HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: Hate Speech Okay, says the Supreme Court
Reply-To: pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:35:02 GMT

In article <nur9dik@zola.esd.sgi.com> thant@void.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman) writes:
>
>I haven't been following this thread, so pardon me if I'm repeating
>something already said.
>
>I don't claim to have *the* answer, but it is worth mentioning that
>in many places in Europe, there is no drinking age, and they have
>less problems with alcoholism than we do.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I don't think this is correct. Most European countries, including those
which are liberal about alcohol & children, have alcoholism problems.
I refer to France and Italy. And better not forget Russia, though you
may choose not to include this country within 'Europe' just yet.

 > Parents teach self-
>responsibility and moderation, and alcohol doesn't have that
>mysterious rite-of-passage appeal that makes it more attractive
>to teenagers in the U.S. than it would otherwise be.

I certainly hope that parents in this country teach responsibility
and moderation, too. Of course, in the USA the efforts of parents to
do this is counteracted by a veritable avalanche of counter-messages
from the popular media.

And BTW, what does the teaching of responsibility, etc. have to do
with alcoholism? I thought that this was a largely genetically-determined
problem.

>
>
>thant

Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: USPS (Was: Question about Clinton's "didn'
Reply-To: pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:48:58 GMT

In article <l7bgghINNkjp@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM (Bob Deguc) writes:
>In article 92Jul27170333@gauss.nmsu.edu, ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
>> 	
>> 	If the USPS is an "independent company", how can
>> 	I set up such a company, please, with a guaranteed
>> 	market, armed men to squelch any competition,
>> 	and so forth?
>> 
>
>How about buying a cable-TV company????
>
>
>Bob

You got it, this is even better. After all, the USPS has to have its proposed
rate increases approved by a regulatory body; cable TV companies don't.

Note: this is written in ignorance of the recent cable-TV re-regulation
activity in the Congress.


BTW - I use the Postal Service a lot, and I find it to be very efficient
and cost-effective. The other guys are OK too, but not necessarily better
or cheaper.


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.folklore.urban
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: College Pranks (Was Re: Vacation Time!)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:25:11 GMT

datri@convex.com (Anthony A. Datri) writes:
: >Second, the water would have been running quite strongly under all the doors.
: >None of them can seal well enough to stop water under pressure.
: 
: Not mention that it would take quite a long time for the trickle from a
: fire sprinkler to spit out that much water, that the thin glass in any windows
: present would probably break under the pressure, that campus security would
: know about it real soon, and that a local fire department probably wouldn't
: get involved in pumping it out -- they'd just sacrifice a window.

Or a door. Firewells usually don't have windows.

Bill
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.religion.misc
From: neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher)
Subject: Re: CLINTON: Acceptance speech text - Bible misquote
Organization: Integrated Systems Laboratory, ETH, Zurich
	<1992Jul17.193835.18771@athena.cs.uga.edu>
	<1992Jul18.202823.26360@tss.com>
	<1992Jul19.162410.5194@infonode.ingr.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 12:55:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul19.162410.5194@infonode.ingr.com> haefner@infonode.ingr.com (Mark W. Haefner) writes:
>By the way, Clinton's use of "covenant" was taken by many in the media
>covering the convention as a way to make the southern christian groups
>feel that they had something in common with Clinton. Try though he may,
>Clinton will not get the southern vote.

Do you also believe, then, that Bush's use of "New World Order" was an attempt
to get the free masonic vote ? 

Matthias

-----
Matthias Neeracher                                      neeri@iis.ethz.ch
  "Nur die halbe Welt ist Teflon und Asbest" -- Einstuerzende Neubauten 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: archer@utkux1.utk.edu (T. Archer)
Subject: Re: Libertarian Platform
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:47:41 GMT

In article <l6uatqINN3p9@spim.mips.com> mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:

>In article <rdippold.711922721@cancun>, rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>|> mpolen@gelato.mips.com (Michael Polen) writes:
>|> >T. Archer writes:
>|> >|> Sure.  But if my children are in a situation where they are getting access 
>|> >|> to alcohol or drugs before they are able to be responsable, then I am not 
>|> >|> supervising them closely enough, and it is MY fault.  I maintain that it is 
>|> >|> a parent's responsability to raise children, not the state's.
>|> 
>|> >Have you raised children to the age of responsibility?  The only way to
>|> >"supervise them closely enough" is to be a jailor, not a parent.  Not
>|> >on my watch.
>|> 
>|> So now you'd like to force everybody else to by a jailor for you.  No
>|> thanks.  Supervision doesn't have to mean hovering over them constantly.

>No.  Just lock up the low-life that is selling/giving drugs and alcohol to
>children.  We just found a basic difference in philosophy. I'll never
>make a Libertarian.

Not as long as you favor abrogating what are clearly parental 
responsabilites to the government.
-=-=-
T. Archer  PA142548@utkvm1.utk.edu
University of Tennessee
"Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking." -- Unknown
-=-=-
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Tell me what Bush has done
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 00:12:39 GMT

<In article <1992Jul21.185348.17370@tss.com> burke@tss.com (Jim Burke) writes:

<   I would sincerely like for some Bush supporters to list three 
<   major accomplishments of the Bush presidency.  

	Well, I don't really qualify as a "Bush supporter", but
	the man has some achievements.

	- Signed the first arms-control treaty with the former
	  USSR that actually CUT the U.S. nuclear weapons inventory.
	  Even the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists noticed; they
	  set the "Doomsday Clock" back several minutes, for
	  the first time in over a decade.

	-Kept the U.S. OUT of the Yugoslavian civil war; make
	 no mistake, we should be sending aid to that area
	 but this really is a job for the United Nations,
	 NOT the U.S. If Bush really were the "Cowboy" that
	 his detractors make him out to be, the 6th Fleet would
	 be bombing Serbia at this minute. That we are NOT
	 involved in a civil war 10,000 miles from home is
	 something to reflect upon, if you believe that
	 Bush is a "warmonger".

	-Appointed the first black Justice to the Supreme
	 Court in over a generation. Regardless of your
	 opinion of Justice Thomas, consider that Bush
	 COULD have appointed a white man or white woman
	 to the court.

<It seems to me 
<   that the Bush camp keeps pleading that they could accomplish
<   something if we would just give them a Republican congress.  This
<   seems like an implicit admission that nothing has been accomplished.
 
	Well, certainly the wonderful tax hike (which was endorsed
	by all leading Democrats, many of whom now are berating
	Bush for "breaking his promise", note) was a major blunder;
	raising taxes in a recession is a poor plan.

<  Surely, there must be at least three notable accomplishments that
<   George Bush can point to.  Hell, I don't consider the Iraqi war to
<   be an accomplishment, but okay I'll grant you that given the decision
<   to go to war (with which I disagreed) Bush conducted the war well.
<   Okay, then, name two accomplishments.  Any two.  Nope, not the Soviet
<   breakup or the Berlin wall - forces much greater than George Bush 
<   brought about those events.  There must be _something_ domestically
<   that Bush can point to - isn't there?

	BZZZZT! Sorry, you just changed the question from "name
	3 things" to "name 3 DOMESTIC things". This kind of 
	game-playing makes your motives kind of suspect, now
	doesn't it?
From: harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (Harel Barzilai)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: G.A.T.T. FACTS (2)
Date: 31 Jul 92 08:44:08 GMT
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB


 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Excerpted from
[The following article was taken from the _Covert Action_ Spring 1992
article by Terry Allen entitled "In GATT They Trust"(p.60-65)]
which we hope to obtain permission to post in full soon]
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Second, it preempts even federal laws in many of these same areas by
requiring that a wide rande of environmental and consumer protection
regulations be subject to challenge within GATT.  If U.S.  regulations
were more strict than the relatively weak global standards set by
obscure and often corporate-dominated international agencies, these
more lax standards would prevail.  For example, GATT proposes that
Codex Alimentarius, an obscure U.N.  agency based in Rome, be the
standard-setting agency for food safety.  Years of infiltration by the
chemical companies and food manufacturers have rendered Codex
standards weak at best and meaningless at worst.  For DDT, for
example, Codex permits residues on imported foods up to 50 times
greater than those allowed under U.S.  law.
From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Farewell Perot
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 23:58:29 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Jul23.183547.14221@gvl.unisys.com>
  <MATT.92Jul23124739@physics.berkeley.edu>
  <1992Jul23.234544.3077@athena.cs.uga.edu>

> Ha! I had the misfortune of working for that disgusting restaurant
> for years...for lack of anyone else who would hire me.  I was only
> in my teens.  They ARE that stupid.
> 
> Cat

Are you by any chance related to Dan Quayle?  The above would be a
wonderful Quayle-ism.

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Let's Blame Reagan (was Let's Not Blame Bush For the Mess)
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 20 Jul 92 23:28:21 EST
 <1992Jul16.162758.2909@desire.wright.edu> <1992Jul20.130314.26990@hemlock.cray.com>
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Jul20.130314.26990@hemlock.cray.com>, rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Jul16.162758.2909@desire.wright.edu>, demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>> In article <NEERI.92Jul16132355@iis.ethz.ch>, neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher) writes:
>> ...
>> >>True conservatives would not "let" the government go into debt out of spite,
>> >>they would cut spending.  Explain why most, if not all, expenditures presented
>> >>to Congress usually come back to the President several factors higher in cost.
>> > 
>> > Can you provide some examples for this ?
>> > 
>> 	1990: The scene, House Appropriations Committee.  At the request of
>> the navy all appropriations for F-14D "Super Tomcats" have been removed by the
>> White House in their version of the budget.  A powerful Dem member, from the
>> district where the factory happens to be, gets his friends to reinstate money 
>> for 14 planes.
>> 
>> 	The navy doesn't want them.
>> 
>> 	But Congress insists otherwise.
> 
> Tell the rest of the story.  Congress instead cut B-2 and "Star Wars" spending
> to get total DoD spending to the level Bush proposed.

	What they should have done is cut F-14, B-2, Seawolf, Star Wars, SS,
Welfare, ...

> Congress recently passed FY1993 DoD spening at slightly less than Bush proposed.
> 
> Your point that Congress protect current production (assembly line jobs) over
> future generation projects (R&D) is generally true.

	But since those jobs have incredibly high overhead, we'd be better off
paying their salaries and killing the programs.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Separation vs. integration (Was Re: The European Community Blackmailed by Greece)
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 13:34:58 GMT

In article <2541@nlsun1.oracle.nl>, cmylod@nl.oracle.com (Colum Mylod) writes:

|>Another classic USENET article has appeared. It has the necessary attributes:
|>1. wild inaccuracies held as truth
|>2. patronising tone
|>3. personal criticisms
|>4. posted widely.

This is because Ulick has a habit of making rather inflamatory messages
of his own. Just as bigots like ARF get short shrift, Ulick's
presentation of the British as evil absentee landlords out to exploit
the Irish was indeed quite appropriate in the 1840's. By failing to
mention that it is rather different now he perpetuates a set of
distortions that have condemed Ireland to continue it's violent and
bloody ast into the present.

If I see bigoted attacks on a country such as the one Ulick made, I am
going to respond in a way that shows my contempt for the poster. Just as
many people take offense at ARFs rather selective criticism of Israel I
take offense at people who seek to portray the British attitude as
beeing unchanged from the 19th century. Particularly because there are
people who are being murdered every week with weapons bought with money
raised by perpetuating these distortions in the US.

I have redirected to talk.politics.misc since this discussion has
nothing to do with human rights.


|>|> Ireland has not separated from the UK, it was partitioned, Southern
|>|> Ireland is not a country, Eire is.
|>Wales is also by this not a country. See the dictionary. 

You dont understand that the reson why I make the distinction is that I
agree with Ulick that Ireland should be unified. Southern Ireland is
merely a part of a country. It would have been better to have put that
Eire is a State.


|>"Country" is a very
|>wide term. You seem fixed on using "Ireland" as a physical geographic term
|>but it does have a political one too. Bit like China.
|>
|>|> When do we get to vote in GB to see if we want to keep them?
|>When the Scots get to vote on independence?

1976, the referendum on devolution failed to get the required proportion
of the electorate to vote in favour. The party of which I am a member
together with the others with one exception proposed that Scotland be
given back many powers in a devolution process which won the support of
the vast majority of Scottish voters. Unfortunately the exception won in
England. Scotland can wait 4 years or so though, the end result is ony a
matter of time and of the Scotts choosing to accept the terms offerd.


Phill Hallam-Baker


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.discrimination
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 04:21:02 GMT

gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
>Now, the landlords and developers will quickly find that if
>they serve the Tasmanians, they will lose the one-third who
>prefer Tasmanian-free housing, that is, about 30% of their
>potential customers, whereas if they refuse Tasmanians, they
>will lose only 10% of their potential customers.  Every
>single landlord and developer will thus feel economically
>pressured to discriminate against Tasmanians.

Not so.  The landlords and developers who cater to the Tasmanians will
find themselves in a great selling position in a high-demand market.
There is also the pressure from the 70% of the non-Tasmanians, unless
they all have no problem whatsoever with outright racism.

-- 
Government is a broker in pillage and every election is an advance auction of
stolen goods.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: marc@meadow.uucp (Marc Riehm)
Subject: Re: US-Canada Beer Dispute ... I thought it was over?
Reply-To: marc@meadow.UUCP (Marc Riehm)
Organization: Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 17:18:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.041433.25658@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:

[re free trade]

>The binational panel is really a form of binding arbitration and the US
>has to abide by the decisions...the problem is that a lot of the current
>disputes have yet to make it through the binational dispute settlement
>process.  The problem is that in most of the instances, the US is
>bringing pretty bogus cases, and using the dispute resolution process
>to delay fair access to the US market.  In most of the current disputes,
>if the GATT rules, or the FTA dispute settlement mechanism are followed
>through to the bitter time-consuming end, we will win most of the
>current cases.
>
>In the current beer dispute, the US is violating the GATT.

No, it is _we_ who have been protecting our beer industry for decades.  GATT
ruled against Canada, and then Bob Rae pulled an underhanded trick (the
so-called "environmental" tax) to continue to protect the Ontario market
against cheap American beer.  Perhaps the U.S. is violating GATT, but we
certainly provoked them into doing so.  I don't blame them in the least.

In general, Canada is far more protectionist than the U.S.  Try importing
items into Canada and see how much duty you pay.  Then try the same items into
the states.

Canadians do not like competition.  There are countless cases of sanctioned
monopolies and sanctioned price-fixing in this country (beer; farm marketing
boards; telephone (until recently); the cable TV system (there is no
competition within a given region), etc.)  I am cheering the removal of trade
barriers to beer, and I'm hoping that the same competitive forces will
eventually force other sectors of our economy to change (whaddya bet GATT will
eventually rule against the marketing boards?).

I would be willing to bet that, ignoring trading between members of blocks
such as the EEC, the U.S. borders are among the most open in the world.  The
reason for it is that the U.S. consumer carries far more clout than elsewhere,
and governments have a hard time imposing new taxes and duties if it drives the
cost of living up.  Meanwhile, in Canada the passive consumer takes a back
seat to businesses and unions.

Currently there _is_ a protectionist movement afoot in the states.  But that is
because of their continual trade deficit (Canada has enjoyed a trade surplus
with the U.S. for years, largely because of the auto pact, which was very
generous to Canada) and the poor economy.  And it is only protectionist in
comparison to their trade stance a few years ago; if you compare their current
set of tariffs and duties to many other countries (including Canada), their
borders are more open.
-- 
Marc Riehm      Amdahl Canada Ltd., Software Development Center
                2000 Argentia Road, Plaza 2, Suite 300
                Mississauga, Ont.   L5N 1V8
marc@meadow.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Which of you is 'good enough' ?
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:24:27 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Jul22.135932.16194@tc.cornell.edu> shore@tc.cornell.edu writes:
]Actually, we *do* need it here.  Among other things, the
]past 12 years of Republican administration has been marked
]by increasing divisiveness in this country and an escalation
]in the number of hate crimes.  We've seen the resurgence of
]white extremist organizations and we've seen people like David
]Duke enter the Republican party.  We have the AIDS crisis,
]which could have been contained early on if the federal
]government hadn't treated it as a disease of those "other"
]people and had stopped obstructing safe sex education and
]needle exchanges.  And, of course, we have the deterioration
]of our inner cities and overt racism on the part of those
]who are supposed to be protecting all citizens.
]
]The kind of hate and alienation being promoted by our
]Republican presidents has hardly led to a "kinder, gentler"
]nation.  It's led to an angry, ailing, impoverished nation.

Not only that, the republicans are responsible for the floods caused
by El Nino, the explosion of Mt. Pinatubo, and the California
Earthquakes. Hey - let's face it - everything is the fault of
Ronald Reagan and George Bush!


-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
- Democracy is two wolves and a sheep using majority vote to decide what -
- to have for dinner. SUPPORT THE BILL OF RIGHTS - INCLUDING THE 2nd! -
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.folklore.urban
From: phil@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Phil Gustafson)
Subject: Re: Vacation Time!
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Keywords: Ditch Day, vanishing room
Organization: Famed Parquet Floor
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:18:35 GMT

In article <BruGv9.2B7@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>   [Re CalTech "Ditch Day"]
>
>   I'm glad I got through college without ever having to deal with any
>   of this infantile bullshit.   Nevermind the way it reinforces, and 
>   invents where necessary, even *more* stupid group allegiances, identities,
>   obligations and similar stuff that our society already has too much of.   
>
>   If anyone in college had ever tried anything like that on me I'd have
>   had them in court for wasting my time/tuition, interfering in my 
>   education, destruction of property, assault, or whatever else was
>   appropriate, faster than you could say "Perry Mason".  
>

I was told that we wouldn't have to listen to rodomontade on a.f.u.

>   Obligatory libertarian reference:  

Oh.  Now I see.

Phil "I was told there'd be no Ted Kaldis, either.  Get thee uncrossposted,
thread." Gustafson
-- 
|play: phil@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG; {ames|pyramid|vsi1}!zorch!phil                |
|work: phil@gsi; sgi!gsi!phil            | Phil Gustafson                   |
| "Don't believe in ads.  Don't believe in government.  Watch yourself --   |
|  everybody is trying to screw you!"  Bill Gaines, 1922-1992               |
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: What kind of recession we're in
Organization: DEC Palo Alto
Distribution: usa
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:51:44 GMT

fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco) writes:
>On the other hand, certain policies prolong a recession - or depression.
>Roosevelt's policies actually worsened the depression, to the point where
>it was so bad that only World War II could get us out of it. With Clinton's
>messianic "New Covenant," we may slip into the same sort of depression
>that Roosevelt presided over.

This sounds a little revisionist to me.  Evverything I've ever seen about
the 30's shows that the economy had picked up substantially by the latter
half of the decade.  There was even a budget surplus in 1937, and a 
small recession following that year.  It's definitely true that the war
completely turned things around, though.

I don't claim to be an economic historian.

--
==============y=o=u='=r=e===a=l=l===s=t=e=a=m=e=d===u=p===j=o=e================
   Mike +   Software +   Digital Equipment +   Western Software +      mcnally@
McNally +    Laborer +         Corporation +         Laboratory +   wsl.dec.com
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism