HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ivaliote@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Lotus )
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: DC Myth # 302 : A tax increase will lower the deficit
Keywords: taxes, deficit, lower
Date: 28 Jan 93 11:31:36 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes:
>   You know that the presidential budget is a wish list!  Besides, when
>it came to crunch time Reagan made a deal with congress that tax increases
>would be accompanied by spending cuts so as to keep the deficit down.  
>Obviously only the tax increases survived!

Never used to be.  As I recall, Ike balanced his budgets.  Then again, he was a 
*real* Republican.
   _________________________________________________________________________  
   Matt Ivaliotes	   lotus@uiuc.edu	ivaliote@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
   a.k.a. Lotus		   Bitnet mail to: 	IVALIOTE@uiucvmd
			   NeXTMail to: 	mci41087@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu

   As much as I speak, I don't speak for C.C.S.O.  Aren't they lucky?
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Deficit
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 17:30:50 GMT

Ted Frank (thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu) wrote:
: In article <C1Btto.Mn2@unix.portal.com> mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
: >Ted Frank (thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu) wrote:
: >: But "tax revenues" tells us too little.  If taxes are 2% of GNP, then
: >: there's lots of room to expand "tax revenues."  If taxes are a huge
: >: proportion of GNP, there isn't.  If we need to include GNP in the
: >: equation to make the "tax revenue" ratio tell us anything, then
: >: we might as well use GNP, and cut out the middleman.
: >
: >Tax revenues do not tell us too little.  GNP tells us too little :)
: >Actually GNP tells us what tax revenues will be.  Revenues are about
: >26% of GNP.  Its been that way for a long time, too.  Juggling various
: >tax rates will still keep it at 26% - it just shifts the burden of
: >paying the tax.
: 
: Really?  Is that 26% true across all time periods for all countries?

26% is true of recent years, certainly (my Almanac tables go back to
the early 70s).  As for all nations... Germany taxes 56% of its GNP
and Japan taxes 22% of its GNP.  This is only federal revenues, so it
does not include state taxes.

: 
: If you prefer to use tax revenues instead of GNP, fine.  Just recognize
: that by that measure we're even better off relative to where we were in
: 1945, when the tax rate was lower.

I take your word for it.  I am far less worried about the debt than I
am about the defecit :)

: -- 
: ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
: standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
: the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13778 talk.abortion:57839
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: control
Date: 25 Jan 1993 08:01:29 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <markp.727720296@joplin.wri.com> markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes:
>In <1993Jan16.213852.4702@netcom.com> ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>>vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes ...
>>>>rwn@po.CWRU.Edu (Richard W. Nelson Jr) writes:

>>>>-> Ahh yes! But what if part of the contents of your body is another
>>>>-> person's body? The plot thickens!
>>>*sigh* But what if you put them there in the first place!

>>Barring a few examples of people who've paid to have an embryo
>>implanted, most babies are not put into the women's uterus.

>Cute. What if you caused them to be there in the first place?

Sperm.

Who 'donates' sperm?

Think about it.

Adrienne Regard
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.guns,talk.abortion
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Subject: Re: Gee, i don't Know...
Organization: The Cat Factory
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:20:04 GMT

In article <C16sun.K1o@unix.portal.com> mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:

}I don't have a gun, but I joined the NRA.  Just to get a sticker for my
}front door.  Just as good as having a "security system by smith & wesson"
}sticker on the door :)

Yep.  Sends a clear message to anyone casing the place for a burglary:

            "If you're looking to steal guns, we've got some."

But you don't have guns, so they'll just trash your place trying to find
them, then trash it some more when they don't.  Expect the cops to be
unsympathetic.


The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp                "If you can't stand solitude,
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483  perhaps others find you boring
Santa Monica, CA  90405                        as well."  -- Mark Twain
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l)
Subject: Re: Zoe Baird, Support Her !!!!!!!!!! -- Too late.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 02:48:21 GMT

amck@rowdy.mcc.com (Alan McKendree) writes:

>She withdrew.

Funny, I thought only men withdrew :)
Is this cabinet interruptus?

>-- 
>Alan McKendree          Opinions posted by me are mine, only.
>amck@rowdy.mcc.com         Who/Little Feat/racquetball/Rand
-- 

Steve Kellmeyer 
kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh who?
Date: 22 Jan 1993 21:40:04 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: skibum.meaddata.com

In article <93020.135915U28310@uicvm.uic.edu>, The Magnet <U28310@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
|> Call me stupid, but after watching his show for a couple of
|> minutes and reading about 30 of theses posts, I STILL cannot
|> figure out what he's about? or basically, is he a Liberal
|> Democrat or Conservative Republican or a green Martian???

Why preoccupy yourself with labels?  Just watch and listen to him and decide
for yourself what you agree and disagree with.  He's fun, too.

-- 
// John Townsend             "I thought I was      Legal Conversion Engineering
// Mead Data Central          wrong once, but         johnt@skibum.meaddata.com
// 8891 Gander Creek Dr.      I was mistaken."         ...!uunet!meaddata!johnt
// Miamisburg, OH  45342            8-}                          (513) 865-7250 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:02:11 GMT

cobb@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Mike Cobb) writes:

>All right, so I'm new.  COuld you please explain the sentience thing again, and
>why it's ok to kill humans that aren't sentient?

>Thanks

Well, it sorta goes like this...

Is it "ok" to kill animals?  I mean *when there is a compelling reason*...
even when the animal hasn't done anything itself ("innocent").  (here's a
clue, "food")  Is it normally "ok" to kill another person?  I mean a human
being who has been living and interacting for a long time...even when there
is a *compelling reason* but the person hasn't done anything "bad"
("innocent").  (here's a clue, "murder")

What is the difference?  In one case we have an animal that is not sentient;
it doesn't think about its existence all that much, it just exists.  In the
other case we have a sentient being that thinks about its existence a lot,
and likes to argue about how "moral" something is.  This is the basic
reasoning behind *sentience* as the "highest moral existence"--that state
which must be protected unless its existence is harmful to others of similar
existence (it is not "innocent").

>MAC

-Rob
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13953 talk.politics.misc:70040
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Why are conservatives so stupid ?
Keywords: liberals, conservatives, intellegence
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:02:50 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <1993Jan26.165921.3752@iplmail.orl.mmc.com> markb@iplmail.orl.mmc.com (Mark Bower) writes:

>Elitism. It is the cornerstone of liberlaism. Like Rush ( the band ) says in 
>the song "Witch Hunt"; an anti-censorship song:
>
>"Those who know what's best for us; must rise and save us from ourselves!"

Funny... the very first thng I thought of when I saw that was the conservative
christians trying to save homosexuals from themselves.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun)
Subject: Re: Free at last!!
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 22:27:05 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC
Keywords: Liberals, Republican Prez, Why?

In article <1993Jan21.153103.17132@news.nd.edu> fdeck@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (francis deck) writes:
>We are free at last from an executive branch which believes
>that it is above the law, and that its purpose is to enrich
>private individuals.  

Right.  The appointment of Zoe Baird notwithstanding there is also
Warren Christopher who, in 1977, testified to Congress that he knew
nothing about the government spying on anti-war protestors.  Turns out
he did.  Or George Stephanopoulos, who was lobbying his friends on
Capitol Hill within a year of his leaving his job as a Congressional
staffer, in violation of the Ethics in Government act which requires a
one year hiatus. Stay tuned for others...

>                      At least I hope that will turn out to
>be the case.  We're free from a guy who calls himself a
>conservative, but who has taken initiatives on any number
>of occasions to increase the size and power of his own
>branch of government.  

Right.  Now we have a guy who doesn't call himself a conservative but
who will take initiatives on any number of occasions to increase the
size and power of his own branch of government.  Is this a net gain?

>                       We are free from someone who caters
>to the right wing, e.g. Rush Limbaugh and the TV preachers.

If you mean Bush catered to the right wing, look again.  The right
wing has been hopping mad at him almost from day one.

>We are free to tell our children that the way to the top is
>not the way of crime.

You can tell your children anything you want but the record of Dan
Rostenkowski, Ted Kennedy, Marion Barry... doesn't support you.

>
>f.deck
>


===============================================================================
William Crosmun
crosmun@dg-rtp.dg.com

===============================================================================
 The difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals
 listen to what government says and believe their ears; conservatives
 look at what government does and believe their eyes. 

===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: What will Bush and Quayle do now?
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 02:09:20 GMT

MAUREEN BURNS (psburns@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov) wrote:
: 
: I am just interested in knowing what Bush and Quayle are planning to do 
: with themselves now that their administration is behind them?  Fish?  Ski? 
: Have either of them made any plans?  I think I heard on the news that Bush 
: is building a new home somewhere,  leading me to believe retirement is his 
: choice.   How about Quayle?
: 
: Just curious,
: Maureen
: 

I heard Bush is moving back to his homestate of texas, where he will build
a new home.  He will work on his memoirs...
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: My fellow citizens?????????
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:28:12 GMT

>>>>> On Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:15:46 GMT, kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) said:
koppenhoefer>    The subject says it all.  Whatever happened to my
koppenhoefer> fellow Americas?  I don't care if you're black,
koppenhoefer> white, oriental, or some mixture.  The president
koppenhoefer> reports to Americans, not just citizens.  God, this
koppenhoefer> makes me ill!

Those of us who were capable of hearing the speech and interpretting it
for ourself (versus having it fed to us in little RL-bite sized chunks)
heard Bill also use the phrase "My fellow Americans" a little later on.

What makes me ill is to see Rush trying to do his same lame "analysis" on
the speech again on his TV program. The material sucked on the radio, and
it still sucked on TV.

koppenhoefer>  
koppenhoefer>    Oh, I can say God without offending, right?
koppenhoefer> After all Bill said it several times yesterday.

You're even free to bawl during spiritual songs if you want, feller.

L.
"Yeh, Buddy..            | larry@psl.nmsu.edu (Larry Cunningham)|  _~~_
 I've got your COMPUTER! | % Physical Science Laboratory        | (O)(-)
 Right HERE!!"           | New Mexico State University          |  /..\ 
 (computer THIS!)        | Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA 88003    |   <> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are CORRECT, mine, and not PSLs or NMSUs..
Oh sure, we could do it the _easy_ way. But it just wouldn't be the COWBOY WAY.


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green)
Subject: Re: The "Liberal Media" Criticizes Clinton
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 01:11:47 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

>tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) says:
>>> Clinton walks looks like a pig, runs like a hippo and brays like an ass.
>>> So, what the hell is he?

Now we're going to get four years of Bill Clinton's white thighs flapping
in the wind - Mark Russell


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: "david meadows" <david.meadows@canrem.com>
Subject: fetal rights of inheritan
Reply-To: "david meadows" <david.meadows@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: alt
Date: 23 Jan 93 13:01:17 EST

TF>>If so, that child must have a legal personality in the womb, no?

TF>"Legal personality in the womb" is neither equivalent to nor does it
  >inextricably lead to "abortion is always illegal."  An "unborn widow"
  >that has never been nor never will be conceived is also a "legal
  >personality" in similar circumstances, but I doubt we'd want a legal
  >regime that worries more about fertile octagenarians than it already
  >does.


So you agree that there is such a thing as legal personality in the 
womb. If that is the case, that legal personality is protected by 
whatever rights he or she would have outside the womb and so neither 
you, nor the mother, nor anyone else has a right to deprive it of life 
without due process of law.

What the heck is an `unborn widow' ... I was unaware that a foetus 
might marry in utero ...


Continuing to wonder ...


David Meadows 
---
  1st 1.02b #813  Libertas inaestimabilis res est -- Paul
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: dlaro@lonestar.utsa.edu (David O. Laro)
Subject: Re: "Trivial" Felonies (Was: Zoe Baird, Support Her !!!!!!!!!!)
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:20:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.215040.1073@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>What I find interesting is that this appointment was supposed to be ground
>breaking in that Baird would have been the first woman in the AG role. She
   (broke the law!)

>was a good example of a woman balancing her career and family life. So
>what do they "get" her on?
    (breaking the laws she would have to enforce)

Her means of procuring child care so that she
>could further her career.
     No. Just breaking the law.  Everybody with 2% brainpower knows about the
     laws.  Many actually obey them.  But she didn't.  That makes her...?

I don't consider this a coincidence. The so-called
>family values types have always looked askance at daycare as an enabler of
>"the breakup of the American family," i.e., it allows mothers to compete
>in the workplace.

omigod.  more of same.  do you have another song?

I attribute the flap about her daycare to the same cause
>as the railing about Clinton's "draft dodging," pot smoking, whatever: it's
>the death rattle of the old order as it's fading from power. The
>hippie/yuppie/whatever-diminutive-you-like generation is here: get used
>to it. :-)

IsincerelyHopeNot.  Otherwise, bend over and kiss yourself goodbye.  We're in
trouble when all henhouses are guarded by foxes.

>Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com

David
From: mlbruce@husc11.harvard.edu (Matthew Bruce)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Deficit
Date: 21 Jan 93 06:04:20 GMT

cstone@husc8.harvard.edu (christopher stone) writes:

>Two comments:

>1) I believe that the deficit *as a percentage of GNP* is not much
>larger than it was in earlier decades.

As percent of GNP, from what I've read it stayed pretty level under
Reagan, but under Bush (esp. after the 1990 package) it skyrocketed as
percent of GNP. Still, as this is fact not opinion in question, we'd just
have to "look it up."

>2) The conservatives, a few years ago, were arguing that deficits
>were not as damaging as everyone said they were...just goes to
>prove that "where you stand depends on where you sit." :)

>I personally have not decided with whom to side in this thread yet.

>Chris
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: drevik@utkvx3.utk.edu (Drevik, Steve)
Subject: Re: The hidden costs of Environmentalism : A case study
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: r-12, cars, big bucks
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:17:00 GMT

In article <C1IzxM.K01@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, kkopp@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (koppenhoefer kyle cramm) writes...
>drevik@utkvx3.utk.edu (Drevik, Steve) writes:
> 
>>In article <1993Jan27.061426.11591@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes...
>>>That's a job for the free market. Instead of complaining, invent a method that
>>>will do it for $10 and still stay within the regulations and you will become
>>>filthy rich.
> 
>>Here, here!  My company is doing VERY well in the midst (or tail end,
>>perhaps) of a deep recession.  Our business is supplying products to
>>help power generating utilities comply with the new Clean Air Act.
>>My division has increased its staffing 300% over the past five years,
>>and my company can support average raises of 13%.
> 
>   Did you ever think that your companies prosperity may come at the expense
>of other companies, and that this may have led to a recession?

    Did you ever stop to think that EVERY company prospers at the cost
  of ANOTHER company?  A lumber mill prospers at the cost of a homebuilder.
  A stell manufacturer prospers at the cost of an auto manufacturer.  Does
  THIS lead to recession?  I don't think so.  Don't forget.... our revenues
  go straight back into the economy, both from salaries paid and raw materials
  used (we are a manufacturing company).

    Don't knee-jerk everytime the environment is at issue, OK?

-s

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13545 talk.abortion:57429
From: jmw@angelo.amd.com (John Wincn)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Different Point
Date: 22 Jan 93 21:56:54 GMT
Organization: Konnem, Churn, Reap & Chortle, Investment Counselors for the '90s

In article <1993Jan17.084005.24444@leland.Stanford.EDU> becka@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rebecca Lynn Sparling) writes:
>
>Does no one on this net understand the meaning of the word SARCASM? Or
>does no one want to?
>
>>RACIST.
>
>If they read
>what it really says instead of what they want it to say they might
>learn something.

Ah, yes, the longtime net.user's greatest lament.  If you are looking for
widespread intelligence on topics that evoke deep abiding fear, hatred,
distrust, and mysogyny like abortion and simple human rights, then I have
a suggestion for you:  get used to disappointment. 

It is not nice, it is not what I prefer, but it is accurate. 
--
J. M. Wincn                           jmw@angelo.amd.com (408) YUP-BEER 
I discriminate.               Standard DISCLAIMER available on request. 
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13790 alt.rush-limbaugh:15117 alt.politics.clinton:21193
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: The "Liberal Media" Criticizes Clinton
Date: 22 Jan 93 22:17:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1993Jan22.212832.18977@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
>Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
>> In article <1993Jan19.073259.25121@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>,
>> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) says:
>> 
>> >But you know the old Republican Duck Test;  if it looks like
>> >a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then its a liberal.
>> 
>> Clinton walks looks like a pig, runs like a hippo and brays like an ass.
>> So, what the hell is he?
>
>Your twin brother?

If it resorts to personal attacks what is it?  A liberal.

Ted

-- 
So the Maples formed a union, and demanded equal rights, "The Oaks are just 
too greedy.  We will make them give us light!"  Now there's no more Oak 
oppression, for they passed a noble law.  And the trees are all kept equal, 
by hatchet, axe and saw.     -  Rush, The Trees
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13493 alt.rush-limbaugh:14830 alt.politics.clinton:20943