HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bobk@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Bob)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 11:46:16 GMT

Lee Story (lee@wang.com) writes:
| Let's take one other example---the dress code that EDS was famous for.
| This is indeed important in projecting a certain image to EDS's big
| corporate customers, and may have been an essential part of Perot's
| accumulation of billions of dollars; but what does it say about the
| man:  once again that he was more than willing to kowtow to bigwig
| prejudice, and to convention, and to think nothing of unnecessarily
| taking personal choices away as a condition of employment, all to make
| a buck.

John Locke (jxxl@cs.nps.navy.mil) writes:
| They never made this complaint about Eisenhower, and his organization
| had to have had a stricter dress code than EDS. I'll bet at EDS they
| at least let you pick your own ties.

  EDS has had a bad reputation among computer professionals for a
  long time.  In many ways, EDS is stricter than even the Eisenhower
  administration.  Jews have been fired for refusing to shave off 
  their beards.  In addition, I've heard of drug testing, lie-detector
  tests and vendettas againsts the careers of many former employees.

  Having said that, if the only other choices are a preppie wimp and
  a pathological liar, I might still vote for the beady-eyed little
  fascist.

  Except for the Texan tendancy toward exaggeration, he seems basically
  honest.  I like what he's saying about cleaning up government, cutting 
  the influence of special interests and lobbyists and getting ordinary
  people involved in the political process.  It might be productive to
  have him go to Washington and kick some rear-ends.

  However, the civil liberties issues are important concerns.  He is
  is going to have to address them squarely and assure that he will
  protect those rights.  I won't support him until he does.
  ==

  Bob

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18306 ca.politics:3498 ba.politics:2670 alt.politics.homosexuality:2173
From: djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Straight Child molesters?
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 16:29:39 PDT
Distribution: world
Organization: NMS&Systems Engineering

mike@butt-pad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor) writes:

> And for balance, I'd post a GIF of the woman I saw the other day in
> the supermarket slapping the shit out of a four or five year old which
> I presume was her offspring.  The kid was crying, and she kept
> slapping him, never figuring out that the slapping was making him
> cry more.  He didn't stop crying until she mentioned telling Daddy
> when they got home.
> 
> Of course, neither of those images would prove anything, but I'm sure
> that would not bother you.
> 

Sure it would bother me.. Some people are afraid to go in public
with me because I _DO_ care enough to speak up  in situations
like that.

Still does not help the case for quasi-men who need to use double
headed ding-dongs and tie their boobs down playing 'daddy'..  Or
helping the child to 'come out' by  introducing him/her to some
older horny pervert before he/she can even read.

-djk

--- Daniel J. Karnes / WA6NDT --------------------------------------
--- NMS&Systems Engineering ----------------------------------------
--- Djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM / ..CtEdge!Nitro!Djk ----------------------
-- 'innovative solutions for modern problems' ----------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: Perot speaks
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 06:16:36 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.192850.11149@kpc.com>,
emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:
>        My biggest complaint about the "PEROT SPEAKS" article, was that
>in a couple of pages, there were very few quotes, and only a couple of
>full sentances. It should have been titled "Evers Speaks of Perot".

Well, don't blame Evers for that.  It was just me trying to make a
bad play on the movie title "Garbo speaks".

/June
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18029 alt.politics.elections:859
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Monday, 13 Apr 1992 12:13:08 EDT
From: <SML108@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: more info on Perot: 1st article of 2
Distribution: usa
 <1992Apr13.053421.1234@midway.uchicago.edu> <rdippold.703150349@cancun>

In article <rdippold.703150349@cancun>, rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron
Dippold) says:
>
>thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
>>In article <82A602f5c8ss00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
>fierro@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com
>(Doug Fierro) writes:
>>>
>>>[Perot on] Deregulation of airlines:
>>>
>>>  "A sad situation brought on by people who don't understand business.  If
>>>and when I"m ever up here, I do understand business and we will not implode
>>>whole segments of an industry... The fact is we didn't get cheaper airplane
>>>tickets, we got more expensive airplane tickets."
>
>>I believe this is factually incorrect.  Does anyone have the exact figures?
>
>According to the Brookings Institution, it's $15 billion dollars a
>year saved.  I certainly know it costs me less.  And with American's
>latest round of cuts and others following suit it's going to be even more.
>We've also got more flights, up 40% or over for most cities according
>to Domestic Affairs.  I wish I could give the out the citation for
>that BI paper, but I don't have it here.

Well, I'm sure that money has been saved, but one questions how it has been
saved.  All following figures & quotes are from America: What Went Wrong?
by Barlett and Steele.  In 1978, before deregulation, the price of a round
trip ticket from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh was $86.  Today, it is $260.
A round trip ticket from NYC to Washington DC cost $38.  Today, it costs
$142.  If gasoline prices had risen at the same rate, a gallon of gas
would now cost $2.33.  This is savings?  In 1978, the top ten airlines
accounted for 88% of the air mileage flown in the United States.  Today,
they account for 94%.  This is healthy competition?  In 1990, the worst
financial year in American aviation history, airline losses mounted to
3.9 billion dollars.  Since deregulation, Trans-World, Pan-American,
Eastern, Midway, Continental, America West and Braniff airlines have
declared bankruptcy.  Braniff has done so 3 times now.  In 1978, the average
age for our airlines planes was 7.56 years.  Today, it is 13.5 years.
In comparison, the average age of European and Asian planes is 10.4
and 8.7 years respectively.  I guess we know where the savings is
coming from after all.  Samuel Skinner declared in 1991 "Airline
deregulation...ushered in a decade of competition and consumer savings
unsurpassed in the history of the industry.  With deregulation having
accomplished so much throughout the 1980s, we must stay the course in the
coming decade as the industry continues to restructure.  Every credible
analysis of airline competition in the 1980s has declared deregulation
a success."

Scott

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18160 alt.politics.elections:901
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Airline deregulation (was Re: more info on Perot)
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:50:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: cancun.rdippold.703201814
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

dma@lacewing.unx.sas.com (Dawn Amos) writes:
>Seems to me I was paying $380-420 for cross country trips in
>1978 and that's what it costs now ($340 at slow times).  For

>the industry.  We had a handful of big companies "controlling"
>prices in the 70's, and we have a handful now whose price "wars"
>aren't very aggressive any more.  What's the difference?

Well, if you're paying the same price for a ticket as you payed in
1978 that's doing very well considering the inflation over that
period.  (Over 50%?)  Too bad government hasn't kept the same record.
-- 
If little green men land in your back yard, hide any little green
women you've got in the house.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,alt.politics.homosexuality,soc.motss
From: oliver@gayley.math.ucla.edu (Mike Oliver)
Subject: Re: Straight Child molesters?
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 22:35:40 GMT

djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM writes:
> They sure are not the product of a (read my lips) NORMAL
> relationship. What do you call them? 'turkey basters'..
 
For whatever it may be worth, and with utterly no documentation,
I conjecture boldly that the *overwhelming* majority of homosexual
parents conceived their children through heterosexual intercourse,
in most cases within marriage.

>> [Someone writes]
>> Heterosexuals invented artificial insemination.

>Sure did.. So normal couples with dysfunctional reproductive
>systems could bear children.. Not so that un-natural sexual
>practices could be 'legitimized' by faking a process that is
>impossible under NORMAL circumstances.

Out of curiosity, do you think that it is impossible for a homosexual
man to have sex with a woman?  That would be a truly remarkable belief,
but if you held it it would seem to make it more difficult to make
a moral case against homosexual activity.  Not impossible, you
could say that these unfortunates are just condemned to do without,
but surely more difficult.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Oliver 
UUCP:...!{ucbvax,{hao!cepu}}!ucla-cs!math.ucla.edu!oliver
ARPA: oliver@math.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.drugs,misc.legal
From: mvp@hsv3.uucp (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: 60 Minutes piece on the Forfeiture Law
Organization: Video 7 + G2 = Headland Technology
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 22:05:32 GMT

In article <_jqj3=n.feustel@netcom.com> feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel) writes:
>Civil Forfeiture has already been ruled constitutional. That's why I
>call for another constitutional amendment that abolishes civil
>forfeiture permanenently.

But what possible good would that do?  If a Supreme Court is willing to
rule that the Constitution doesn't say what it quite clearly and
unambiguously says, then what makes you think that your ammendement
will be immune to the same treatment?

Here's to a re-hearing of that case before a more literalist court! 
-- 
Mike Van Pelt          | It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming
Headland Technology    | mob pounding on a greasy spot on the pavement,
mvp@hsv3.lsil.com      | where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.
...ames!vsi1!hsv3!mvp 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17665 alt.politics.elections:697 misc.taxes:2194 alt.society.civil-liberty:3354
From: brady@castor.cs.uga.edu (Mike Brady)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,misc.taxes,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: What keeps me from being Lib. (was Re: FW: news release: abolish IRS)
Date: 10 Apr 92 04:20:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Apr9.201827.3723@cs.ucla.edu> frazier@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Frazier) writes:
>
>Please, get off your high horse.  Libertarian is just another
>political party - the question is whether one finds the
>platform more or less attractive.

Gosh, I hope that the Libertarian Party is not just *another* political
party.  If that were the case, then I would not be a card carrying member
today.  If the Ls are like the Rs and Ds, then we are destined to ride down
the path of chaos and irrationality that they do.  

The party does have a statement of principles which have been virtually
unchanged since 1972.  See page 18 in the fifth editon of "Libertarianism
in One Lesson." 

Barry Goldwater wrote a book in the 60s call "The Conscience of a 
Conservative."  He realized that the Republican Party had no set of
principles and that many of is R colleagues were starting to sound like
the Democrats on the other side of the room.  His book focused on 
issues.  His stances on many of these issues did respect individual rights,
but the rights of the individual were not used as the foundation on
which policy was built.  Today, neither the Republicans nor Barry Goldwater
sound like the book that he wrote.

The Libertarian priciples are based upon natural rights.  In speaking of
the history and formation of the Libertarian party, David Bergland first
describes natural rights.  In "Restoring the American Dream", Robert
Ringer starts off his explanation of libertarianism by first describing
natural law at the beginning of the very first chapter.  The LP is the
application of libertarianism in politics.  

Although I call myself an Objectivist, I don't quite agree with Pope Leonard
that Libertarianism has no foundation.   The foundation is clear
in any l/Libertarian literature you read and is heard at any LP convention
you attend.  The people who call themselves Libertarians who don't subscribe
to natural rights tend to be the ones who hop back to the Republican or
Democratic parties when the going gets tough or when the get discouraged.
If we cannot win elections w/o sacrificing our principles, then I don't care
to win. I don't just want the word Libertarian in office.  I want 
the ideals in office.


Mike Brady - brady@castor.cs.uga.edu
From: dfpedro@nv2.uswnvg.com (Donn F. Pedro)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality in Alabama
Keywords: A Sensible Approach
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:43:04 GMT
Organization: US West NewVector, Bellevue, WA

In article <ow55HB5w164w@Nitro.CtEdge.COM> djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM writes:
:kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes:
:
:> university.  There was a petition circulated in support of the school
:> which gathered over ten thousand signatures.  The homosexual group, on
:> the other hand, has gone to court.  Let's hope that the judges who
:> will hear the case will be perceptive enough to see the wisdom of the
:> school's policy.
:> -- 
:
:Seems the folks in Alabama are not quite as intimidated by the
:old-time pork barrel politics that those groups employ. 

Seems like some folks in Alabama aren't quite as intimidated by
the good 'ol boy bigot network.

:Bravo.

... for those who won't stand still for discrimination.




     Donn Pedro ...................{uunet, sequent, pn400}!uswnvg!dfpedro.
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: The Nation on Clinton
Date: 11 Apr 92 17:14:35 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Apr11.045745.8203@athena.mit.edu> hhuang@m4-035-15.MIT.EDU (Han-Young Huang) writes:
>
>4/13/92's The Nation, a pro-Democratic periodical

The Nation, though most certainly anti-Republican, is hardly a pro-Democrat
periodical.
-- 
Ted Frank          + "He wanted to be the car rather than the thimble or the
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  hat."  -- District attorney explaining Marc Cienkowski's
U o' C Law Skool   +  murder with bow and arrow of Michael Klucznik in
Chi, IL 60637      +  Doylestown Borough, PA over a game of Monopoly.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17648 ca.politics:3396 ba.politics:2624 alt.politics.homosexuality:1942
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Straight Child molesters?
From: mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor)
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 17:48:13 PDT
Organization: The Batchelor Pad

djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM writes:

> fierro@uts.amdahl.com (Doug Fierro) writes:
> 
> >   Well, according to that philosophy, religion is a crime against humanity;
> > it is 'inflicting' a lifestype upone someone who has no choice.
> > 
> >    Doug
> > -- 
> >                                                      Doug Fierro
> 
> 
> Kind of hard to equate the two subjects. There is a 
> difference.

Yeah, djk approves of one, but not the other.

The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.
The sun goes round the earth.

Say it enough and you might believe it.



[] ---
[] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US -- cerritos.edu!batpad!mike
[] Long Beach, California
[] TNG Quote: "You were travelling in close formation at over 80,000 kph, only
[] 10 meters from Cadet Albert, and you didn't even know his orientation?!?"
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17544 talk.politics.theory:1983 alt.politics.elections:645 talk.environment:1422 alt.news-media:190 soc.culture.usa:2862 soc.college:1840 alt.activism:7452
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 9 Apr 92 11:42:29 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

	Since it's clear that opponents of Justice Thomas will condemn him no
matter what his rulings are (see related posts where people condemn him for his
actual vote and his rumored vote the other way), he has little incentive to
care one way or the other, eh?

	Really, just stick to the facts and refer to him as unqualified.

:)

Brett
===============================================================================
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                            CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: The Character Issue in Bipartisan Perspective
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 22:49:47 GMT

In article <RV.92Apr7195936@cslab8a.cs.brown.edu> rv@cs.brown.edu (Rodrigo Vanegas) writes:
>In article <1992Apr4.223815.3029@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>
>>>  The Character Issue in Bipartisan Perspective
>>>
>>>  Bill Clinton:
>>>    If he lied to his wife, will he lie to the country?
>>>
>
>> The answer to this one is yes...Clinton lied to the voters in Florida
>> about Paul Tsongas, and he is lying this weekend to the voters in New
>> York about Jerry Brown.
>
>Why?  What did he say?
>

Clinton ran radio ads, I think, implying Brown was against a woman's
right to choose....in Florida, he tried to scare seniors and Jewish
Americans by lying about Tsongas, in NY, he tried to scare women
by lying about Brown.

Clinton is a liar!                          

Gerald
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17528 talk.environment:1421 alt.activism:7444
From: williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.environment,alt.activism
Subject: Ozone hole farce? (was Re: Ozone problem burns Politically Correct)
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:28:28 GMT
Reply-To: williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums)
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,talk.environment,alt.activism,rec.nude
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena


	This came across in rec.nude.  Anyone else heard of this?

Article 7624 of rec.nude:
From: galster@plains.NoDak.edu (Dwight Galster)
Newsgroups: rec.nude
Subject: Untraviolet
Summary: Ozone depletion, global warming, higher UV appears to be bogus.
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:39:24 GMT
Followup-To: rec.nude
Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo

Sometimes people ask questions about the potential harmful effects of UV
exposure while being out in the nude.  Someone always writes a sensible
response.  But apparently there's more to the story:

Recently I heard a news report stating that peer data (from other scientists
besides NASA, who publicized this in the first place) does not support the
conclusion that the ozone layer is being depleted.  The general idea is that
ozone is highly variable, that holes appear and disappear frequently, and that
the big hole recently publicized may have been the result of a volcano.  The
scientists say that overall, ozone had increased by 25% since the early
70's (my memory may not be exact here)
                                 AND.....
The level of UV reaching the earth's surface has actually decreased 
in recent years!

A group of 21 (number may not be exact) prominent scientists signed a
petition to the United Nations when they had their conference on global
warming which declared the whole thing a hoax and urged the UN to stop
this nonsense.

The reason NASA would promote inaccurate data?  Research money!  No one
will give you money for research if you say there's no problem!

The cost?  Trillions to consumers as we ban cfc's from refrigerators and
air conditioners and replace them with more expensive chemicals (whose
detrimental side effects have yet to be discovered).

And what of the cost to integrity?

Sorry if this seems inappropriate for rec.nude--it was because of the UV
that I thought you'd be interested.


--
***  Dances with Drums  ***
***    DoD #0492   Steed: Kawasaki '80 750LTD                             ***
:: If pro-choice means choice after conception, does this apply to men too? ::
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: goldman@atlantis.eid.anl.gov (Daniel A. Goldman)
Subject: Perot Info: Partial Contact List
Keywords: Perot president petition contacts
Reply-To: goldman@atlantis.eid.anl.gov
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 14:34:06 GMT

The following is a partial list of Perot petition drive contacts. The names and  
numbers are changing frequently, and the best bet is to call the 800 number (1  
800 685 7777) and check for the contact in your area.

-dan


Pennsylvania
Harold McClain
215 688 4351

Washington State
Larry McCallum
206 621 9860

California
in Irvine 714 280 7677 (ROSS)
in Los Angeles 818 784 7677

Maryland
in Annapolis 410 849 5650

Virginia
Pat Clauson in Arlington 
703 578 1366

Oregon
Whitney Matthews in Portland 
In place in next few days 

Iowa
Ed Goldman in Des Moines 
515 279 5611

Kansas
Jesse Hubbard in Kansas City
913 341 6807

Illinois
Ron Scoma in Park Ridge (near Chicago)
708 692 5245

New York
212 730 1202

New Jersey
609 896 0003


--
	Daniel A. Goldman
	goldman@atlantis.eid.anl.gov
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17610 alt.individualism:2365 alt.activism:7475
From: byron@archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: What keeps me from being Lib.
Date: 14 Apr 92 04:46:27 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: College of Architecture, Texas A&M University

In article <1992Apr13.193000.12970@unx.sas.com> sasafw@dobo.unx.sas.com (Fred Welden) writes:
>In article <rdippold.702939428@cancun>, rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:

>|I like it, except where the cards are kept legally stacked as to make
>|it impossible.  For example, there are often laws in place to make
>|sure that using an alternative to government supplied services is
>|illegal.  Those would have to be removed.

>Can you give some examples?

Well, off the top of my head: gambling, 1st class mail, apparently peddling
child pornography (cf. recent Supreme Court case). I'm sure there are
many more. You could broaden this category if you wanted with licensing
restrictions, it amounts to pretty much the same thing.

If you go to other "democratic" countries, you have things like radio &
TV and telecommunications being controlled as govt. monopolies (scary,
eh?), utilities, universities (no joke---in Greece for example it is
[or was, last time I checked] illegal to set up a private institution
of higher learning), etc.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc