HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: charlesw@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Charles Wilson)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 13 Nov 92 21:56:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: sail.12888
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Nov13.174545.13614@nwnexus.WA.COM> edm@halcyon.com (Ed Morin) writes:
>donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro) writes:
>
>What I mean by this, is that _I_ would probably not like homosexuality being
>taught in a public school, but I understand that in a public school that
>if a significant percentage (not necessarily a majority in my opinion) wish
>it to be presented, they have that right.  However, I think that _all_ sides
My goodness!  Is the public school system the ONLY place people learn?  I
think not!  Freedom of speech does not necessary apply to institutions.
Freedom of speech is completely protected for individuals.  Do you think
it is acceptable to start teaching religion in public schools?  No, it
isn't!  It is a private matter to be learned at one's own discretion/pursuit.
The same applies to sexual orientation.
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: fyl@fylz.wa.com (Phil Hughes)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Organization: FYL
Distribution: pnw
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:00:55 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.WV.TEK.COM) wrote:
: So you exclude people with passbook savings accounts from the class of
: ordinary people, and suggest that they should have lost their savings?
: 
: The robber barons who *ran* those S&Ls didn't get a dime from the
: bailout.  Even the ordinary folk who had stock in those S&Ls lost it
: all.

Not true.  The robber barons got money in the form of the loans they
got to make, many to each other.  Then, as part of the bailout, the
S&Ls were bailed out and then re-sold to the same robber barons so
they can do it over again.  If we (our tax money) is going to bail out
an S&L then we (our government) should run it instead of reselling it.

I am not a great fan of bigger government but if we are in the banking
business why not be in it when it can make a profit as well instead of
only when it loses money?
-- 
Phil Hughes - FYL - 8315 Lk City Wy NE - Suite 207 - Seattle, WA 98115 
Phone: 206-526-2919 x74      Fax: 526-0803
E-mail: fyl@fylz.com or nwnexus!fylz!fyl
From: johnl@pcx.ncd.com (John Light)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Keywords: el-mundo-zurdo(Gloria Anzaldua),immediatism,anarchism,queers, feral-humans,freethinkers,[lL]ibertarians,gays-and-other-sex-radicals, strategy,tactics,intelligence,psy-ops,deception,disruption,memetics, screwing-things-up,aikido,entropy,doxies,o
Date: 13 Nov 92 21:34:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: pcx.1992Nov13.213438.17996
Organization: Graphic Software Systems, Beaverton, OR

In article <12879@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> charlesw@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Charles Wilson) writes:
>In article <1799@rwing.UUCP> pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:
>>
>>Any law that sets aside a specific group or groups for special consideration
>>that are not afforded the rest of us creates special rights.  Even
>>if that law provides special sanctions if ORDINARY rights are denied
>>a certain group, by the fact that it gives that group avenues of redress
>>unavailable to the rest of us grants that group special rights.
>>
>I'm all for special rights for homosexuals.  You see, if special rights
>are granted to homosexuals we ALL benefit.  It's very simple.  If you 
>want to get the same special rights as a homosexual, just say you're
>homosexual (even if you're not).  Who's going to question it? It's not
>like if you had to be of a certain color, or handicapped, or a veteran
>to get the special rights.  People can tell by records or by looking at
>you if you fall into one of these categories.  But if you're not homosexual
>and you say you are, who's to know?  Bring on the special rights for 
>EVERYONE!!

This bit of sarcasm helps to point out the silliness of the arguments.
As I pointed out in a previous article, the *only* special consideration
being considered by *anyone* is the inclusion of homosexuals in the hate
crime statutes, to which Pat Myrto responded:

In article <1799@rwing.UUCP> pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:
>Any law that sets aside a specific group or groups for special consideration
>that are not afforded the rest of us creates special rights.  Even
>if that law provides special sanctions if ORDINARY rights are denied
>a certain group, by the fact that it gives that group avenues of redress
>unavailable to the rest of us grants that group special rights.

Pat twists the language sufficiently to suggest that being protected from
skinheads is a special right.  Fortunately, Charles Wilson exposes the
idiocy of the argument by pointing out that he could then protect himself
from getting picked on by someone by claiming the cover of homosexuality.
(And making himself the target of skinheads!)

There is a long history of law in this country that protects the rights
of all of us by focusing the law's protection on those most threatened.
The problem I see is that as more of us are threatened by a deteriorating
society, some of us will believe that we are safer if society's resources
aren't wasted protecting lesser citizens.  In fact, none of us is any
safer that the least protected citizen.

John Light
From: bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:15:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: Celestia.1992Nov11.171510.1334
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA

In <MS-C.721459153.1103527590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) writes:

:I don't think the government should be in the banking business.  It's bad
:enough that they are in the money-printing business.

:However, there can be no doubt that the robber barons such as Charles Keating
:belong in the slammer, preferably at hard labor, and their assets confiscated
:to repay those they ripped off (including the US government funds for the bail
:out).

:Keating is a prime example of a slimeball.  Republicrats and Demopublicans
:both fell over each other to kiss Keating's ass.  Cranston & co belong in the
:slammer with him.

And all the politicians they bought too!

Bill
-- 
INTERNET:  bill@Celestial.COM   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
SPEED COSTS MONEY -- HOW FAST DO YOU WANT TO GO?
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: The Election
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:08:27 GMT

In article <MS-C.720933958.1103527590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU> mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) writes:
|Perot's 15% should send a message to President-elect Clinton and to
|soon-to-be-ex-President Bush.  Perot siphoned many more voters from
|Bush than from Clinton.  One of Clinton's aides was saying how pissed
|off they are at Perot for `taking away our >50% majority' and how they
|intend to pay no attention to Perot or the movement he represents.

Well, at least NPR reported that exit poll data indicated Perot hurt Clinton
more than Bush.  If Perot had not been an available choice, their data
indicated Clinton would have gotten %48 (up %5) and Bush %41 (up %3).
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I believe we're on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy,
but that could change.
--Dan Quayle, addressing a London Newspaper Society forum on Europe, April 1990
________________________________________________________________________________
From: dickwin@sequent.com (Dick Winningstad)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Date: 10 Nov 92 00:13:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Nov10.001354.9471
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Nov9.113402.23405@sequent.com> newell@sequent.com (Donald Newell) writes:
>In article <1992Nov8.174212.6515@sequent.com> dickwin@sequent.com (Dick Winningstad) writes:
>
Reply to my posting:
>
> The intent of Measure 9 was to discriminate, plain and simple.  The "progay"
> government stance I hear about most often was the executive order by
> Goldschmidt barring discrimination in state jobs. Alas, this was overturned
> by M8 a couple years ago. What terrible laws are being instituted at the
> local level that I haven't heard about?
>
> I'm not sure of the efficacy of putting the right to not be harassed up
> for a vote. At what granularity should this happen? Which of your
> prerogatives are you wanting me to vote on?
>
> Don N.

Yes the intent was to discriminate. Because of the push to have the
gay lifestyle accepted as a normal alternative to a hetrosexual life
the measure was put on the ballot. Another locally sucessful act is
the Multnomah Co. order allowing homosexual couples to have spousal
medical benifits. Also Portland has a nondiscrimination towards
homosexuals regulation. The question for a lot of people was whether
to allow the advancement of priveledges by doing nothing or try to
stop the progression by taking a procative stance.

You ask about granularity, why single out homosexuals for fair
treatment? Why not demand job related considerations be the only
criteria for hiring if you want to specify how to hire people?

Getting back to the discrimination matter, there are people that do
not believe that homosexuality is a moral life style. When people
look at a problem with different assumptions about the problem
agreement on a solution is highly unlikely. I would suggest you try
to educate people to your ("your" is used generically I do not know
what your specific assumptions on this issue are) basic assumptions
that homosexuality is ok and not an immoral lifestyle. Once the
assumptions are the same, the solution should be the same.

For the record, I will repeat that I am not into gay bashing. I do
believe that gays, and anyone for that matter, should not bothered in
their private lives.

Dickwin

>
>
> Proclaimer: Neither of our statements should be construed as being
>             representative of Sequent or the people who work there.
>
>
>
>
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:03:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.030813.3274@klic.rain.com> keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
|There are a large number of people, such as Dick, who can vote either way on
|these future measures.  If we learn how to talk to these people, one on one,
|learn their feelings, and assuage their fears, we can defeat those future OCA
|measures.  We won't educate anybody by calling them names or making fun of
|them. 

Thank you.  We may disagree on other issues, but I couldn't have said this
better myself.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

Abraham Lincoln once turned away a job applicant because he didn't like his
face.  Aides were critical, saying that wasn't a satisfactory reason.
"Every man over 40," Lincoln explained, "is responsible for his face."
________________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: rick@eaglet.rain.com (Rick Lindsley)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Organization: Quagmire Annex
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 07:59:40 GMT

First let me congratulate a measure 9 supporter on posting that they
support measure 9, and why. I must admit, I was a little surprised at
the polls beforehand and the eventual result, because it just didn't
seem I knew *anyone* that supported measure 9. Where *were* these
people?

To that end, let me state I was, am, and will be against a measure like
measure 9. The simple reason is, I believe you should not discriminate
against people for reasons that are unrelated to the "privileges" that
supporters of this measure wish to deny them.

If you want to rent, and you've proven that you (personally) trash
apartments and houses, then certainly a landlord has a reason to
discriminate against you. If the last person that trashed my apartment
was a white, female, short, handicapped, gay person .. well, that
really doesn't allow me to draw conclusions about white, female, short,
handicapped, or gay people. Only about one.

The same argument could be made for a promotion, a loan, job benefits,
or whatever.

Don't get me wrong. There are people I don't like, just from the way
they look. There are people that I look at suspiciously because of the
way they dress, or what they say, or even the way they carry on. I'm
human; I do feel this way. Sometimes I'm ashamed of it; sometimes I
just feel like it's just the safe and prudent thing to do.  But even
feeling that way, I would never, NEVER advocate legislating my fears
away. I learned as a young child that the things I fear today I may
value tomorrow. (Consider spinach! :) I would do myself a disservice by
legislating my fears away instead of inspecting them more closely. And
of course by putting it into law, I "protect" others from that experience
as well.

Clearly, dickwin@sequent.com and I do disagree on one very basic
premise which would indicate to me we cannot probably arrive at a
compromise that leaves us both feeling comfortable. He believes that
homosexuals choose their lifestyle; I do not. That right there will
lead you off on many distinct, legitimate tangents on a variety of
subjects. If you accept that it is voluntary, then I can see where many
other arguments become weaker or less important to you. I would
respectfully suggest in the absence of scientific evidence one way or
the other, that we err on the side of caution and compassion.

Don't provide another means to make people's lives worse.

Rick
From: larryd@stein.u.washington.edu (Larry Desoto)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:22:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov5.172237.16957
Distribution: pnw
Organization: University of Washington

monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:

>In article <1789@rwing.UUCP> pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:
>>
>>Well, ya better hang onto yer wallet.  Those making purchases on time
>>payments, do NOT try to pay it off early - better to pay it off in cheap
>>dollars, and to hang onto any cash you have, when the inflation starts
>>spiraling.  

>Do you have any reasoned arguments for this shrill prediction?
>This is 1992, not 1976, and Bill Clinotn is not Jimmy Carter, and,
>presumably, energy prices will not triple (as in the 1970's).

Jimmy Carter was ineffectual, but basically a benign and decent man.  Slick
Willie has demonstrated that he will say or do anything to get (and 
presumably hold) power.  Maybe those of you that hated Bush so much weren't
paying attention to what he said he wants to do.  Well, I for one am hoping
for the best but I also suspect those who voted for change are going to
get more than they bargained for.  Good luck to us all.  I think we are
really going to need it.

--
Larry
From: pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto)
Newsgroups: pnw.general
Subject: Re: The Election
Date: 5 Nov 92 08:37:39 GMT
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Totally Unorganized

In article <1992Nov4.231539.28294@nwnexus.WA.COM> edm@halcyon.com (Ed Morin) writes:
>alpinist@eskimo.celestial.com (David Butler) writes:
>
>>Looks like the forces of evil have been voted out and the forces of
>>good have been voted in.    :)
>
>I certainly would _not_ say that!  I think I would phrase it like:
>
>Looks like the forces of evil have been voted out and replaced with
>"blow-dried" ones...

Well, ya better hang onto yer wallet.  Those making purchases on time
payments, do NOT try to pay it off early - better to pay it off in cheap
dollars, and to hang onto any cash you have, when the inflation starts
spiraling.  Looks like time to consider converting savings to gold
coins.  Unlike many of the young voters who supported Clinton, I
had to support myself during the Carter Utopia, no parents handling
the task of making a buck.  There was times I went days without money
for food during that wonderful period.  Now we have the SAME PEOPLE
in power again (just a blow-dried front man instead of one with 850
teeth).  Not surprising, Iraq is celebrating with a national holiday,
while Kuwait citizens are holding a wake.  Saddam knows that this time
around when he stomps into Kuwait, we will do nothing except call him
a few names:  Clinton has made it very clear what his position on
intervening in that situation is.

Our new governor is allready talking about the need to institute several
CATEGORIES of programs, and the 'need' for revenue to 'fill the gap'
(read taxes to support all of it).  Also, expect him to try to gut any
sanity in the WA gun laws.

Clinton has discussed changing the Party symbol from a donkey to a
condom:  It stands for inflation, covers a lot of pricks, stops
production, and gives one a false sense of security while being
screwed.  :-)

Whether many folks know it or not, this country is REALLY in DEEP
doo-doo now.  Unless one is a 'protected' minority, on welfare,
or wealthy with most of one's liquid assets OUT of this country,
there are grim times ahead.  Everyone will be making 'minimum wage'
after the new 'fair' taxes are done 'balancing things out'.   Anyone
making more than a subsistance wage will be considered a nasty
money-grubber.   1/2 :-)


-- 
pat@rwing.uucp                                  (Pat Myrto),  Seattle, WA
                      If all else fails, try:
         ...!uunet!{pilchuck, polari}!rwing!pat
WISDOM:    "Travelling unarmed is like boating without a life jacket" 
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Distribution: pnw
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:37:26 GMT

In <1992Nov10.002542.23406@u.washington.edu> dxxb@hardy.u.washington.edu (David Barts) writes:

:monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:

:>Perhaps with a line-item veto (which Clinton wants), some form of

:Oh *goody*.  Concentrate more power in the hands of a single individual.
:Just what we need:  a more authoritarian government.  Fortunately, I
:don't place much chance in this happening.

I have to disagree in this case.  The line-item veto is necessary
because it's quite common to have amendments tacked onto
legislation that have absolutely nothing to do with the main
purpose of the bill.  Tack your favorite piece of pork onto an
otherwise useful piece of legislation (assuming that such a thing
exists :-), and it may well get enacted as law.

I personally think we have far too many laws and that ALL laws
ought to have a specific life (say 5 years).  Sure it would take
time to re-enact important legislation, but this might keep
congress out of our pockets a bit.

Bill
-- 
INTERNET:  bill@Celestial.COM   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
SPEED COSTS MONEY -- HOW FAST DO YOU WANT TO GO?
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Inflation (of fears, not prices)
Organization: Tacoma Screw Products, Inc.
Distribution: pnw
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 14:42:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.172237.16957@u.washington.edu> larryd@stein.u.washington.edu (Larry Desoto) writes:
>
>Jimmy Carter was ineffectual, but basically a benign and decent man.  

Carter benign and decent?  The man who wanted to ban the use of private
boats to conserve fuel?  In the same vein, remember his proposal to
issue each car a sticker stating on which days of the week it could
and could not be used?  On another car-related note, he wanted to
outlaw convertibles (why do you suppose they made a "comeback" after
Reagan was elected - the car companies destroyed their tooling in
anticipation of the law - it came that close).  On another trans-
portation-related topic, remember Brock Adams, Jimmuh's Secretary of
Transportation, the guy who said that people would have to make do
will less, uh, transportation.  The paranoid among us could interpret
this whole thing as a concerted effort from the Carter administration
to clamp down of the mobility of American citizens.  Give me anybody -
FDR, LBJ, Nixon, Huey Long, Boss Tweed, but not Jimmy Carter, ferchrissake!
Never again!  I will fight his political rehabilitation as my Sacred
Mission.
:-)

-- 
David Breneman     Sys Admin, Tacoma Screw Products, Inc. |  ____  ____  ____
dcb@tacoma.uucp           |   SCREWIE the TSP CLOWN sez-  |   /   /___  /___/ 
 ..!uunet!tacoma!dcb      | "Zinc & cadmium plating stops |  /   ____/ / 
CompuServe: 75760,1232    |  rust & acts as a lubricant!" |
Newsgroups: pnw.general
From: billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Post election comments on Prop. 9
Organization: SEANEWS - Seattle Public Access News & Mail
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:24:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.204554.19304@mdd.comm.mot.com> bradley@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Bradley) writes:
>>If anyone doubts this, consider for a moment that religion IS a
>>matter of personal choice.  What would you think of a proposed law
>>declaring that Christianity is unnatural, immoral, peverse and
>>wrong, and requiring the schools to teach it as such?
>
>That is what the public schools teach, if not explicitly then
>implictly

You're kidding, right?  You must have forgotten a smiley.  This is the
"poor Christianity is picked on everyone" rhetoric from the
pseudo-evangelists.  I didn't think anyone actually believed that
BS.

How exactly do public schools teach that Christianity is any of these
things?  By not allowing state-sanctioned prayer in schools?  By not
allowing the teaching of religion in schools?  There are clear, rational,
reasonable legal restrictions on this.

Secondly, you really do not want religion in schools.  Really.  I'll repeat
that.  You, personally, really do not want religion in schools.

Step back and think about it for a second... If we teach religion in schools
how do we decide *which* religion to teach?  Personally I think we should head
on into Satanism, because students don't have any exposure to that in normal
USA life.  It would be more educational.  Yep, Satanism would be the official
religion of schools.

What?  You don't like that?  How about Islam?  Hare Krishna?  Buddism (there
are a lot more of them then there are Christians).

Christianity is far from the only religion in the world.  It's not even the
most popular.  Our laws against state-supported religion exist to protect
the minority religions from the tyranny of the majority religions.

Don't be a religious tryant.  Also don't put yourself in a position where
others can exercise religious tryanny over you.

Bill
-- 
SEANEWS  []  Seattle News + Mail  []  Public Access  []  +1 206 747 NEWS
E-mail for PGP key.   MD5 (no sigs) is: 8e253e95133365a292261c7d0da58bcb
Newsgroups: pnw.general,pnw.motss