HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Increase in millionaires
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 27 Aug 92 10:38:00 EST
 <1992Aug25.134223.28941@dscomsf.desy.de> <ART.92Aug26141414@world.std.com> <1992Aug26.195730.27559@news.columbia.edu>
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Aug26.195730.27559@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> In article <ART.92Aug26141414@world.std.com> art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug25.134223.28941@dscomsf.desy.de> hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
> 
>>   But Bush did not increase the median income (in real terms), he descreased it.
>>   He increased the mean income, this is not difficult, it's inevitable that a
>>   technologicaly advancing nation increases it's GNP. Bush simply ensured that all
>>   the jam went to the ultra rich.
>>
>>Wrong, plain wrong.  In 1981 the year Ronald Reagan assumed office the
>>median US income was a little under $27,000.  In 1990 the median US
>>income was slightly over $29,000.  In the case of the mean the figures
>>are: 1981, $31,000; 1990, $35,000.  Source:  Alan Reynolds, "Upstarts and
>>Downstarts".  National Review, Aug 31, 1992, pp25-31.
>>
>>Read it liberals if you dare, you won't like it.  Of course I don't
>>expect to let a little thing like the facts interfere with what the
>>liberals put out for public consumption.
> 
> I assume these are in constant dollars, or else your argument is in
> deep doodoo.
> 
> Er, how much of this is attributable to the Baby Boomers reaching
> their peak earning years?

	Why should it matter?  Are not "baby boomers" part of society?  Or are
we now keeping such stats as "greedy yuppies in the economy".

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com (Richard Wojcik,snake)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Was Clinton a Moral Draft Dodger? (was Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT)
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:43:26 GMT
Reply-To: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com
Organization: Research & Technology

In article 6672@craycos.com, jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies) writes:
>In article <1992Aug30.180554.17290@uunet!tellab5!odgate> mike@uunet!tellab5!odgate (Mike J. Kelly) writes:
>
>>(And before anyone comes back on Clinton's draft record, at least he has a
>>reason: he opposed the war.
>
>Would you care to elaborate on this?  If he was opposed to the war, then
>why did he join ROTC?

People who didn't live under the Selective Service Act (and even many who
did) often fail to understand the way it operated.  There were simply too
many men of draft age to take.  What you call "dodging the draft" was, in
fact, behaving in precisely the way the law wanted you to act (outside of
fleeing the country).  The government called it "channeling", and the idea
was to get people to enlist, go to school, become preachers (yes, there
was an exemption for religious activity), work in certain industries, sign
up for ROTC, etc.  The lottery system did not end draft exemptions, but it
was designed to redress some of the immorality of this blatant attempt by
the DoD to control the lives and destinies of so many civilians.  A few
people actually refused all exemptions and went to jail as a protest against
the system.  

    One draft counselling center, run by a certain John Perrera in
Columbus Ohio, was featured in the local paper.  "Perrera Runs School for
Draft Dodgers" screamed the headlines.  After a trip to court, and an
explanation of what a draft exemption was, the local paper was forced to
print a retraction in equally large banner script.  It turns out that
"dodging the draft" connoted something illegal, whereas Perrera was 
counseling people about their legal rights under the system.

    Bill Clinton sought to avoid the draft and stay in school through 
perfectly legal means.  He did nothing worse than what Quayle did with
his "quickstep" into the National Guard, except that the legality of 
the influence peddling which went on in Quayle's behalf is not at all
clear.  A bigger difference was that Clinton never hid his opposition
to the war, and he is honest about it now.  Quayle, who thought the war
was fine for other people, would not volunteer to fight it.  Instead, 
he hunkered down in the National Guard, which everyone recognized as a
haven for legal "draft dodgers" at the time.  In one case, you have a
man who avoided putting his life on the line for something he opposed.
In the other, you have a man who hid out in his safe haven and urged 
others to go do the dirty work.

-----
Disclaimer:  Opinions expressed above are not those of my employer.

    Rick Wojcik   (rwojcik@atc.boeing.com)   Seattle, WA
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 10:41:03 EDT
From: <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: The Morality of Minimal Requirements on Health Insurance Payments
 <1992Aug29.022909.9979@brownfield.glv.com>

In article <1992Aug29.022909.9979@brownfield.glv.com>, brownfield!jbrow (Jim
Brownfield) says:

>Maybe the fact that we have the *best* health care system in the world is
>because we *don't* have a national health care system.

"Best" in what sense?  Maybe if you consider having the most technology
(not necessarily putting it to its most efficient use), you can say
the U.S. has the "best" health care system.  In a recent issue of JAMA
Victor Fuchs considered five different definitions of "best".  We
certainly don't have the "best" health care system if you look at access
to care, nor control of costs within means, nor "best" as measured by
objective health outcomes.  Yes, if you use being able to get an MRI
tomorrow for an insured individual as your yardstick, we are probably
"the best".  If your yardstick is immunizing children, we're not even
close.

>If I hold a gun to your head and take all your money, I have a "more
>efficient"
>system of survival.  However, you are left with a "less efficient" system of
>survival.  How do you intend to pay for a national health care system?  Oh, I
>forgot, by taxing the rich (shhhhhhh -- you see, they don't have enough
>*votes*

No, by adjusting the current tax structure.  The current system subsidizes
the insurance purchase of high income people who work for large employers
through tax-deductibility.  In essence, it taxes those workers with low
wages who work in small businesses.  Switching the system to one based on
income taxes, rather than tax deductions, will result in approximately the
same amount of money, with the burden shifted from low income workers to
higher income persons.

>to keep us from taking it ;-| ).  People may think, somehow, that the "ends
>justifies the means," but this is a formula for tyranny.  And if they're going
>to steal things for satisfy their own personal morality, they may just regret
>the day when the producers quit building things to steal.




Dennis G. Shea, Penn State
<<DISCLAIMER>>
Ain't nobody's bizness but my own. I'll be happy to accept all
the credit for anything I've written.  It's funny, however, how
employers only acknowledge the profitable ideas.
From: exukjb@exu.ericsson.se (ken bell)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: rumor that Perot is back in race
Date: 29 Aug 92 22:02:13 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug24.141051.3719@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>Subject: Re: rumor that Perot is back in race
>From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
>Date: 24 Aug 92 14:10:51 EST

>In article <1992Aug22.174410.42506@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>> I have heard a rumor in the Kansas City area that Perot is back in the
>> race.  I am sure it is only a rumor, but has anyone else heard it
>> and/or know where it started?-- 

>        Perot is continuing to "campaign" behind the scenes.

>        This is either in preparation for a "possum play" next month or as the
>head of the world's largest PAC.

>Brett                                                      
>_______________________________________________________________________________
>Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
>Better, Cheaper, Faster                                        (Pick any two :)
>Disclaimer:                                                                NOT!

The rumon is that on Sept. 11 in the LA Convention Center Perot will 
formally re-announce his presidential candidacy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenny Bell                          *        Welcome to Mind Wars
Ericsson Network Systems, Inc       *        Abstract Arts BBS 386-7907
P.O. Box 833875                     *        Severity with oneself is heroism.
Richardson, TX 75083-3875           *        --A.G.Sertillanges (France, 1943)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43316 ca.politics:7376
From: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Picking and Choosing our References
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:42:29 GMT
Reply-To: gnn@wsl.dec.com (George Neville-Neil)
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab

In article <12014@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
|> I seldom see a posting in soc.motss that discusses a long-term
|> relationship based on love, romance, shared interests.  Instead, I 
|> see constant discussions of casual sex, the use of whips, complaints
|> about casual sex partners not being willing to use condoms, 
|> references to a partner as a "slam-puppet."
|> 

Hello Stupid,

	Obviously you have the reading comprehension of a snail.  Why you
bother to keep this crap up is beyond me.  Why I bother is a matter
of being tired of dealing with fascists like yourself.

	That said, if you had read ALL of soc.motss when I was still
posting there you would have seen my marriage announcement.  You would
have also seen the discussion of how my family sent wedding presents to
Richard (my slam puppet) and I after we had been DP'd in San Francisco.

	FYI the term "slam puppet" was coined by a heterosexual friend
when we visited him on vacation.  We thought it very funny, sorry I don't
call Richard "snuggle bunnies" or something sickening like that.  It's not
my style.

	Now, go douche with draino you single minded, lying, simple fuck.

	
-- 
To fathom hell, or soar angelic, take a pinch of psychedelic.
				Dr. Osmond
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines
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 16:48:47 GMT

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

In article <bdm.715608639@cs.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay) writes:
>perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Sep3.192057.29754@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wmuhanna@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Waleed A Muhanna) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug31.200824.9011@colorado.edu>, perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU 
>>>(Eric S. Perlman) asserts:
>>>>And E. Jerusalem is *not* occupied territory. 
>>>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>Really? Just because you say so?  For the umpteen time, point of fact is that 
>>>the UN and virtually the entire world, excluding the Israeli government and 
>>>Perlman (as usual, of course), believe otherwise.   Iraq too claimed that 
>>>"Kuwait was *not* occupied territory," but the world didn't seem to 
>>>agree with such assertion either.
>
>>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
>
>If Goldberg wrote that, he is an out-and-out liar.  As for Caradon,
>nothing I have seen of his writings could in a fit be regarded as
>sanctioning the annexation of Jerusalem.

I didn't say that Caradon did, if you check above.  I did say that
according to both Caradon and Goldberg, border changes are legal as part
of the final agreement under 242.  Now as far as what Goldberg said, I
think he's voicing an honest opinion, albeit one which much of the rest
of the Security Council didn't share.  And as one of the two framers of
the resolution, I don't think you can say he was "lying".

>>242 contains a sentence that reaffirms the inadmissibility of border
>>changes by force - but both Caradon and Goldberg have commented that
>>this refers directly to land gained by conquest not in self-defense.
>
>Given that Caradon himself sought to have the word "the" inserted
>before "territories", this is rather lame.

That was Caradon's original draft.  He agreed to Goldberg's changes, so it's
not lame at all.


-- 
"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.mideast,misc.headlines
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Eggert vs. Livni
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 12:09:44 GMT


In article <1992Sep3.013607.26708@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:

|>In article <1992Sep2.154729.9097@dscomsf.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
|>writes:

|># |>	The defeat of Likud has no effect.  Eventually, to protect Arabs
|># |>and Jews from Killing each other, Kach ideas will have to be enacted.
|># |>A Labor defeat would not have changed that.
|> 
|># Oh yes we forgot, Makowsky is a Khach supporter. The Israeli version of the
|>Klu
|># Klux Klan and a tenth as popular.
|>
|>	You obviously know nothing about Kach.  At any rate, if you want
|>to stop both sides from killing each other, you too will become a Kach
|>supporter.

If Kach policies were ever implemented in Israel there would be a million more
refugees in the world. And that would just be the jews who don't want to live in
a fascist state.


|># |>	You have no idea about what your are talking.  I suggest you find
|># |>out what a Hesder Yeshiva is.  At any rate, I live in the US where
|># |>there is no draft.
|> 
|># There is no Heseder Yeshiva only a Yeshivat Hahesder, I am instructed by my
|># sources to tell you that you are an ignorant git.
|>
|>	Ignorant heh?  Would you care to move this debate to hebrew?

Only if we can use the proper alphabet. I warn you though that after shalom ma
nishma, the only hebrew I know is: matay ata ose et haguibuy shel hadisk? I
don't see the relevance to "religious" exemptions from military service.

|># Sitting in a room reading the
|># Torah does not count as military service, nor is 9 months token service
|># comensurate with the 3 years that all other Israelis have to do.
|>
|>	You still have no idea about what  you are talking.  I suggest you
|>find out what a Yeshivat Hahesder is, and this time ask someone who
|>actually knows (i.e. has been there).

I am prepared to trust the word of an Israeli army officer over a "Zionist" who
lives in the wrong continent.


--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42305 alt.politics.elections:11729 alt.politics.clinton:3226 alt.politics.bush:3164
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Warily wary
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:05:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Sep3.152410.7979@amd.com>, jmw@angelo.amd.com (jmw) writes:
...
> J. M. Wincn                           jmw@angelo.amd.com (408) YUP-BEER 
>                Standard DISCLAIMER available on request. 
> Be wary of a man who would orchestrate a war simply to secure his hold 
> on a public office. 

	So we should be doubly wary of ol' Saddam, eh?

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: ursic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A good reason not to vote for Bush
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:18:09 EST

In article <1992Aug27.183801.16302@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>,
 c60a-zg@volga.Berkeley.EDU (Martin Guerrero-LabA) writes:
> In article <1992Aug27.163341.16290@nwnexus.WA.COM>
 jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle) writes:> 
>>Gee, you're still equating slavery with abortion?  Haven't you learned
>>that FORCED CHILDBIRTH EQUATES WITH SLAVERY.  And neither is right.
> 
> This assumes, of course, that the unborn is just a scum sucking parasite
> stuck in the mother's womb sucking the life out of the mohter, and therefore,
> we should have the right to terminate that parasite.
  ^^
Who is this "we", Martin?  Do you ever expect to find yourself pregnant?
Now if what you're trying to say is that women should have the right to bodily
autonomy, then I think most would agree, especially in the case you cite where
a parasite (human or not) is "sucking the life" out of her.  - J.J.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: speed, police, crime, hell
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:44:58 GMT

stieger@cco.caltech.edu (Ronald David Stieger) writes:
# (Danny Keren) writes:
#
#
##I think that the original reason for the speed limit was to save gasoline.
##If a car drives from point A to point B at a constant speed of 55 mph,
##it burns less gasoline than if it would go 85 mph. This is a result of
##the old F=0.5*m*v^2 rule, as well as certain properties of internal
##combustion engines.
#
#First of all, it's kinetic energy, KE=0.5*m*v^2, not force, 

Thanks for the correction. Its been a long time...

