HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Private vs Public schools (was: Is this a socialist county?
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:11:02 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments, Inc

In article <1992Aug10.232142.1393@access.digex.com> steve-b@access.digex.com (Steve Brinich) writes:
>  >  ...even though you do not use a service directly, you benefit from
>  >its existance and from others using it.  Hence, you should pay.
>
>  The bottom line is that everyone who makes an honest living in society
>provides all sorts of incidental benefits to everyone else (and everyone
>who makes a *dis*honest living should be punished for whatever frauds
>and thefts he engages in for his livelihood).  Ultimately, one must either
>accept that the incidentals all cancel out in the long run, or else try
>to strangle the world in red tape in order to account for them on some
>formal tally sheet.

Except, of course, for the small problem that they DON'T all cancel
out in the long run.  Unless, of course, you mean the VERY long run,
in which case the cancellation occurs at death.





-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Re: Anti-religious fanatics (Was Re: School Choice )
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 04:23:13 GMT

In article <ATAYLOR.92Aug17180945@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
><In article <24922@castle.ed.ac.uk> fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes) writes:
>
><   The thing is that christianity has shown a penchant for this sort of
><   thing. Apart from the inquisition I'm thinking of:
>
><   The Crusades.
><   The Genocide of the Incas.
><   The murder of complete villages in Europe who were accused of "Heresy"
><   (ref: Simon De Montfort, The Albigensians, The Gnostics, various others...)
><   The European Witch-trials (one third of the female population killed in
><   some areas).
>
><   So this "aberration" seems to be a regular feature of christianity.
><   It's a reasonable question to ask whether a penchant for mass-murder
><   could be expected from a creed whose god is also depicted as having
><   a very strong genocidal and murderous streak.
>
>	I note that all of those events occurred rather a while back.
>
>	However, let's continue in this direction: socialism, as
>	religion, has killed more than all previous religious
>	crusades.
>
>	* The 1920's purges of "kulaks" in the USSR
>	* The 1930's purge of the Communist Party of the USSR
>	* The 1930's purge of Communists by the NSDAP in Germany
>	* The 1930's purge of the Army in the USSR

No problem so far.

>	* War in Europe from 1939 to 1945, instigated by Socialists,
>	  continued by Socialists.

Your being a bit overly broad grouping Nazi's and Marxists together, this
would be like grouping Christians and Moslems together.

>	* The killing in Cambodia

I wouldn't be surprised if the people murdered in religious wars numbers
in atleast 10's of millions.
The deaths by neglect are atleast 10's of millions (maybe someone could
explain the role of the church in the medival plagues). This may climb
to 100 million in the next 10 years since Christianity has fought all
attempts to cure or control HIV transmission.

>	And so forth and so on. Now, it will be argued that
>	"those actions weren't carried on by REAL socialists"....
>	but that's the same argument as "the crusades weren't
>	carried on by REAL christians".

I would expect any Marxist to explain how they where different from
the other Marxists before I would seriously consider supporting them.
Likewise I have no reason to believe modern Christianity is much different,
at the Republican convention we saw yet more attempts to shove Christianity
down the throats of all people.
Why should Christians have the right to tell me I have to pay higher tax's
because they think homosexuality is sinful (marriage provides a tax break)?

-- 
>>Unix/C Contract worker available 5 years C/unix work experience<<  ______
Available for Telecommuting/Travel and contracts on the T Line       \    /
in the Boston MA area. Send me e-mail for a copy of my Resume.        \  /
       -- VWIS 508-793-9568 (2400 baud), Linux support BBS.--          \/
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.politics.clinton
From: dks@athena.mit.edu (dks)
Subject: Content-free Discourse (was Re: FAQ: The Record Thing)
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 23:43:14 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.195933.7846@ncsu.edu>,
dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>
>Anyone who believes that a Democratic President and
>a Democratically-controlled Congress will keep a lid on
>spending is fooling themselves.  

I have quoted the entire body of this post -- one statement.

This is the sort of statement that reveals more about its
author than about its own content.  It is irrefutable because
it denies the possibility of refutation.  It says:

	If [A] believes X, then [A]'s thought process is flawed.

How is [A] supposed to refute this sort of statement?  Any response
that [A] cares to make is immediately dismissed as another instance
of [A]'s self-delusion.  In the sense that it demands silent
acquiescence, it is, essentially, a religious statement.

I have nothing against religious statements as long as they are not
masquerading as argument.  But when I am confronted with them in a
so-called argument, the only response that seems to get through is
counter-religion.  So:
	
	If Doug Holtsinger believes that he exists,
	he is fooling himself.

	If Doug Holtsinger believes that he has a clue,
	he is fooling himself.

	If Doug Holtsinger believes that he isn't fooling himself,
	he is fooling himself.

Why do people make such statements?  I can understand that one or two of
these things might creep into a passionate argument, but when the entire
body of a post is just one ridiculous statement, it's time to shut down
Usenet, chuck everything, and move to Portugal.


Dhanesh

PS: Doug -- I'm just picking on your post as an example.
            I'm quite sure you're really a Brilliant Political Analyst,
            Superb Surfer, and All-Round Nice Guy.  In fact, I'd be
            surprised if you weren't.  OK?


Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:59:06 GMT

In article <NEERI.92Aug14005750@iis.ethz.ch> neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher) writes:
>Excuse me if this looks quoted extremely out of context,

It is, and in a way that distorts the message.  If that's the
best argument you've got....

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:2548 alt.politics.elections:11323 alt.politics.clinton:2637
From: sderby@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Stuart P. Derby)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: TV COVERAGE IGNORES GOP SCRIPT
Keywords: delegates
Date: 23 Aug 1992 14:26:36 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx

In article <NEERI.92Aug19131726@iis.ethz.ch> 
neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Neeracher) writes:
>
> [...]
>
>Another question: CNN said that about a third of Republican Congresspersons
>were not going to the convention. Does anybody have the percentage of
>Democratic Congresspersons going to the Democrat convention for comparison ?
>
  Uh, I saw it somewhere, probably Newsweek, it was upper 90's I think,
but they noted that that was not completely comparable, since Dem. rules
make their national Congresscritters automatic delegates, whereas Rep.
rules do not. On the other hand, it does say a little something about
Rep. faith in their candidate. Now that Bush is starting his campaign
travels, let's see how many Congresscritters reach for Bush's
coattails...


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stuart Derby - sderby@bcm.tmc.edu  | When in trouble, when in doubt,
Baylor College of Medicine         | run in circles, scream and shout.
Houston, Texas                     | -from _Glory Road_, R.A.Heinlen
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:1423 alt.politics.clinton:1846 alt.politics.perot:1257 rec.humor:25995 talk.bizarre:25813 talk.politics.misc:39428
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot,rec.humor,talk.bizarre,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 19:47:52 GMT
 <BsxJ4r.HDC@news.larc.nasa.gov> <1992Aug13.180103.27080@news.columbia.edu>
Organization: SPSS Inc.

egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

>In article <BsxJ4r.HDC@news.larc.nasa.gov> avik@icase.edu (Avik Banerjee) writes:
>>a president doesn`t have to be above the law, he can change the
>>law so it wont be broken.

>Depends what you mean by law.  If you mean what comes out of Congress,
>the President can't necessarily change that.  He can try to go around
>it by not telling anyone what he's doing (a la Reagan), though.

>[On the other hand, I must commend Bush: at least he didn't have
>half his administration indicted.]

Yet. 

I'm just waiting for "Fishing for Politics II", a new beginning.  Iraqgate,
don't ya know...

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:1783 alt.politics.elections:10675 alt.fan.dan-quayle:2538
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Abortion is Stealing! (was Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!)
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 19:06:40 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS, New Orleans, LA

v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff) writes:

>
> Like I said before, it's very simple.  The conclusion follows logically from
> the premises.  While he hasn't insisted on the death penalty for those who ha
> abortions, consistency demands this conclusion.  You can't have it both ways:
> claim that abortion is murder, demand that murderers be executed, and then
> "coddle" the murderer of unborn babies without being properly labeled a
> hypocrite.
>

This sounds like a fantastic appeal defense for an axe-murder or some such.
Claim that if Bush lets all of the moms who have abortions off the hook, then
it's discriminatory to execute the guys who kill folks during robberies, mass
murderers, etc...



|Edward J. Branley                         elendil@mintir.New-Orleans.LA.US|
|Seashell Software                                UUCP:  rex!mintir!elendil|
|3508 North Woodlawn Avenue                          Compu$erve: 71237,2227|
|Metairie, LA   70006       voice: +1-504-455-5087     bbs: +1-504-455-8665|
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.theory
From: fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Anti-religious fanatics (Was Re: School Choice )
Date: 18 Aug 92 13:12:17 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:

[after my piece on Christianity's propensity to have its adherents
commit mass-murder...]

>	I note that all of those events occurred rather a while back.

>	However, let's continue in this direction: socialism, as
>	religion, has killed more than all previous religious
>	crusades.

>	* The 1920's purges of "kulaks" in the USSR
>	* The 1930's purge of the Communist Party of the USSR
>	* The 1930's purge of Communists by the NSDAP in Germany
>	* The 1930's purge of the Army in the USSR
>	* War in Europe from 1939 to 1945, instigated by Socialists,
>	  continued by Socialists.
>	* The killing in Cambodia

>	And so forth and so on. Now, it will be argued that
>	"those actions weren't carried on by REAL socialists"....
>	but that's the same argument as "the crusades weren't
>	carried on by REAL christians".

No such argument from me. It's pretty obvious that socialism is a
dangerous creed too. The difference I feel is that I'd generally expect
political creeds to cause this sort of thing. Claims have been made of
christianity though, that it makes for a better world. The historical
evidence seems to negate this claim and lead rather to the conclusion
that christianity is significantly worse than other religions in terms
of contribution to murder. I'd be more impressed if you could quote
instances of genocide for say buddhism, taoism, shinto, or even the
scientologists. 

FoFP
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush shows his love for his children!
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 16:04:17 GMT

In <1992Aug13.152926.15159@ncsu.edu> dsh@odin.ece.ncsu.edu ( ) writes:
>In article <23582@oasys.dt.navy.mil> 
>mulvihil@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Lawrence Mulvihill) writes:
>> If it is morally wrong, then it is morally wrong.  If it is
>> murder, then it is murder if his relatives do it.  The inconsistancy
>> demonstrates the moral bankruptcy of the thinking.
>No, it demonstrates that Bush is a loving parent who would
>support his children and grandchildren no matter what they did. 

Yes, but then when he says "it's the woman's choice after all", and doesn't
say anything about how it's wrong "but I'd still support her", it sure
sounds like he's either waffling again, or seriously a hypocrite.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
             "See you guys ar--see you.  Er.  Great.  Fine.  Ciao."
     As the Bently skidded off into the darkness Ligur said, "Wossat mean?"
            "It's Italian," said Hastur.  "I think it means 'food'."
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,tx.politics
From: phil@onetouch.COM (Philip D. Turner)
Subject: Re: Evil government
Organization: MCS/OneTouch, Inc.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:00:08 GMT

richard@technology.com (Richard Murphy) writes:

>I heard enough about the evils of government provided health
>care and so on. Try this out: I pay a good chunk of dinero for
>my HMO coverage here in Texas. Back in 1980 when we(family) first started
>using HMOs, the service was pretty good. Now it is terrible.
>Bad record keeping, no record keeping, can't get appointments for
>4 weeks, calls never returned, the list is long. The previous
>HMO we were using was dropped by my company after many complaints
>and is now being investigated for billing fraud. These are
>multi-state large organizations, very profit oriented, who don't
>give a damn about their customers. OK, now the contrast. Several
>months back, we were visiting Honduras, not exactly your world
>superpower or paragon of capitalism. We needed some air-sickness
>pills and the community nurse in this tiny town quickly gave us
>some without the slightest hassle. She told us that she was
>a government nurse and she made weekly rounds visiting several
>villages to check on sick kids, old people, etc. Somehow the idea
>that these fishermen in Honduras get better health care than
>several people I know here in Texas really stinks. 

>Who knows, maybe government can't fix it, but don't tell me it can
>even more messed up if they tried....

Somehow I don't see how some woman handing out free Dramamine equals
good government health care.  But, perhaps that really is the issue.
Gov't run healthcare would mean lots of little freebies for thing that
most of us could get along without (e.g., seeing a doctor for a cold is
perhaps comforting, but really doesn't have a big determination on whether
or not the patient recovers), but would prove to be disasterous for those
who are really ill.

-- 
Phil Turner					phil@onetouch.COM
Columbus, OH	 				...!uunet!onetouch!phil
There's more than one way to skin a cat:
	Way number 27 -- Use an electric sander.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
From: stanton@athena.cs.uga.edu (Demon Piperess)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!
Date: 12 Aug 92 15:34:59 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

Re: Bush's stand on a constitutional ban against abortion.

Okay I'm rather new to voting, this'll be my first year.  But
*I* will not choose a President who tries to dictate the morals
of America, I'd much prefer one who would lead the country while
at the same time, LISTENING to what the people want.  Babs! Lend
Bush your hearing aid hon! He needs it!!!

Cat
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:2491 talk.politics.misc:41242 alt.politics.elections:11264 talk.politics.theory:3787 misc.education:3197
From: elg@elgamy.sccsi.com (Eric Lee Green)
Date: 21 Aug 92 20:54:45 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory,misc.education
Subject: Re: School choice (Re: Is this a socialist county?)
Distribution: world
Organization: Eric's Amiga 2000 @ Home

From article <1992Aug20.215145.733@clipper.ingr.com>, by ald@clipper.ingr.com (Al Date):
> The Lancaster Schools are an interesting historical
> example of innovative education accomplished at low cost.
> The basic idea was that the older kids
> learned how to teach certain subjects to the younger ones.  This
> reduced the number of teachers required.  Of course, the public
> schools wont have any of this, as they are run by the NEA.

Actually, you are talking about techniques well known back in "one room
schoolhouse" days, but little known today. The problem is not the NEA --
the problem is colleges of education which refuse to teach the techniques,
principals who are ex-football-coaches, and school board members who think
they know "the way it 'spozed to be", i.e., exactly like it is.

One of the most exciting things to come down the pike, research-wise, is
the research on heterogenous grouping -- which by definition includes some
instances of older/more advanced kids teaching less advanced kids. Together
with the research on peer tutoring, this has some pretty interesting
implications. Unfortunately, "experimental" programs like these are the
first things cut when funding gets short (like now, when most states are
running budget deficits and reducing aid to schools). There are many of us
teachers who would LOVE to innovate -- but we're not given the money and
the administrative go-ahead to do so.

Regarding the NEA -- they don't run the majority of the schools in the
country. In fact, the majority of schools in the country do not have an
collective bargaining agreement with a union (i.e., they're not unionized).
Of the schools that ARE unionized, it is true that the NEA has a majority
of those... but that doesn't mean a whole lot, especially since many of the
big cities are no longer NEA strongholds. Where the NEA has most impact is
in national politics, where their well-lubricated PACs and adept PR wing
swiftly swing into action when anything threatens their interests. This,
however, is no different from Shell Oil or Monsanto or any number of other
organizations which have PACs...

--
 Eric Lee Green  elg@elgamy.sccsi.com         Dodson Elementary
 (713) 437-6908  uunet!nuchat!elgamy!elg      Houston, TX
                "Kids are kids, no matter what"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory
From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Subject: Re: FAQ: The Record Thing
Organization: Wayne State University, C&IT
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:47:57 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.133200@IASTATE.EDU>
danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes:
 
>   Um, howsabout the 873 gazillion stomptillion dollars spent on "deregulation"
>of the S&L industry?  Talk about your hidden costs.  wheeeezzzzeee.  The
>deregulation _was_ a Republican initiative, wasn't it?  Of course the
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
In a word, no. The two bills that made up DIDMCA were signed into law
by Carter in 1980. Garn-St.Germain was signed later, by Reagan, but
the initial plan was Carter's. Of course, the fact that so much time
elapsed between the beginning of the S&L failures and the desire to
start shutting them down was a bipartisan crime.
 
Dereg did not initiate the S&L failures; the historically high interest
rates of the Carter era did that. Dereg only oallowed the insolvent S&Ls
to attempt to gamble their way to solvency with government insurance.
Interestly, the *solvent* S&Ls prospered further under deregulation.
 
>occasional
>Democrat (e.g. Cranston) manages to make a bit off the chaos too.
>
>   The figure for the cost of the cleanup is derived from a Dave Barry column.
>
>Dan
>Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
>
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 Michael Joseph Edelman           Wayne State University
 medelma@cms.cc.wayne.edu         Computing & Information Technology
 mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu        Detroit, Michigan
 medelma@waynest1.bitnet          (313) 577-0742
 KE8YY
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:2507 alt.fan.dan-quayle:2852
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 14:14:53 EDT
From: <JFL4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: DATELINE: Bush fucks up!

In article <1992Aug22.055327.21185@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David
Condon) says:
>
>In a previous article, andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) says:
>
>>In article <1992Aug19.224946.12105@news.columbia.edu>
>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>>Interestingly enough, some of those communities have FREE pre-natal
>>care available; the rates continue to be high because it isn't used.
>
>Some examples would enhance your argument.
>
Actually, this is a beautiful example of a Reagan/Bush end-run:  it
is true that some free care is available (has been for a long time) but
during the Reagan/Bush years, resources were cut for the clinics.  As
a result, there is *less* staff to support *more* people - hours were
cut, lines became long.  In the end, Reagan/Bush got to say that they
did support various social programs (because they existed) but were
able to gut them at the same time.

A perfect example of this is the contagious disease eradication program
in the U.S.  When I was a child (*long before Reagan/Bush!*) I was
innoculated for the various childhood diseases (smallpox, measles, mumps,
etc.).  Most of these had been almost wiped-out in the early 80s.  Now,
they're making a comeback.  I recently heard an interview with several
families in public health clinics that said, in effect, they had come
several times to get their kids innoculated but had waited in line until
closing without being helped.  And, they couldn't come back because they
couldn't miss any more work without losing their jobs.  So, the kids
would go without if they didn't get helped *that day*.  Keep in mind
that they were interviewed in line, in the clinic.

Sorry this post is so serious.  To paraphrase someone else, so is this
election.

Jeff Luck                             *Standard Disclaimer*
CES Systems Office
Penn State University        "Whatever you want, I'm for...."
JFL4@PSUVM.PSU.EDU                      Quayle to Ohio farmers, 1988
Xref: sparky alt.politics.bush:1551 alt.politics.clinton:1921 alt.politics.perot:1276 talk.bizarre:25962 talk.politics.misc:39656