HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Subject: Re: Fair Swap
Followup-To: talk.politics.mideast
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:44:04 GMT

Follow-ups on this article are directed to talk.politics.mideast, where
this discussion belongs.

In article <EGGERTJ.92Sep4121946@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu> eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu writes:
>In article <1992Sep3.210032.29898@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) writes:
>>   The comparison between Kuwait and E. Jerusalem is inapplicable.  Kuwait
>>   was gained in a war of conquest, E. Jerusalem in a war of defense only.
>>   Further, let's remember the writings of both Lord Ambassador Caradon and
>>   Ambassador Goldberg (GB and US respectively), who have written that
>>   border changes are quite legal under 242, and Goldberg has in fact
>>   written that 242 was never meant to apply to Jerusalem.  What we're
>>   seeing is that Muhanna only admits as facts those interpretations which
>>   happen to agree with his view of the world.  Quite illuminating really.
>
>Of course the public opinions of two ambassadors do not carry the
>weight of international law that UNSC resolutions do.  If the UNSC
>doesn't want their resolution to apply to Jerusalem, then they'd
>better write it as such.  Until then, it sure does apply to Jerusalem,
>despite public posturing by some individuals.

Until doing so, the fact is, it remains unclear.  While two ambassadors'
opinions certainly don't carry the same weight as a resolution does,
they *do* serve as a primary indication of legislative intent if they
are the framers of that resolution - as Caradon and Goldberg are.

>>...
>>   Fact:  to call Jerusalem "Arab territory" ignores history. Let us
>>   remember that between 1948 and 1967 it was occupied by Jordan, shall we,
>>   and that no Jew was permitted to approach the holiest sites to Judaism.
>>   Let us also remember that those portions referred to as "Arab territory"
>>   were in fact *majority Jewish* before 1948 and were in fact gained in a
>>   war of conquest by Jordan.  If the UN is such an honest broker, where
>>   was the UN outcry then?  ...
>
>Careful with this argument!  Pursued to its logical conclusion, it
>would mandate that all pre-1948 majority Arab lands be taken from
>Israel.  I don't think that you want that.

No, in fact I was trying (in part) to show just how ridiculous the "Arab
land" approach was.  I don't want for all pre-1948 majority Arab lands
to be taken from Israel, because it would invalidate the idea that two
communities - Jewish and Arab - can live in a Jewish state, a goal which
Israel has been pursuing since its inception.


-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman 				 <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy
From: gary@isis.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand)
Subject: Re: Kulturkampf
Organization: Climate and Global Dynamics Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 05:47:03 GMT

gf> Gordon Fitch

gf> I find it fascinating that the libertarian mob here will strain at the NEA
gf> and swallow Buchanan.

gf> Libertarian, indeed.

  These comments are below you. Buchanan is an idiot. But, he does occassional-
  ly say things I agree with. As does Ted Kennedy. Do I get called a "liberal"
  now? I doubt it.

  Why is it that people cannot understand that agreement with person Y on
  issue X does not mean agreement with person Y on *all* issues? Geezus.

--
Gary Strand                      Opinions stated herein are mine alone and are
strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu            not representative of NCAR, UCAR, or the NSF
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson)
Subject: Re: Why I cannot vote Democratic
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY
	<NELSON.92Aug25232203@sun.clarkson.edu>
	<athos-260892100243@athos.apple.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 05:06:36 GMT

In article <athos-260892100243@athos.apple.com> athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:

   In article <NELSON.92Aug25232203@sun.clarkson.edu>,
   nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) wrote:
   > 
   > In article <1992Aug25.191613.23545@fid.morgan.com> joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins) writes:
   > 
   >    And then there is Mario Cuomo, Governor of NY.
   >    In general I simply have a hard time trusting members of the
   >    democratic party - they are too quick to raise taxes and 'help
   >    me' with new programs.
   > 
   > Get a clue -- Cuomo cut taxes in NY.  The only complaint that you
   > might have about him is that he didn't cut them as fast as he
   > said he would.

   Russ, Russ, Russ,

Sorry, Rick, you're no John Hockenberry.

   I am from New York State myself.  Cuomo is an economic nightmare and an
   idiot.  I can't believe he won lo' those many years ago...

I stated a fact, that Cuomo cut taxes in NY.  You didn't dispute that fact,
but instead offered a contentless opinion.  How am I to disagree with you
except by offering my own opinion?  Shit, *everyone* has an opinion.

--
--russ <nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> I'm proud to be a humble Quaker.
Peace is not the absence of war.  Peace is the presence of a system for
resolving conflicts before war becomes necessary.  War never creates peace.
From: 76330.3412@CompuServe.COM ("John M. Sulak")
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Marrou was on the 17185 according to UPI
Date: 29 Aug 92 19:44:29 GMT

daybook-27 UPI Western US
daybook-27
 Thursday, Aug. 27 


   12:50 p.m. -- Los Angeles -- Libertarian Party presidential candidate 
   Andre Marrou arrives for campaign appearances. LAX, Delta Flight 17185. 
   Contact: John Vernon 818-780-9943. 

 
 



Distribution:
  talk-politics-misc internet:talk-politics-misc@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
  Libernet internet:libernet@dartmouth.edu

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines
From: eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Taxing capital gains (was: why progressive tax rates)
Date: 31 Aug 92 21:15:02 GMT
Organization: Superseding Information, Inc.

In <1992Aug31.175506.9395@lsa.umich.edu>, jwh@citi.umich.edu sez:
>
>The problem with your analysis is that you are comparing apples and
>oranges.  You are comparing an investment which has gains realized
>each year (interest payments, in this case) to an investment in
>which the gain is realized at the end of a period of time.  

It's not a problem -- it's a basic difference that underlies the
argument (which I dispute) that cap. gains are unfairly penalized
because of inflation over an n-year holding period.  CG-indexation
advocates claim that they suffer unfair adverse consequences because
of inflation, allegedly unlike annual interest recipients.  As my
figures demonstrate, this is hogwash.


>  The biggest difference
>between capital investment and interest bearing investments is
>the degree of risk.  One argument for a favorable rate on capital
>gains is that it will encourage investment in capital.  Capital
>is needed for economic growth but it is also a riskier investment.
>Encouraging capital investment via a lower tax rate may be a smart
>thing to do. 

It may well be.  The question I originally posed -- which I keep
having to restate for some reason -- is "*Policy arguments aside*, why
should cap. gains be specially indexed for inflation?"  This is a
question that calls for a mathematical answer, not more policy
arguments (which may indeed have independent merit).


>I have heard *no* compelling argument as to why
>gains should not be indexed for inflation.

Similarly, I hear only policy arguments in favor of special CG
indexation.  BTW, if you could have indexation, would you insist on
the double benefit of retaining annual bracket indexation as well?
-- 
      I am George Bush, miwwionaire.  I own a mansion and a yacht.

	Mark Eckenwiler    eck@panix.com    ...!cmcl2!panix!eck
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42415 alt.activism:15560 misc.headlines:6024
From: mpolen@suntory.mips.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines
Subject: Re: Slick Willie and the Rapists
Date: 27 Aug 1992 22:31:06 GMT
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mips.com (Michael Polen)
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mips.com

Michael P. Deignan) writes:
|> Someone wrote:
|> 
|> >GHWB
|> >was expected to slam Slick Willie by bringing up a bunch of rapists
|> >whose life sentences he commuted.
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:
|> 
|> >Sure, it's another example of the kinder, gentler nation that 
|> >George "pro-LIFE" Bush has in mind.
|> 
|> 
|> So, you feel that the governing actions of an individual should not be
|> an issue discussed during a political campaign?

Of course not.  But if you move the stage to an arena, you need to
expect to have to fight in that arena.  So if the Republicans comment
on Clinton's fidelity/infidelity, then it is a reasonable question
to ask Bush if he ever had an affair.  He, of course, refused to
ask that question saying it was irresponsible journalism.

If you accuse clinton of 158 (or whatever) tax raises, you need to be
prepared when a conservative newspaper like the Wall Street Journal
says that the number is bull shit, and that, using the same counting
method, there were more Federal increases under 4 years of Bush than
under 12 years of Clinton.

If you accuse Hillary Clinton of supporting the rights of children to
sue their parents rather than take out the trash, you deserve to be
called a liar, an incompetent, and an asshole.

What we are talking about here is setting the tone of the campaign.  
GWHB is setting it pretty low.
|> 
|> Or, only the records of those you support shouldn't be discussed, as
|> that would be "negative campaigning"?
_________________________________________
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my
dog's, never my employers.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43557 alt.politics.elections:12332 alt.politics.clinton:3939 alt.politics.marrou:1013 alt.politics.bush:3970
From: tag@hermes.ecn.purdue.edu (Tony A. Gibbens)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Why I cannot vote Democratic
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:38:50 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <Btwqx9.J36@well.sf.ca.us> rab@well.sf.ca.us (Bob Bickford) writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.143612.18977@Princeton.EDU>,
> pswanson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Paul Swanson) writes:
>
>   [quoted comments about Gov. Florio ommitted --- voter disgust, etc.]
>
>>>
>In short, you need to support the Libertarian Party and their candidates.
>
>--
>  Robert Bickford        /-------------------------------------\
>  rab@well.sf.ca.us      | Don't Blame Me: I Voted Libertarian |
>                         \-------------------------------------/

Isn't the Libertarian's canidate the one who couldn't be troubled to serve
his full term in an elected office in Alaska?  

tag@ecn.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,soc.singles,alt.sex
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: How Does this work out?????
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:53:03 GMT

eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
] mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:
] !Martin Guerrero-LabA) writes:
] !|> >>It takes two to tango.
] !
] !1	The only purpose of sex is reproduction.
] Well, if nature (since I guess I can't say God or Allah or
] whatever) had a purpose in sex, that's generally what it is.


Could YOU PLEASE explain this to my Problem Older Woman....

Neither One of Us can engage in proCreation, and
yet she Still Suffers from HeteroSexuality....

] Sex itself is a gift that is shared between two people that love each
] other, according to my pastor.

Oh Dear....

Is that why she still wants to Engage in HeteroSexuality
even though we are in a NonGestationallyViableLifeStyle.

Or is the above to be considered a refutation of your
original point... 


ciao
drieux



-- 
I Do Not Believe in .sig files
as they are such a Known Waste Of BandWidth,
And Therefore Not a Morally UpRight Choice.
But I Can See the HideousHienousHandOfHeteroSexualityBehindItAll.
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,soc.motss,ba.motss
Subject: Re: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:50:49 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <1992Sep4.040226.23999@spdcc.com> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
    >What's your phone number again? I couldn't make it out
    >scrawled on the bathroom wall.

Tsk tsk tsk. Looking for a date AGAIN!?!?!

Really -- flinging mud on the net is one thing, but don't be such an asshole.

Whether it is Clayton or Melinda, we all should cold shoulder any asshole
(if we know of 'em) that does obscene phone calls. And we all should make it
clear that it is disapproved of, even if the calls are directed to someone
we disagree with.


-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42274 alt.politics.elections:11720 alt.politics.clinton:3211 alt.politics.bush:3148
From: tag@hermes.ecn.purdue.edu (Tony A. Gibbens)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: What kind of change do we want? (was Re: Better Off ..)
Date: 27 Aug 92 15:25:54 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Aug26.172619.8240@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.235417.6163@oracle.us.oracle.com>, kwee@oracle.uucp (Karl Wee) writes:
>> 
>> In article <1992Aug20.222440.27721@pony.Ingres.COM> reb@Ingres.COM (Phydeaux) writes:
>> >If Bush thinks it's  time for a   change  then WHY  should  we reelect
>> >*him*? Let's vote for a *real* change and throw the fucker out!
>> 
>> I'm remembering the movie "The Fly": since the guy can't get the machine to
>> work, he is so frustrated toward the end that he just randomly programms it
>> and makes arbitrary changes, and it gets worse every time.  In the end he ends
>> up looking so grotesque that the director tastefully decides not to show his
>> whole figure.
>> 
>> Good things never happen by accident.  They're always the result of knowing
>> exactly what you're doing.  Clinton tries to capitalize on the voters' anger
>> which makes them want change for the sake of it, and I believe what we have
>> now will look real good in 4 years if Clinton gets elected.  Just inflation
>> and high tax alone will make you real nostalgic....
>> 
>> 
>
>Note:
>
>This arguement has no verifiable facts, just speculation. It is
>typical of the Republican lies, fabrications, and distortions perpetrated
>to make people forget how Bush ignored their problems for 3 1/2 years.
>
>Dr. Norman J. LaFave

In addition, he isn't remembering the movie "The Fly" correctly either.

tag@ecn.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Slick Willie and the Rapists
Organization: The Rhode Island Internet Systems Cooperative Network
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:54:51 GMT

mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
         ^^^^
First, you might want to fix your news software.


>GHWB is generally used to imply that Bush is too rich and Waspish.
>Apparently people with too many names are automatically no good in
>some people's eyes.  I intended no such implication.

Using "Bush", or "George Bush" could also be construed as demeaning in an
attempt to be insulting.


>It wasn't significantly.  So what?  Does that mean I can parapharase
>what you wrote and pass it off as your words?

I hardly think that GHWB instead of GB or Bush is "paraphrasing". In fact,
"a rewording of the meaning expressed in something spoken or written"
is the definition I have.

Methinks you protest too much. Perhaps because you're losing your
argument and have nothing else to back up your point, thus you have to
resort to petty little nitpicks. Next you'll complain because I chopped
off a period, no doubt.

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /  parents never had it, chances 
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won't either...
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell)
Subject: Re: Slick Willie and the Rapists
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:44:43 GMT

mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>In article <1992Aug27.221613.19103@anomaly.sbs.risc.net> kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
>>Someone wrote:

>>>GHWB
>>>was expected to slam Slick Willie by bringing up a bunch of rapists
>>>whose life sentences he commuted.

>Well, Mike, that someone was me and that isn't what I wrote.  Either you
>or this Bri person changed my post and I don't appreciate that.  I
>called the president George Bush, not GHWB, and if people want to
>paraphrase what I said they can damned well put it in brackets 
>or otherwise indicate that it is not exactly what I said.

>Bri, do you hear that too?

For the 8,234,782 time, I misread the original post. The original post
did say "life sentences", I just misread it. It was my fault. How many
times do I have to say it?

---"That Bri person"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: shore@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Melinda Shore)
Subject: Re: The Claytoon on the Couch (was Re: Stereotyping)
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 13:29:26 GMT

In article <11968@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>My wife tells me that when women she meets find out that she
>gets to stay home and raise her own kids, most get green with
>envy.

Yes - most women want more choices, not fewer.  Not that
long ago women with children really had limited career
options, now, after 12 years of ReaganBush, women who
prefer to be full-time mothers don't have that option.
Their families can't afford to make ends meet unless both
parents work I might also note that after 12 years of
ReaganBush men don't have the option of being full-time
fathers, either.

Whatta maroon.
-- 
"I would promptly inform any homosexual who would dare to proposition
me that my preference is fisting."  -- Theodore A. Kaldis

       Melinda Shore - Cornell Theory Center - shore@tc.cornell.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:41899 ca.politics:7053 ba.politics:4780
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: A Retraction
Date: 25 Aug 92 20:57:13 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <Aug.19.22.59.31.1992.20449@joes.garage.com>, shibumi@joes.garage.com (Kenton A. Hoover) writes:
> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# ## Did you watch the Gay Pride parade in San Francisco?  The NAMBLA marchers
# ## were booed and subjected to thrown trash all along the parade route.
# 
# I was at 2nd and Market (behind the Hambrecht & Quist building (1 Bush Street)
# ) and NAMBLA punted the parade before they had made it that far.  Lost my
# chance to spit on them, I guess.
# 
# #It's a start.  But I understand that a lot of signs were carried
# #as well decrying "yellow journalism" against NAMBLA.  It sounds
# #like the community is still quite divided about child molestation.
# 
# No signs seen, and the whole parade route (from where I was to Civic 
# Center) was pasted with anti-NAMBLA stickers.  Must be a press thing --
# one sign seen and therefore its a trend.
# 
# | Kenton A. Hoover                                                            |

Press?  Well, no, I saw that mentioned in soc.motss.  Perhaps the
gay community is libelling itself now on purpose. :-)
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis )
Subject: Re: Macedonia: History and Reality
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:56:10 GMT

cromar@math.rutgers.edu (Scott Cromar) writes:

>About all the quibbling over names:  Who the hell cares!?!

>What next?  Are the Russians going to threaten to launch nukes at
>Moscow, Idaho unless they agree to change their name?

>What I see is a politically influential group in the US using their
>power to persuade the administration to not recognize a country.  This
>action leaves Serbia with a green light to invade this new country,
>whatever it is named.  If this stupid confrontation about a name
>persists, we are going to see a human tragedy of immense proportions
>brought on because of a quarrel over a name.


 You must have missed the story that Serbia is going to recognize Macedonia;
 Macedonia, on the other hand, is going to brake the embargo ...

 Also, take a look on Mr. Shopov's article.  If you don't care about what he
 writes, then I should inform you that I do; these people are my neighbors,
 not yours.

>--Scott


-- 
---> Panos Tamamidis
     University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From: ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Subject: Re: why progressive tax rates (was Re: Clinton's
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 17:28:11 GMT

In article <IeaMhoy00h5yQtNrlX@andrew.cmu.edu> conradp+@CMU.EDU (Conrad Poelman) writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.alt.politics.elections: 20-Aug-92 Re: why
>progressive tax rat.. Caroline E. Bryan@dbrus. (1971)
>
>> The paper (Sacramento Bee) reported that the 1990 US Census reported that the
>> average wage in the USA had declined since the 1980.  This average wage is
>> in real numbers, not adjusted for COL, inflation, taxes, military in/exclu-
>> sion, or any other voodoo.  That means that regardless of the numbers of 
>> people who lost jobs, or who found them, or who used to work part-time and
>> now works full-time, or vice-versa, THE AVERAGE WAGE HAS DROPPED during the
>> Reagan-Bush era.
>
>What do you mean by "real numbers"?  As opposed to complex numbers or
>integers, perhaps?

What I mean by "real numbers" is

>> in real numbers, not adjusted for COL, inflation, taxes, military in/exclu-
>> sion, or any other voodoo.  That means that regardless of the numbers of 

If you read for content, all KINDS of interesting things will pop up in front
of your nose!


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244   ------------------------------+
|   "When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then there will be   |
|   peace."					-- Anon.		      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc