HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton's Economic Plan
Date: 31 Aug 92 13:35:12 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <qucBr*oV0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>Only if he is willing to hold the entire budget hostage.  Remember, it is all or
>nothing with the veto.  Do you really want the President and Congress to play
>"chicken" with the entire government?  (well, maybe...)

This is exactly what Gov. Pete Wilson is doing right now in California.
Except that California continues to spend money it REALLY doesn't have
by issuing IOU's ...
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Privacy    (was Re: what the hell is HR 4983
Date: 28 Aug 92 22:13:06 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <1684FB6A5.TROTH@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU> TROTH@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Rick Troth) writes:
>From: TROTH@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Rick Troth)
>Subject: Re: Privacy    (was Re: what the hell is HR 4983
>Date: 26 Aug 92 17:59:03 GMT

>In article <RTIIBX2@taronga.com>
>kossack@taronga.com (Jordan M. Kossack) writes:
> 
>>                                        (Speaking of ennumerated
>>   rights, if flag burning is protected by the First Amendment, how
>>   can nudity be illegal?)
> 
>        Excellent point, my friend.

Perhaps you can be nude, but not wrap yourself in a burning flag?
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - D Adams
  - Patrick Taylor
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    alternately, exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org
From: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-a
Date: 1 Sep 92 13:01:00 GMT
Reply-To: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks)
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525




JP> produce what you claim.  You really ought to read the Bible.  Then you
JP> would know
JP> what it really says.  (By the way, the KJV is still the best English
JP> translation.)

        As a Biblical scholar, your statement here makes me choke!
        To begin with, the KJV is not even a translation...it is a
revision of a version of a translation from German of some rather
questionable manuscripts. There are several places where the
translaitons from the original Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek are simply wrong.
(ie. "not"'s inserted where the original has none.) Secondly, the
English is uses is very imprecise, and certainly no longer in common
usage. There are much better English Translations available,
including the RSV, NAS, and NIV. IMHO ther NAS is the best available
English translation since my translation from the Greek NT mirrors it
in most cases. I'm sure other scholars have differing opinions. I and
most other biblical scholars would rate the KJV as among the worst
English versions of the Bible with regards to accuracy and
inteligibilty. (Also among the worst are the NKJV and "The Living
Bible".)

        David Brooks

 * Q-Blue v0.7 [NR] *                                                                                                                  
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
From: paco@cs.rice.edu (Paul Havlak)
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston Defending Choice C
Reply-To: Paul Havlak <paco@cs.rice.edu>
Organization: Center for Research on Parallel Computations
	<Rs93PB1w165w@keys.lonestar.org>
Distribution: tx
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:25:56 GMT

In article <Rs93PB1w165w@keys.lonestar.org> cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller) writes:
>JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Joseph L. Lockett) writes:
>> In article <ggkXPB5w165w@keys.lonestar.org>
>> cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller) writes:
>>  
>> >Go review the guiding philosophy of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned
>> >Parenthood.  One of the fundamental reasons she founded the organization was
>> >because she hated the poor (and the minorities) who kept having children.
>> >...
>> Yeah, and George Washington and Thomas Jefferson kept slaves. What's your
>> point?
>My point was that her philosophy still has had significant affect upon the
>direction of Planned Parent hood even to this day.  ...

The NYT Book Review of the recent Sanger biography did point out that
no organization founded by Sanger survives to this day.  While she did
found an organization (I forget the exact name), Planned Parenthood
was founded by others -- and now I'm out on a limb -- probably because
of disgreement over Sanger's pandering to eugenicists.

I don't know any eugenicists in the modern birth control movement.
Most are interested in letting women *choose* how many children to
have, and making sure that these wanted children survive through
adequate pre- and perinatal care.

--paco
--
Paul Havlak			Dept. of Computer Science
Graduate Student		Rice University, Houston TX 77251-1892
PFC/ParaScope projects		(713) 527-8101 x2738 	paco@cs.rice.edu
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
From: dirk@spacsun.rice.edu (Dirk Valk)
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston Defending Choice C
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: tx
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:16:24 GMT

cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller) writes:
> JLOCK00@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Joseph L. Lockett) writes:
> > Yeah, and George Washington and Thomas Jefferson kept slaves. What's your
> > point?
> 
> My point was that her philosophy still has had significant affect upon the
> direction of Planned Parent hood even to this day.  

Excuse me, but how exactly does a 'philosophy of hate for the poor'
translate into a directed effort to provide cheap, available birth control,
gynecological services, and free HIV testing?  Not to mention sexual education.
Are you really suggesting that Planned Parenthood exists to carry out some
sort of economic genocide?  Get a grip.

-- 
: Dirk Valk             | In order for evil to triumph, it is sufficient 
: Rice University       | that good men do nothing.  
: dirk@spacsun.rice.edu |
: Space Physics & Astro.| 		DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston
Date: 1 Sep 92 02:28:59 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Aug31.163031.22154@technology.com> judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin) writes:
>   Wow, Jim.  And the Bible is not, NEVER has been, nor EVER WILL BE the
>   guiding law of this country.  However, if you want to live somewhere
>   that the religios dogma is their constitution, Saudi Arabia is one
>   suggestion, I believe the Koran = their constitution.  Maybe you could
>   start a new country of your own somewhere that uses the "Bible" as its
>   Constitution and everyone believes in it.  This country REJECTS that
>   idea.

Oh.  This myth again ...

   "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this
    great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by
    Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus
    Christ!"
			-- Patrick Henry

That is the same Patrick Henry, Patriot of Virginia, who stood before
the House of Burgesses and said "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!"

It is small wonder that Virginia has given birth to more presidents
than any other state in the Union.  God truly blesses any nation (or
state) that professes belief in God as plainly as did Patrick Henry,
George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson (to name only three prominent
Virginians ...)
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
From: root@netmail.austin.ibm.com (Chris Moller)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Tax suggestion
Date: 23 Aug 92 16:49:57 GMT
Reply-To: moller@netmail.austin.ibm.com
Distribution: tx
Organization: As little as I can get away with.

In article <1992Aug18.183140.5410@technology.com>, richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy) writes:
|>> I'd like to see this tax idea put into practice:
|>> 
|>> For the SS part of FICA (Medicare is another issue) do these things:
|>> 
|>> a) Do not penalize those who work to suppliment their social security.
|>> After all, they do pay taxes and perhaps have some health coverage from their
|>> jobs. Why should someone who makes $100K/year from investments not be
|>> penalized when someone who WORKS is?
|>> b) If you do earn more than say, $100K/year from investments or whatever
|>> and do not have any earned income, then no social security check at all.
|>> Why would you need it?
|>> c) Gradually phase in a FICA credit for those who put a certain amount
|>> into IRAs or other retirement plans. This would start a transition away
|>> from using the SS system to bailout the rest of teh federal deficit....
|>> d) Finally, institute a lower FICA tax (say 2%) on ALL income (not just the
|>> 1st $55K) that would provide benefits to those who are unable to work
|>> or never had a job where they could pay into IRAs or whatever.
|>> 
|>> 
|>> WHat do you all think?

How about the following:

  1.  Starting immediately, no one will be added to the Social Security
      system:  no SSAN, no SS withholding, no SS benefits.  You keep your
      own money to invest or burn as you see fit.  You also take respon-
      sibility for your own retirement.

  2.  People already paying into in the SS system can opt to stop having SS
      withheld and receive a lump-sum reimbursement, plus accrued  interest,
      of everything they've put into the system so far.  The SS system keeps
      the employer matching "contribution" for use as described below.  People
      taking this option forfeit all subsequent benefits, but as above, are
      free to invest/blow the reimbursement and the money no longer being
      withheld.

  3.  People currently receiving SS benefits can also opt to quit as in 2, but
      may opt to continue to receive benefits.  The SS system will pay these
      benefits out of the retained employer contributions.


The net result will be that, in thirty years or so, the gov't will be out of the
retirement insurance/welfare business, which it shouldn't have gotten into in
the first place.
  
-- 
IBM pays absolutely no attention to my	|   "Hell hath no fury like a
opinions, ergo the foregoing cannot	|   bureaucrat scorned."
possibly represent its position.	|     -- Milton Friedman

Christian H. L. Moller
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Pro-Choice
Date: 29 Aug 92 00:56:16 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <exuptr.438.715039207@exu.ericsson.se> exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se) writes:
>Wrongo.  If the baby doesn't get fed, mama goes to jail.  It is her ultimate
>responsibility, not the neighbors, etc...

You're speaking legally. I'm speaking biologically. There is no biological
requirement hat the baby's natural mother be the one to feed it after birth.
Biologically speaking, the requirement is transferable, and legal requirements
don't change that biological fact.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
 "Keep in mind that Amateur Radio As We Know It Today will cease to exist
            at midnight tonight." -- Dave Newkirk, WJ1Z
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: The blame game
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:29:35 GMT

In article <bVcBr*rV0@caleb.UUCP>, jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
> I'm telling you again.  The deficit is MUCH LOWER than it would have been
> if a Democrat had been President!
 
The only problem with that statement is that both Bush and Reagan
have run considerable higher deficits than the last Democratic president.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
From: troth@riceVM1.rice.edu (Rick Troth)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston Defending Choice Coalition needs you)
Date: 31 Aug 92 21:58:56 GMT
Organization: Rice University

In article <Btv6M0.6Hy@rice.edu>
evan@is.rice.edu (Evan R. Wetstone) writes:
 
>>        They need freedom of religion or else their beliefs become
>>harder to live-up-to.   (tho most of them would still try;  and have)
>
>  But the rest of American society needs freedom of religion too.
>Up to and including freedom *from* religion,   ...
 
        Right, right.   (I was trying to speak (write) tounge-in-cheek)
 
>>        They need those family values because private school is expensive.
>
>I wasn't referring to the public schools; I was talking about the claims
>that the only family with "value" was a family with both natural parents,
>never divorced.
 
        (again,  attempted TIC)
 
        I *do* think,  though,  that endorsing or supporting the  family-
with-both-natural-parents-never-divorced  is a good idea.   Sometimes
ya can't,  but it's worth shooting for.   (I guess that makes it,  by
definition,  an,  er uh,  "ideal")
 
>>>"Judeo-Christian heritage" in his acceptance speech,   ...
>>
>>        And I've heard that that phrase is offensive to many Jews.
>
>The phrase doesn't offend me.  After all, Christianity is just a radical
>offshoot of Judaism....:-)   (Better get on that flame-retardant suit now!)
 
        [sigh of relief]   That does make me feel better.
 
        You won't get any flames from me.   It  *is*  an offshoot of
Judaism.   Some would say,  the  "fulfillment of Judaism".    ;-)
 
>Perhaps I wasn't clear.  The religious right would have us back in those
>situations our ancestors fought to escape.  The only difference being that
>their religion would be the State sanctioned one, and they would not be
>the persecuted ones.
 
        Perhaps I don't understand  "the religious right".
(or you don't)   I made the mistake once of identifying myself
as a fundamentalist,  because I truly believe in  "fundamentals".
 
        Christianity must be accepted freely,  or it  *isn't*  faith.
I fear state sanctioned religion every bit as much as you do.   I do see
a  big  difference, though, in promoting  "our Judeo-Christian heritage"
and creating a state religion.
From: judy@technology.com (Judy McMillin)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Spend, Spend
Date: 31 Aug 92 16:09:24 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas


In article <rAEAr*wU0@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>> >  {much stuff omitted}

>> Regarding deficits and taxes -- try Marrou, the other presidential candiate on
>> your ballot.
>
>Isn't he the Socialist (Communist) candidate?  What is his advantage over Clinton -
>that he admits what he really is?
>
>
>                                                Jim Pritchett
>
Oh, come on, Jim!  First, Marrou is not the Socialist (communist)
candidate; he's a Libertarian, and they're as different as night and day!
Second, socialism and communism are not the same thing. 

	Judy


>
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Spend, Spend
Date: 29 Aug 92 06:43:07 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <1992Aug26.113152.62@turtle.fisher.com>, boyd@turtle.fisher.com writes:

> In article <4193PB2w165w@keys.lonestar.org>, cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller) writes:
> >
> > Got some other choice better than Bush (regarding deficits and taxes)?
> >
> Regarding deficits and taxes -- try Marrou, the other presidential candiate on
> your ballot.

Isn't he the Socialist (Communist) candidate?  What is his advantage over Clinton -
that he admits what he really is?


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
Xref: sparky tx.politics:4706 alt.politics.clinton:3683
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The blame game
Date: 1 Sep 92 02:41:49 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Aug31.220001.2595@pony.Ingres.COM> garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR) writes:
>"Socialist" media? This sounds like the communists are coming.
>When the election comes around, look at who your local newspaper
>supports. Look at who it supported in 88'. Time will prove you 
>wrong.

Newsweek or some other magazine did a report on which candidates
the media supports.  The conclusion was that while they support
both sides, they support the left about 4 to 1, measured in terms
of dollars.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
Xref: sparky tx.politics:4733 alt.politics.clinton:3809
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The blame game
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:11:37 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: usa
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <cornell.715375276@vivaldi> cornell@inoc.dl.nec.com (Cornell Kinderknecht) writes:
>jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>>He [Johnson] left Nixon with
>>a recession in 1968 - Carter did the same thing to Reagan.  By contrast,
>>Reagan and Bush ...
>
>And Bush is about to do it to the next pres...

No, the economy is currently growing at a 2 to 3% rate, and will continue
to expand over the next year or two no matter who is elected.

The '91 - '92 recession is a direct result of the tax increase of 1990 and
the growth of the 80's.  In '64, Johnson had taxes cut - unemployment fell,
the economy grew.  In '68, John had taxes raised.  This left Nixon with an
inflation nightmare, and screwed the economy up for the next several years
(Nixon would eventually lower taxes).

As for the 80's growth, we are much better off than we were in 1981, or
even 1984 or '85.  Sure, we have to PAY for all of that growth, but then,
this is the fourth or fifth up-down cycle this country has seen since the
end of the Great Depression.

This current down-turn was successfully predicted over 90 years ago.  There
will be another up-down cycle, followed by another, and another, and so on.
The best we can do is elect a president that will not "buy into" the
current crisis by going on a spending binge.  Bill Clinton wants to spend
$220B in the next four years.  The only problem with George Bush is that he
isn't Ronald Reagan.  What we need MOST at this time is a president that
isn't going to set us up for a serious roller-coaster ride in 10 years by
pumping Federal deficit dollars into the national economy.

That we will have economic expansion followed by economy contraction is a
foregone conclusion.  Spending tax dollars to prop up the economy, then
raising taxes to pay for that stimulus only ratchets up the strain on the
system.  Right now, we need tax CUTS.  We also need spending CUTS.  We
need less drag on the economy, not more.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard
From: jcj6@ace3.sps.mot.com (james berry)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Anti-Choice
Date: 28 Aug 92 14:24:03 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: APRDL, Motorola Inc., Austin Texas

>>Something to note: if Pro-Lifers are so worried about the sensation of pain 
>>that the fetus allegedly feels, why are they (Pro-Lifers) so adamant about
>>banning orally induced abortions (RU486 and Morning After)?  If the Pro-
>>Lifers truly stood by their stance that abortion is wrong because it is
>>torturous, and the other method of abortion (oral) is not torturous, why are
>>they trying so hard to keep RU486 out of this country?

>There are many reasons why pro-lifers are opposed to abortion, of which
>alpha's(*) pain is only one reason.  Even if abortion were totally
>painless, I'd still be against it for the same reason that I'd be
>against giving an infant an overdose of sleeping pills.

The simple reason many Anti-choicers are opposed to these is the same reason
they are opposed to all birthcontrol.  Once again the hierarchy of the 
Catholic Church is speaking.  Just as these people were able to get the Reagan
administration to halt funding to the UN for birth control in the third world 
they are now working in Mexico to end funding to that contries birth control
clinics.  In fact much, not all of course, of this debate should be redirected
to birth control in general. 

>JIDaryl Biberdorf                 |  Compaq Computer Corporation | standard
darylb@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com |  20555 SH 249  M/S 060701    | disclaimer
dlb5404@tamsun.tamu.edu         |  Houston, TX 77070           | applies



James L. Berry  jcj6@giedi.sps.not.com
From: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-a
Date: 2 Sep 92 12:02:00 GMT
Reply-To: david.brooks@cutting.hou.tx.us (David Brooks)
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525



JFH> Oh.  This myth again ...

JFH>   "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this
JFH>    great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by
JFH>    Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus
JFH>    Christ!"
JFH>                        -- Patrick Henry

JFH> That is the same Patrick Henry, Patriot of Virginia, who stood before
JFH> the House of Burgesses and said "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!"

JFH> It is small wonder that Virginia has given birth to more presidents
JFH> than any other state in the Union.  God truly blesses any nation (or
JFH> state) that professes belief in God as plainly as did Patrick Henry,
JFH> George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson (to name only three prominent
JFH> Virginians ...)

        Not to burst your bubble, but Jefferson was a Deist, not a
Christian...(source: his autobiography.)



JFH> John F. Haugh II

        David

 * Q-Blue v0.7 [NR] *