#but anyway,
#keep in mind that the energy the engine burns is not really a function of
#the car's speed, but the engine's, i.e., the RPMs.  Every cycle of the 
#engine burns a certain amount of gasoline which creates a certain amount of
#thermal energy.  I can floor the accelerator while still in park and use
#a lot of gas without going anywhere, or even just let it idle, and I'll
#still eventually runout of gas.  I think your point is correct, though,
#that 55 mph is more efficient that 85 mph, assuming the same gear ratio.

There is also the point of the resistance of the air to the car, this is
where the kinetic energy come in. That doesn't mean that going 0.5 mph
is the best way to save gasoline, though, because engine characteristics
also come into play. I remember reading that the optimal speed for most
cars is about 50-60 mph.

-Danny Keren.



Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: The Claytoon on the Couch (was Re: Stereotyping)
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:51:51 GMT


	After reading some of the Claytoon's arguments on how gay
people should ostracize NAMBLA, I'm surprised that he has not called
upon the Republican Party to ostracize:

	A Jew-baiter and Nazi sympathizer whose father raised him to
beat up other kids, who once punched out a cop, and who admires Joe
McCarthy. [Pat Buchanan]

	A lifelong mediocrity who supported the Vietnam War while
sitting it out in the National Guard, who has a gift for embarrassing
himself with repeated gaffes, and who considers himself
more-than-competent to criticize pop culture. [J. Danforth Quayle]

	A woman who went to law school yet who thinks that not being a
full-time housewife goes against a woman's most fundamental nature.
[Marilyn Quayle]

	And that's not the end of it, of course.

	I'm sure a similar list can be compiled for the Democrats.
From: lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM (Len Bucuvalas)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: ca.politics...Nuts & Flakes
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:45:41 GMT

I find it incredible that in this important year, with so many
issues at stake that you all waste our time letting Cramer yank your chains.

Some of the issues are:

	* our national sovreignity
	* the threat to our constitution
	* AIDS
	* 15 million unemployed and rising
	* the genocide of the Iraquii people
	* the genocide of the Bosnians 
	* the whole sale slaughter of the dolphins
	* the devastation of our forests
	* the genocide of the filo plankton 
	* the possible reelction of a criminal
	* the scavaging effects of the narcotics epidemic
	* the threat of nuclear pollution due to testing

The list continues too long for this post! And all anyone on
this damned newgroup can do is let Cramerfacistbigot drag them
down into the same gutter he lives in!!!! Do you poeple realize
that the issue revolving around gays is minor?!?!?!?! Do you
realize that the primary areas that care at all are San
Francisco ... and New York....with the rest of the national
gay community finding it rather easy to get along in life if left to
their own devices?!?! Do you realize that our futures and lives
are at stake with these bought and paid for political who*es who
call themselves politicians????

Get a grip on yourselves! Grow up! You have bigger fish to fry
beside Cramers's butt or for you homophobes....any issues that
revolve around the gay community!!!

I thought this was ca.politics .... NOT alt.bash.motss.

This is ridiculous! Cramer is effectively diverting you all and
you dont even know that you are playing his game exactly as he
wants you to. Cramer is controlling your every response. I am
saddened to see an obviously intelligent person use their
intellect for such wasteful purpose. But it depresses me EVEN
MORE to realize that ca.politics typifies the "Californian nuts
and flakes" bigoted jokes that abound on the East Coast.

Len

DISCLAIMER: My opinions ONLY.  NOT my employer's.

*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
The accountability of government has gone to the point where the very
use of the law is the instrument of illegality.
                -- Ralph Nader @ Harvard Law School, 1/15/92

----- End Included Message -----
From: cc433336@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Constantinos A. Caroutas)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Macedonia: What's in a Name? (was The New Greek Phobia)
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:31:30 GMT
Organization: Colorado State U. Engineering College

In article <Sep.2.12.00.08.1992.25989@math.rutgers.edu>,
cromar@math.rutgers.edu (Scott Cromar) writes:
>
>Wonderful.  After my last posting on this subject, I received several
>pieces of mail asserting that the Macedonians wanted to annex the part
>of Greece bearing that same name.  Aside from this rather dubious
>assertion (something like claiming that Jamaica had plans to invade
>the US), I have not heard of anything in Macedonia's petition that

Cuba wanting to invade the US is a better analogy...
--
Constantinos A. Caroutas

"It's easy to make mistakes when others will be held responsible."
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc