HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 12 Oct 1992 21:32:15 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct12.194732.25893@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
=In article <1992Oct10.075735.8668@netcom.com> beast@netcom.com (Master) writes:
=>In article <JMC.92Oct7225619@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
=>>Here's the energy god again.  There is plenty of energy to be had.
=>>Human labor is what needs to be conserved, unless we want to live in
=>>poverty.
=>
=>I agree.  The thing that really gets me about these people who want us to
=>make as many of the things we use as possible (including growing our own
=>food) is that they don't seem to realize just how much time we would actually
=>spend doing these things.  
=
=Do you ? Do you know that I can grow 80% of my summer diet and about
=30% of a winter one on 300 square feet with less than 10 hours of work
=a week ? 

Is that counting the time it takes to make your own farm implements?  From
scratch?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: dtschett@scott.skidmore.edu (donna tschetter)
Subject: Students for Clinton/Gore
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:56:26 GMT


Students for Clinton/Gore tee-shirts with logo for:

Jobs, Justice, Choice, Privacy and Planet on front and red, white and
blue logo for campaign an back available now for $10 (includes
postage)

mail check to: Deryl Bullard
               10 Pieter Schuyler Court
               Albany, NY  12210

These shirts were commissioned by the "New York Students for
Clinton/Gore" and distributed at rallies all over New York State.
From: doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu (David Oliver)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Is Perot an idiot or am I?
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:47:11 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Oct14.204036.22681@infonode.ingr.com> case@infonode.ingr.com (Bill Case) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.131908.10578@bsu-ucs.uucp> 00rdharringt@bsu-ucs.uucp (Rob Harrington) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct14.150957.25152@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu (David Oliver) writes:
>>> Question: Did Perot, in his half-hour commercial or at the debate say something to the effect of 
>>> 
>>>      
>>> 
>>>      Look at our problem with Japan, all we get from them is radios, TVs
>>>      and VCRs, which will fall apart in five years, and they have our MONEY!!
>>> 
>>> Did he say anything resembling this? If he didn't, I'm the idiot (albeit a 
>>> minor one).  If he did say it, he is an extreme idiot.  I wouldn't be surprised if he did say it, in general his economics stinks!
>>> 
>>
>>I don't remember it in the debate and I didn't see the infomercial...but...
>
>I remember it.  Seems he said that Japan has our money,  which increases
>in value through Japan bank loans,  while we have purchased goods which lose

They don't use it all to lend us the money, anyway what's the point,
why should I care who's lending us the money?


>value rapidly over time.  Why is that idiotic?  It's a generality,  but
>largely true.  Check the list of largest world banks.  In terms of
>world economics,  if I trade my manufactured goods for your currency, in
>an out-of-balance way, then you lose - but you're entertained.  

What do you mean "an out-of-balance way"?

>Buy 20,000 Toyotas for 20 million bucks,  keep them six months,  then trade 
>them back for currency.  Your 20 mil has increased to 20.5 mil in Japan,  
>and you can get 12 mil back for your Toyotas.

Yeah, and we had the use of 20,000 Toyatas for six months.  That's the whole
point of TRADE.  We valued the use of the Toyata for six months by (in this
example) at least 8.5 mil.  There is NO objective way to say this is too much.
If I borrowed $10,000 to go to school and when I'm done I pay back $11,000
you don't say  "jeez all I got is an education".

The point is, that this is nothing more than mercantilism.  Japan can continue
accumulating US dollars and they won't be better off or stronger (whatever 
that means).  The welfare and wealth of country is not measured in dollars,
but in stuff, i.e the scarce resources which we use to live our lives.  If
goods aren't as scarce, then we are better off.  I suggest you read a small
book by one Adam Smith called "Wealth of Nations" which debunked these ideas
over 200 years ago (and the arguments haven't been refuted!)

=============================================================================
-David Oliver (doli@troi.cc.rochester.edu)

What you don't know can definitely hurt you.
=============================================================================
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Statistics from nurses ( was Re: Mr. Cramer's strange views )
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:34:56 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA


>twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:


>In article <12528@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>>told a donor that there was still about a 1:100,000 or so chance
>>of getting AIDS-tainted blood.


>That nurse should have been reprimanded for alarmism.  The chance of
>being infected with HIV for *donating* blood is 0:100,000.

Since by definition the blood donor is not getting any blood.  It is pretty
obvious that the above number only refers to blood receipients.
The donor is still safe.

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: ==> Albert Gore Biographic Info
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 16:17:58 GMT

In article <92290.004244U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> <U56503@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

>                           SENATOR AL GORE

     Tennesee's own resident (not really, but he's got a house here and even
visit occasionally.  Like for photo-ops) slime ball.

>
>      In his l6 years representing the people of Tennessee, 

     Represent... Right...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  Information Services Group
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: flick@cwis.unomaha.edu (John Anderson)
Subject: Perot...Get off his back!
Keywords: perot
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 09:41:48 GMT

I have been watching the discussions here, and I am frankly shocked at the
comments made by several of you.

More often than not, the suggestion that Perot did not "answer the question
".  Evidently these people are very biased.  Perot does answer the questions
and supports it with examples.  Now do these examples for some reason or 
another confuse you?  Make you miss his answer?  Whats the problem?

I consider myself an "uncommitted" voter, but I am quickly moving toward
Perot as the choice for my vote.  He sticks with issues and doesn't play
politics.  He has proven his knowledge of business and finance...shown 
his commitment toward education...shown great compassion toward POW/MIA
veterans...hunted vigorously for POW's left in Vietnam (by the way, did
anyone catch the news story about the letters U S A K being carved into
rice paddys in Laos?  Perhaps Perot is right after all???)...etc.
 
No joke people, all three have proven to have decent plans for the future,
but when you take them apart...Perot is a clear winner by far.

So, next time you go ranting about how "Perot avoided the question", why
not watch the debate a few more times.  He only looks better and better!
 

John Anderson

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice)
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 01:51:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.233650.14720@nntp.uoregon.edu>, eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson) writes...

>It was a normal trip for young scholars.

If it was his first trip in the Soviet Union, then also likely a
memorable experience. I wonder why he won't talk about it... if
it was just a normal trip?

-- Stephen Tice   
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Subject: Re: Republican Fear
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:41:22 GMT

In article <23617@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM> msheldon@luna.dpl.scg.hac.com (Marti Sheldon) writes:
>
>
>I don't mind seeing posts in disagreement with my own beliefs.  
>I'm just sick and tired of the lies.  Stick to the issues. Stick 
>to the facts.  This is supposed to be an election - not a wresting
>match.

did you see the CNN report on the "Spin Fest" after the first
debate? Verrry Orwellian. As the reported noted, the Founding
Fathers must be spinning in their graves.

-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
From: PA1460008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Clinton won't put ASS on the line.    (re: 2nd Debate)
Date: 16 Oct 92 15:49:58 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education

In article <MATT.92Oct15221809@physics.berkeley.edu> matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) writes:

>In article <15OCT199222074314@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice) writes:
>
>> Clinton wouldn't take the pledge to cut the deficit in half or leave.
>
>That's right, he didn't.  He also gave his reasons for not doing
>so---reasons that, in my opinion, made a great deal of sense.  Just
>for anyone who missed the debate, I'll repeat them.  (In my words, not
>Clinton's; I don't have a transcript.)
>
>	1.  To a great extent, the size of the deficit is not under
>	    the control of the President.  If there is a recession,
>	    for example, then the government has to spent more and it
>	    doesn't collect as much in taxes.

     And yet a great portion of his campaign is based on the (incorrect)
position that the size of the deficit *is* Bush's fault.  How many times
have we heard Bush blamed for the "biggest spending ever."
     Bill Clinton says he can do what Bush hasn't.  If he believes the 
Presidency does not have the power to do what he wants to do *regardless*
of other factors, he doesn't have a leg to stand on blame Bush *regardless*
of other factors like the Congress.

>	2.  Anyway, the deficit is not the only problem facing America.
>	    As President, Bill Clinton will have many tasks facing him;
>	    it is wrong to single out a single one as the only 
>	    indicator of how well he has done.  Reducing the deficit
>	    is irrelevant unless we get America working again.

     Bill Clinton has singled out the deficit (with the economy) as an
example of what "Bush has done to this country."  If he isn't prepared to
put in writing that he can do better than Bush, why should we think he
can?
     The bottom line is there's only so much the President can *legally*
do, and Bill Clinton knows this.  He brings it up when his own job 
perfromance is going to be the issue, and ignores it when Bush's job
performance is at issue.


     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  Information Services Group
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:51882 misc.headlines:6613 talk.politics.mideast:21124
From: pdchapin@unix.amherst.edu (PAUL D CHAPIN)
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 12:40:56 GMT

: 	Actually, it is a likely scenario for a potential spy.  If Clinton, as
: John Doe, applies for a security clearance with such a background it would be
: denied.

Not necessarily.  I was active in the anti-Vietnam war movement and had
known left-wing tendencies (like most college students back then) and still
had no trouble getting a secret-cryto clearance while in the army.  (How I
ended up in the army is another story).  I never could decide if the army
security check was so poor it never noticed by college days, or so good it
realized I took my oath seriously.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,soc.singles,alt.politics.homosexuality,talk.bizarre
From: mbur@nyx.cs.du.edu (MAC)
Subject: Re: A Most Pressing COncern
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 12:34:30 GMT

In article <Bvsr0M.1o6@agora.rain.com> robart@agora.rain.com (Robert Barton) writes:
>In article <1avrpqINNsvg@bigboote.WPI.EDU> walkerr@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Robert A Walker) writes:
>>
>>>Orgasms, in the main, are messy things,
>>>and Really are not the sort of things
>>>that decent persons with good personal
>>>hygeine standards would wish to involve
>>>themselves in/with/towards.
>>
>>
>>	Sounds like this person can't get their rocks off to me.
>>Its only messy if you shoot somebody in the face or your so wet that
>>you flood your bedroom.
>>                                  
>>
>>
>>        
>
>
>  What does this have to do with Clinton?
>

Nothing.... IN BED!
From: gt6367c@prism.gatech.EDU (DEAL, DOUGLAS WAYNE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: AutoVoter(tm)
Keywords: vote here, vote now vote often
Date: 12 Oct 92 06:50:06 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

I am doing my own little pre-election poll, and would like your help.
All that you have to do is e-mail a vote to my address
gt6367c@prism.gatech.edu.  The question is:  If the general election
were held today, which candidate would you cast your vote for?
The valid responses are:
Clinton
Marrou
Bush
Perot
Other
I have only included those candidates that are on the ballot in all
fifty states.  To vote just follow the following format

#
Vote

The # is to tell my vote tallying program that a vote is about to be cast.
The second line is the name of the candidate you support.  I also have
a sub-routine to check to see if a vote has been cast from that e-mail
address, so don't try to vote more than once.....I'll catch yuh.
Also, dont try putting two # signs in your mail, because that will be caught
as well.  I will post the results when i get a sufficient number of votes.
thanks.

Remember e-mail address gt6367c@prism.gatech.edu
#
Vote

-- 
Douglas Wayne Deal
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt6367c
Internet: gt6367c@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,soc.singles,alt.politics.homosexuality,talk.bizarre
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Family leave farce (was a most pressing COncern)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 06:06:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.204732.12246@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> shackeld@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (david m shackelford ) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.230609.23542@advtech.uswest.com> steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak) writes:
>>> = (Keith R. Jurena) writes:

>>No wonder you sound so dumb.  You see, the Family Leave Act allows 3
>>months of unpaid LEAVE with the specific purpose of ensuring that a job
>>still EXISTS when that worker returns.

>What is the business supposed to do with the work that needs
>doing during these 3 months?  Just let it pile up?  Pay
>for somebody to be trained, only to be laid off before being fully
>qualified?  Hire more people than necessary and endure the
>overhead all the time?

>Do you think a business with 50 employees can afford to
>keep a few extra employees around not doing anything while
>nobody is on family leave to satisfy the government mandate?

Temps?

>>>This bill hinges on the premise that employers are cold and
>>>mean slave drivers who don't care about their employee's families.
>>>I have a revelation for you: they are NOT.

>>Uh, Keith - why do you think the bill needs to be passed?  Because these
>>imaginary benevolent employers in your fantasy are ALREADY granting such
>>leave?

>Those employers which are large enough to handle the burden do
>provide family leave, in some cases paid.  One of my friends
>and coworkers at IBM got ~3 months PAID leave -- another used some
>vacation time.

Good, I'm glad IBM does it.

>>No-o-o-o-o...it'll ensure that people taking such leave will NOT be
>>unemployed.  Your grasp of the guts of this bill seems tenuous at best.

>Who will hire somebody knowing that they might have to be given
>leave time? 

Really?  So no business will ever hire anyone again?  What do you think
all those European countries do that have family leave programs?  What
do you think all those businesses in New Jersey do?

>>Exactly.  Just the reason we gotta make sure creeps like SOME employers
>>are DON'T make people who need leave to give up their jobs.

>This is the point!  SOME employers are creeps and are gouging
>their employees.  In SOME cases, giving an employee leave could
>seriously damage the company.  We need a GUIDELINE, not a LAW!

>Also 3 months seems a little long to me.  Why not make a shorter
>period mandatory, with longer periods earning the employer tax
>breaks?  Why is this bill the only answer??

I'll give you a hint.  It's a seven letter word.  D-E-F-I-C-I-T.  You
can't give tax breaks to employers unless you figure out where the money
is going to come from.
-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1993 World Series Champions
niepornt@phoenix.    | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
   princeton.edu     | Roland Hemond: SIGN BARRY BONDS!!!!!!!!
Vote Clinton/Gore '92.   Four more weeks!!!   		"Bloody urine"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell)
Subject: Anti-war = Anti-country?!
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:47:01 GMT

What is patriotism? It seems that conservatives are trying
to equate anti-war protests with unpatriotic behavior.
Not just with Clinton but do you remember the War for Oil?
Anti-war protesters were basically told to shutup lest they
undermine the confidence of the soldiers. Anti-war protesters
were called unpatriotic. BULLSHIT!

Let's face it. If they didn't love their country, why would
they be protesting? If they didnt' care what happened to their
nation, it could go to hell and they wouldn't care. But these
people DID care so they tried to protest what they felt was
a bad govt action. They felt they were supporting the troops
by saying that they shouldn't be there in the first place. The
fervor swept majority made them out as communists or something
but definitely unAmerican.

What Clinton did in organizing protests in Oxford was
to protest what he felt was a stupid govt policy. Bush
said, "I can't understand for the life me understand moblilizing
demonstrations...against your own country...when you are in a 
foreign land." In other words, he protested a govt policy he
despised. Maybe what Bush can't understand is that patriotism
does not mean blind acceptance of all govt policies. That's
how too many people are defining patriotism.
============================================================================
BRI FARENELL			    "If you choose not to decide, you still have
FARENEBT@CRAFT.CAMP.CLARKSON.EDU        made a choice."  --RUSH ("Free Will)
CLARKSON '95			 	   
A politically incorrect, pro-life, liberal, card-carrying member of the ACLU.
===========================================================================
CLINTON FOR PREZ, BOB ABRAMS FOR US SENATE, DAVE ROBERTS FOR CONGRESS (NY-24TH)

		

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Dictionaries
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 07:36:48 GMT

thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>I heard that "gullible" wasn't in the dictionary.

It's in Black's Telelegal Word Service, accessed by
calling 1-800-ESQUIRE.

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Quayle's a liar!
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:09:34 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.152238.23005@csrd.uiuc.edu> saarinen@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Sirpa Saarinen) writes:
>
>I also found the Quayle tactic offensive: it is one thing to say that
>your opponents are slick and untrustworthy, but it is a totally different
>thing to stand in front of many million people and tell outright lies. Did
>Quayle think that those facts cannot be checked? What does the republican 
>party think that the IQ of the average viewer/voter is (or for that matter,
>the IQ of the average journalist - I don't mean Mike Royko)?
>No wonder some people are looking elsewhere. I sure hope that Quayle/Bush
>will be held accountable for this media nonsense. 

This is why I think Quayle won.  He got away with telling lies,
without an immediate, substansive reply.  I feel that these lies will
lodge somewhere in the back of a voter's mind.  These statements may
be false, but they were made and not refuted at that spot.  Gore, to
say the least, was disappointing.

--
"Moors."  "Moops."  "Moors."  "Moops."  Psssssssssssss.....
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc