethnic group, geography, and ideology has been common since the beginning
of democracy in making appointments.  What Clinton proposed to do is
expand this diversity beyond white males by including qualified women 
and minorities in the process.

No one has ever suggested that educational diversity is a good thing.
You're creating a strawman.  Care to address real arguments?

>Once again, liberal enthusiasm for judging people by the color
>of their skin, instead of the content of their character, shows
>itself.

And what's the qualitative difference between what Clinton said,
and Nixon's 1968 promise to nominate a Southerner to the Supreme Court?
Oh, I forgot -- Clayton thinks Nixon was a liberal.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Letting gays into the military and Pres. Clinton
Originator: rja@mahogany126
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 27 Jan 93 13:08:54 CST


In article <106641@netnews.upenn.edu>, bond@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Robert S. Bond) writes:
> Dear President Clinton:
> 
> 	After the election you promised to focus in on the economy "like a 
> laser beam."  So far, you have been in office for almost a week and the things
> you appear to be focusing on are controversial issues such as abortion and
> letting homosexuals into the military.  Perhaps it would be wiser to spend
> your great political capital on something we all can agree on which is 
> improving on the economy.  When that job is done then you can concern yourself
> with the other issues.
> 					Sincerely,
> 					Robert Bond

Have you noticed the rally in the Bond market?  Seems Wall Street is
convinced that Clinton will reduce the deficit and inflation will
remain low, hence long term interest rates are coming down.
The stock market is also doing well, especially small stocks (small
companies that creat most of the jobs).

Wall Street is comfortable with the way Clinton is handling the 
economy.  Why aren't you?

See the Wall Street Journal, Tues, Jan 26, 1993, page C1 for more details
on the Bond market rally.

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69232 alt.atheism:26812 talk.religion.misc:27265
From: emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Madeleine Murray O'Hare
Date: 22 Jan 1993 17:36:50 GMT
Organization: Sun
NNTP-Posting-Host: hernes-sun

>In article <1993Jan21.162625.17617@aber.ac.uk> jma@aber.ac.uk (Jonathan Michael Ashley) writes:

> Is this the same Ted "Tyre-Iron" Kaldis who made a famous post describing 
> how he and one of his chums set about some chap with a tyre-iron for 
>no apparent reason other than that he was gay?

Yep, and its the same "Tire-Iron" Kaldis who later stated that he was
qualified to speak for Jesus.

Eric
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Re: Mike, Because You're such a guy...
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 08:30:30 GMT

donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
] In article <1993Jan21.061502.24849@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com
] (drieux, just drieux) writes:
] 
] Maybe we'll have to agree to disagree, as far as the semantics
] go here.  Certainly, everyone here agrees that the situation has
] changed Big Time once a weapon is pulled.  And certainly, everyone
] here would feel immense relief afterwards, if the situation concluded
] with nobody being killed. 

Workable Compromise.

] Certainly, everyone who owns/keeps a gun should know how to keep it
] safely.  My feeling is that our schools should teach a bit of gun
] safety but I fear that this would be opposed by many, with the same
] vehemence (and irrationality, IMHO) as some would oppose sex education
] and the discussion of birth control in school.

Especially given all the Drek that Kids will have watched
on TV from cartoons forward about what using a gun is
alledged to mean....

I would support the sort of Weapons Safety Training that
would combine the basic fundamentals of the standard NRA
'hunters safety course' mixed with the basics of what
to do with the average infantry support systems.

This way kids would Know which side of a Claymore
went which way....

ciao
drieux


-- 
MajorModernDayProblems: 

"If you will not talk with Yourself, 
Why should anyone else?"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Big Three Begs Big Government (again)
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:17:02 GMT

In article <1k78maINNgvv@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>    Protectism is coming.  

Not necessarily, given the appointments Clinton made.

>besides, it's okay now, Karl.  These guys
>    still don't get it.  Clinton has two choices:
>
>         i)    Wipe all the people who bet on inflation.  Probably
>               about 60% of the middle class.

Actually, the middle class would benefit from inflation in the short
run at least, as they're net debtors.  It's creditors and folks on
fixed pensions who lose out.
-- 
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:70468 soc.motss:58969
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss
Subject: Re: Family Leave Bill
Date: 28 Jan 93 01:21:25 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <44048@zygot.ati.com>, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes:
> In article <9301222329.AA29961@client.its.rpi.edu> buckmr@rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire) writes:
# #        The family leave bill would establish a national policy for Millions
# #of working families. The bill... which would affect businesses with 50
# #employees or more... would allow a worker to take up to 12 weeks of
# #UNpaid leave per year for the birth or adoption of a child... or to
# #attend to a seriously ill family member.
# #
# #Does anyone know how this ``family member'' is defined?
# 
# I have some real concerns about all of this. Does this open a new
# mechanism for a dual standard regarding GLB and "family" types? Is this
# going to end up a perk for Quayle-style family people and no one else
# need apply?

By "Quayle-style" you mean not simply "two parents and kids" but also, 
"with enough wealth to afford 12 weeks unpaid leave."

# And even beyond that, why do only people who work for large companies
# get to play? There are millions out there who work for small, Ma and Pa
# operations. Are they less needing of family leave? And if the size of
# the company is involved, why is this less of a problem for larger
# companies than smaller ones? Key people are key people; or is the
# premise that large companies are inherently overstocked with personel?

No, it's a way for large corporations to be made more attractive
than small businesses, thus assisting the Democrats with their
scheme of concentrating industry in fewer and fewer hands.

# At the risk of taking considerable heat, let me suggest that if a
# company can do without the services of someone for three months, paid
# or unpaid, there might be some question whether that person was
# necessary at all to begin with. A programmer or designer of a critical
# project could really hold a company up with this one, no?
# -- 
#  John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115     |       FAX:

It isn't a matter of can they "do" without those services -- they
will make adjustments -- probably expensive and painful ones.


-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"When freedom destroys order, order will destroy freedom." -- Eric Hoffer
Not a goal, just a statement of reality.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:69149 alt.president.clinton:1700
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.president.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton's flip-flop on Haitians!
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 22 Jan 93 00:08:41 EST
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea) writes:
> 
> 1) WHAT BUSH SAID: Read my lips, no new taxes.
>    WHAT BUSH MEANT: I will raise taxes and create new taxes, then 
>    blame it on Congress.

well, Congress -was- the one that proposed it. and promised that it
would help. Bush was indeed a fool, but he wasn't a fool for raising
taxes, he was a fool for believing congress.

> 3) SAID: I will be the "Education President."   
>   MEANT: I will pay lip service to such sayings as "Premier Schools"
>          and "America 2000" while promoting a scheme to privatize
>          public schools.  I will be in the back-pocket of 
>          corporations who see a big profit potential in America's 
>          children.  I will watch as American public schools fall 
>          farther and farther behind the rest of the world.

he proposed a number of educational measures, all of which were turned
down, even on an experimental level. it's not like he didn't try.

> 5) SAID: Keep Republicans in office.  We are the party of economic
>            prosperity.
>   MEANT: I will do nothing when a serious recession breaks out a 
>          year and a half after taking office.  I will hold to a 
>          19th-century view that the economy will just take care of 
>          itself.  

funny. it did. too bad we didn't -hear- about it until after the election...

> 6) SAID: The American Family is our highest priority.
>   MEANT: I will veto the Family Leave bill because of opposition 
>          from big business.  I will veto extensions to unemployment
>          benefits.  I will do nothing as families fall farther and
>          farther behind economically.

first off, it was mostly small businesses who opposed the family leave
bill. they're the ones who take the brunt of such regulation, yet they're
also the ones that provide the most growth & new development in this
country.

secondly, it is -not- the government's responsibility to take care of
families. i don't like that Bush said anything to that effect either,
but i'm glad he didn't carry through on it. i don't want the government
to be my mommy & give me an allowance every week. 'cause when it takes
that kind of parental role it becomes impossible to get the car keys
& you have to be in by 12.

now, i agree with you on a lot of your points, in fact, i didn't even
vote for Bush. but i don't see how someone who's even more of a liar
& master distortionist will make things better.

jason

--
 "Y'all ain't from around here are ya?" - The best compliment I ever got, 
                                          from a local in Defiance, Ohio
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:70491 alt.politics.clinton:21538
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Congratulatoin, Bill-Bots!
Date: 28 Jan 93 18:03:18 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <1993Jan28.145349.2183@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:

|I give up. I will no longer respond. You guys are getting too
|wierd, too bitter, too vacuous,
|and too paranoid to debate with. What happened to all you conservatives
|who could actually debate without drooling?

We had the sense to bail out on this guy a long time ago.
It has been fun watching you thrash around though.

So long, and thanks for the fish.
-- 
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:70048 talk.politics.medicine:706
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Re: Statement of President Clinton on Health Care Reform Task Force
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:38:55 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <PA142548.892.728162618@utkvm1.utk.edu>  
PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
> In article <1k578pINNn2u@news.aero.org> helfman@aero.org (Robert S.  
Helfman) writes:
> >It's called a SOCIETY, child. We all pay for it,
> >we all use it. 
> 
> No, it's called a state, and we are forced to pay for it, whether  
we use it 
> or not.
> 

No, you have a choice: you can move elsewhere.  And if you 
think that is not a real option, it is at least as real 
as the "right" many blue collar workers have to move
elsewhere to find a job if working conditions aren't safe,
if the are fired for joining a union, etc.  Several libertarians
on this group have been saying for weeks that we shouldn't
prevent companies from doing anything in these areas, because
workers could go elsewhere. It seems to me they have
the same right if they object to paying for the projects
(like roads) that the vast majority in society want to
build.  After all, none of the states (nor the US as a whole)
force you at gun point to live here.

What, you have property here, a family growing up here, etc.?
Well, so do those workers who can "always quit and go elsewhere
if they don't like the unsafe working conditions."

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu (Mark 'Mark' Sachs)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Judiciary Committee, Please Get a clue!
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:19:52 GMT
 <1jp4dfINNi7b@transfer.stratus.com> <ATAYLOR.93Jan24152856@gauss.nmsu.edu>
Organization: The Leader Desslok School of Diplomacy

In article <ATAYLOR.93Jan24152856@gauss.nmsu.edu>, ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) says:
><In article <1jp4dfINNi7b@transfer.stratus.com> (Jim Mann) writes:
><   I do think, that for the postion of Attorney General, the negative
><   (unfortunately) did outweigh the positive.  It's a shame, though.
><   I wish she hadn't done what she had, as she seemed like she'd
>,   have done a good job.

>        Sure, felons often are good at being cops, right?

Naw. Ed Meese, for example, was terrible.

     "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.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: matjmm@gsusgi1.gsu.edu (J. Morgan Morris)
Subject: Re: Congratulatoin, Bill-Bots!
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:17:08 GMT

an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:


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

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

>         Come unto me, Norman, and the Torch of Truth will set you
>      free...

>         1985 - I'm working for Savin.  I'm flying to Dallas constantly,
>                doing about 40% of our training classes, with FIVE other
>                people available to go.  But *I* "always did well".   

>                Made the branch look good.  So I'm missing my evening classes,
>                sometimes one, sometimes two weeks, and my sundays.

>                Without compensation.

>                One day they give me tickets.  I'm supposed to miss the
>                FIRST two weeks of night class.  I said  " no more, 
>                send someone else "  I end up going, but with the promise
>                of no more travelling during my semesters.

>                FOUR weeks later, I have plane tickets on my desk.

>                I went out that day, found another job at 2/3 my salary,
>                went back and QUIT.

>    " Oh, no, wait, wait, we can work something out.
>      How about a raise?   10%?  Plus, no more trips to 
>      Dallas!  "

>        THAT, Norman, is YOU.  Reprehensible bullshit.  

>        " Well, we tried to dick you, sorry, lets start over "

>                 THAT, Norman, is AMERICA now.

>                 *I* voted for "fair, shared sacrifice"

>                 *I* voted for reality.

>                 *MY* conscience is clear.

>      You, and the rest of America, can prepare to flame on, with my 
>      blessing.

>e hhh
>hxxxxxxsehlhhkawlays shll the tn


Broward, you need psychotherapy. I wish you would stop occupying bandwidth
with such useless drivel.

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

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.legal,alt.politics.usa.constitution