HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: 18 Nov 92 14:28:23 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <1992Nov16.181440.29961@watson.ibm.com> johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:

>David L. Cathey (davidc@montagar.com) wrote:
>:                                           Remember John, even your kids are
>: learning how to bribe the teacher and cheat.  Nice.  I guess that is the
>: only way you believe that football players can get good grades.

>No, I'm saying that they only way they can play football is to pass unrelated
>classes, AND they don't give a hoot about the unrelated classes, then they will
>find a way to pass, and it probably won't be the way you want.

Then they've shown they don't have the discipline necessary to play
the game at a professional level -- at which point they're going to
need some of those classes that you want them to not have to take.

>: 	Does that mean that the football player doesn't have to show up for
>: practice if he doesn't want as well?

>Of course.  And if he doesn't, they kick him off the team.  Wouldn't it be
>absurd if they punished him instead by forbidding him from going to math class?
>If you really want to learn math, you should be willing to work a little harder
>at playing football.  Call it incentive.

Only if the purpose of the public schools was to teach football.  It
isn't. 

>: 	You want the student to get what he wants, without doing anything to
>: earn it.  That is also an ethic.  One you seem to believe in.

>You don't have to "earn" liberty in this country.  It's a given.

I suggest you check some history and see just what 'liberty' has cost.
No, you can't be FORCED to earn it, but if sufficient people are
unwilling to pay for it for you, then you won't have it.

-- 
"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.
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: CSPAN Voter Manipulation
Date: 18 Nov 92 01:27:31 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin

In article <BxGzv9.813@NeoSoft.com> hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen) writes:
>jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>> Arkansas STILL ranks anywheres from 41st to 49th in economy, education,
>> health, environment, basic services, etc.  Arkansas is STILL the hick

>Giving me point data won't answer that question. 
>In order to prove your point you have to show that Arkansas is in worse
>shape than it was when he became governor.  


I think Mr. Perot said it best in the debates, "It's irrelevant."

Arkansas is smaller than DFW.  How he managed that, good or bad, is
not gonna tell you jack about how he'll run the U.S.

Clinton is a total unknown.  We don't know what he'll do.

Is he for against free trade?  Who knows?
Will he really lower middle class taxes?  Who knows? 
He's been on both sides of every issue.  He won because he wasn't Bush.

The only thing that we DO know is that he will compromise.


From the Wall Street Journal 11/17/92:

    Clinton Signaled Willingness to Compromise in Dealings with Congress

	The president-elect, after meeting with the top three House and
	Senate leaders, softened his stance on several controversial
	proposals he had advocated.  Clinton distanced himself from a
	pledge to push to allow homosexuals in the military and backed
	off from promises to advocate a line-item veto and to pressure
	Congress to cut its staff by 25%.

The big three were Foley (flaming big spending liberal), Mitchell
(ditto), and Gephart, (frothing foaming protectionist.)

The liberal Democratic Congress has been waiting for 12 years to have
it's way with a sweet little virginal Democratic President.  For an
instant it looked like Clinton might just have big enough balls to
go in there and effect real CHANGE.  After all that's supposedly
why he was elect right?

Backing down on the line item veto really irks me.  If you read
Clinton's little book that's one of his big promises, to push for
that hard.  He's already given up and he ISN'T EVEN IN OFFICE YET.

What a wimp!

-- 
--
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |        Austin, TX
- FICA isn't a retirement plan. Money's spent. It'll be gone when you need it.-
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000)
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:58:58 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

fred j mccall 575-3539 (mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com) wrote:
: To what?  The only system that avoids these kinds of costs (and it
: doesn't, really, it just selectively imposes them) is total anarchy.

..and the only two colors are black and white.  Right.

: What you save in taxes you'll surely spend in ammunition.

At least you have a choice that way.

: Gee, I object to that, too.  Given that we both object to that sort of
: absolute statement, why did you even bring it up?  Of course, it's
: another thing entirely to say that people who drop out or flunk out
: are more likely to wind up being criminals than those who don't.

Especially with no evidence besides "Fred thinks it's the case".

: >I could say the same for English, Math, History, and Science.
: 
: You could, but then you'd be missing the point of having schools.  Of
: course, you don't seem to get the point, anyway, so I guess that
: wouldn't be any different.

You mean I'm missing Fred's point of having schools.  And we all know that 
Fred's opinion is the only one that matters.

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
    "Egad, a base tone denotes a bad age" -- TMBG   "I Palindrome I"
From: reed@rd08.wg2.waii.com (Michael Reed)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Clinton has won...watch your pocket!
Date: 18 Nov 92 20:40:05 GMT
Reply-To: reed@rd08.wg2.waii.com
Distribution: tx
Organization: Western Geophysical Research & Development

In article <1992Nov15.140420.13884@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
|> 
|> And let's not mention the jiggery-pokery by which the Republican
|> Executive has made its own deficits look smaller by folding in the
|> SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS.  Yes, indeed, it's sure run much better with
|> Republicans making those decisions.  NOT!
|> 

Fred you must subscribe to Joseph Goebell's view that if you tell a big
enough lie often enough, people will believe.  As I and several others
have posted previously:

THE SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS IS NOT SUBTRACTRED FROM THE BUDGET DEFICIT.

It is a federal law that it can not be.  If you do not believe me, please
show me a federal budget where it is "folded in."  My budget in the
World Almanac, 1991 edition, page 102 shows a revenue entry:

Undistributed offsetting receipts: -89,155 (millions of dollars)

Being the econ wiz you claim to be, you should be able to figure out
what that is.

-- 
The above are my own opinions and mine alone.

*****************************************************************************
Dr. Michael Reed,
Western Geophysical, Research and Development Group
reed@rd08.wg2.waii.com
(713) 964-6322                     FAX: (713) 964-6372
*****************************************************************************
From: davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Football Failures at Bowie Force end of Season
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:47:00 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Montagar Software Concepts, Plano TX

In article <1992Nov16.185242.15081@watson.ibm.com>, johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:
> David L. Cathey (davidc@montagar.com) wrote:
> : 	Rights of the individual are more important that society.  Okay...
> : . . . 
> : 	Yep, John is really concerned about the rights of the individual that
> : was shot...  And none at all for the individual survivors still living.
> 
> David, HE'S DEAD.  Dead people don't have any rights.  What amazes me is that
> you are so concerned about where to put the body of a dead burglar.  If he
> left enough money to plant himself in the ground then fine.  If his family 
> wants to come pick his body up, then fine.

	So if I walk up and shoot you, it's okay?  You would no longer have
any rights (you're DEAD), so it wouldn't make any difference would it?

	Did I shoot you in self defense?  Premeditated homicide?  Was deadly
force required?  Both ways you are dead, but there is a definite legal
interpretation in violation of rights.  Which you appearently don't see...

> John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
>         My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
David L. Cathey		                |INET: davidc@montagar.com
Montagar Software Concepts              |UUCP: ...!montagar!davidc
P. O. Box 260772, Plano TX  75026-0772  |Fone: (214)-618-2117
From: curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: CHOICE: DEBATE BASED ON COMPETING PHILOSOPHIES
Date: 20 Nov 92 22:05:27 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin

In article <1992Nov12.223257.11398@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:

>There is no doubt that private school tuition would rise with the 
>availability of voucher money.  

sure there is
in fact, i disagree

if it did, then presto!, you'd have more private schools open up.

it's called supply and demand

but i'll make a different prediction in a similar vein:

	There is no doubt that PRIVATE and PUBLIC school EXCELLENCE
	    would rise with the availability of voucher money.

Once again it's simple economics.  If the public schools had to compete
they'd get better.  Right now they don't have to.

If you're worried about the poor getting screwed somehow then give them
bigger vouchers, or work it out some other way.

-- 
curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com (Curt L. Finch) | AIX NFS/NIS Field Quality 
My views are unrelated to those of IBM     |        Austin, TX
          - Fire public school administrators.  Hire more teachers. -
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill
Date: 19 Nov 92 23:05:59 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <y0y+r*Hk1@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:
>In article <1992Nov3.190629.2932@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, fred j mccall 575-3539 writes:
>
>> Jim, you seem to have missed the little fact that we don't WANT to
>> have to go to your churches.  That's the PROBLEM.  We see no reason
>
>Who is forcing you to go to church.  Who has even suggested such a thing?
>Why do you keep making up this stuff?
>
>> why we should have to subsidize the churches with special tax
>> exemptions.  And now people want us to subsidize sending their kids to
>> religious schools?  Makes me feel like I'm living in Iran.
>
>I wish that you were.  It would make you appreciate this country more.
>
>
>                                                Jim Pritchett
>
>
>UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
> or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp

Didn't someone say that the power to tax is the power to destroy?
Why should I have to subsidize sending Fred J. McCall's kids to
public schools? Just give me credit for the children I don't send
there. 

Iran indeed.  I really think he is seeing things in his opponents'
arguments that simply are not there.  And I thought that right wing
religious lunatics were the only ones who were paranoid. Is there
an official phobia called "fear of religion"? or "fear of religious 
people?" Maybe we could call it "diversiphobia".

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@
From: jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill
Date: 15 Nov 92 22:26:52 GMT
 <Bx80Dv.GFA@NeoSoft.com>
Distribution: tx
Organization: is sometimes desirable

In article <Bx80Dv.GFA@NeoSoft.com>, Joe Mullally writes:

> In article <4KiVr*je1@caleb.UUCP> jdp@caleb.UUCP (Jim Pritchett) writes:

> >I haven't IMPOSED God upon you.  God will impose quite a few things upon you
> >(and everyone else), but that will come later.
> 
> 	Here, Jim (though he really doesn't and won't understand what
> I'll claim) tries to impose his religion. It's quite interesting to
> watch. You (other posters) seem to give him credit as an individual,
> whereas it seems obvious he is but a caricature, a non-individual. Which
> is sad for Jim, perhaps, but doesn't it point to the possible danger
> of forgetting to think for yourself? We will not save Jim from this,
> it's clear. We can but observe and say to ourselves (as we would should
> a leper pass by) "There but for the grace of God (or just good grace)
> goes I". P.S. I'm dead serious. And, I will amend myself ahead of time
> by admitting that everyone is somewhat individual. Perhaps Jim never
> shivers when he pisses. Only liberals would do that.

Most of that makes no sense at all.  What does urinating have to do with any
of this?  (Never mind, I don't want to know.)

Please explain how I have IMPOSED God upon anyone.  Be specific.


                                                Jim Pritchett


UUCP:  rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
 or    utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: YOU OWE ME FREE HEALTHCARE!
Date: 23 Nov 92 14:11:46 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: tx
Organization: Los Tejanos SCUBA Club and Beer Joint, Austin, Tejas

In article <1992Nov23.004106.1@deep-13.gizmo.com> maxwell@deep-13.gizmo.com writes:
>You've spent more on insurance in two years than you could have ever spent in
>medical bills? That is utterly absurd.  Two emergency room trips to have you
>checked out after bicycle accidents is small potatoes.  Imagine how much money
>you'd have spent if you had ... AIDS for example. Or maybe leukemia, or a brain
>tumor... or what if your neck had been broken in one of your bicycle wrecks.

Imagine if the entire planet had to have open heart surgery next week.  Then
we'd have more medical expenses than any collection of premiums code pay
for.

Fortunately the odds are against that happening, so David only has to pay
for his fraction of the risk of having open heart surgery.  But his point
is well-made.  If I live a clean life, eat right, don't smoke, don't screw
around, wear a bicycle helmet, floss after every meal, MY risk of incuring
some medical expense is lower than someone who doesn't do one of those
things.

I will refrain from mentioning that my medical insurance was $300 per year
the last time I carried my own ...
-- 
John F. Haugh II                  [  TSAKC  ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151           [ DoF #17 ]        @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
From: dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com (Dewey Coffman)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Bill to legalize carrying handguns
Date: 17 Nov 92 20:46:05 GMT
Reply-To: dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM, Austin, TX. US of A.

In article <1992Nov17.191217.28696@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>, curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806) writes:
|> dewey@vpdbox.austin.ibm.com writes:
|> 
|> >Rep. Bill Carter, R-Richland Hills, said Monday he plans to file legislation
|> >to allow "properly trained, law-abiding citizens" to carry concealed
|> >weapons to protect themselves and prevent crime.
|> 
|> Are these the kind of people typically involved in handgun related
|> deaths or not?
|> 
	Called the Bill's Sponser, Bill Carter and talked to the "Director"
	of his office: Roger Starkey. Roger said this is House Bill 100, and
	the properly trained line is "15 hour education course to be designed".
	The person also can't have any criminal record...etc....so...I'm
	not sure how to answer your question.
---
Dewey Coffman		ibmpa!vpdbox.austin.ibm.com!dewey%ibminet.awdpa.ibm.com
Consulting @ IBM			dewey@ctci.com
11400 Burnet Rd				All opinions are mine.
Austin, TX 78758-3493, USA		(512) 823-6463
===============================================================================
	"I do hope that you rot in Hell"   -The Christian JFH II
Social Security Personal Report 1-800-772-1213, Curt Finch, how much FICA have
your paid in? Call the number and find out.
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: Clinton has won...watch your pocket!
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: tx
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:47:02 GMT

In article <21846@rpp386.lonestar.org>, jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> That's OK since neither Reagan nor Bush did that.  Bush's last (and worst)
> deficit was $292B.  Except that Bush didn't have a "deficit".  Because -
> 
> Like it or not, =all= borrowing, spending, and taxing originates in the
> House.
 
Right.  And the key word is "originates".  Should we also conclude that
the Senate is not responsible for the deficit because they can't originate
spending bills?  Anyone who put their name on that bill (House, Senate and
President) is responsbile.
 
If you tried to pull that sort of semantic bullshit in a business
situation you'd be fired.  "Gee Boss, I didn't actually write that report,
I just OK'd it". 
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: CHOICE: DEBATE BASED ON COMPETING PHILOSOPHIES
Date: 16 Nov 92 17:23:15 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

Thomas Rush writes

	[excerpts from my posting deleted]

>Yes, and now lets talk about all the State and Federal rules that that
>public school has to comply with that that private school doesn't.
>EVEN SO, the NON-PAROCHIAL private school is not significantly less
>expensive (if at all) than the public school.  It is the preponderance
>of parochial schools (with the cheap teachers, administration, etc.)
>that lower that aggragate cost for private schools.  Talking about
>'private schools' as a single group just doesn't make much sense,
>since it subdivides into two groups with quite different
>characteristics (and costs).

A choice system would go far to free the public schools of all those Federal
and State rules that cost them so much, also of the top-heavy administrative
structure that is required to enforce them and which tends to perpetuate 
and grow its own existence over time.  A choice system would improve the
public schools as well as the private schools and, properly administered,
lower the total cost as well.

I must say that your motto,

"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden


would have led me more to believe that you were pro-educational choice than
not.  It's a good motto, whatever side you are on.

Cordially
Gerry Palo (73237.2006@cis)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: thomasr@cpqhou.compaq.com (Thomas Rush)
Subject: Re: Protectionism and Japan
Reply-To: thomasr@cpqhou.UUCP (Thomas Rush)
Organization: Compaq Computer Corporation
Distribution: usa,tx
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 15:27:17 GMT

>In article <1992Nov12.142955.625@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
> 
>> This one was more politically motivated than anything else, wasn't it?
>> I mean, given that the bulk of the sugar on the world market was
>> coming from Cuba, etc., and we wanted to try and do something with
>> Hawaii?  I can try to look it up in my baby library here, if someone
>> doesn't know.

If the motivation was to discourage use of Cuban sugar and boost sales of
domestic, why wouldn't we simply require labelling: "This sugar contains
70% imported sugar and 43% imported Cuban sugar."  


thomas rush			compaq computer corporation	
thomasr@cpqhou.compaq.com	their employee, not their opinions.
I believe all human interactions should be based on mutual consent.
Newsgroups: tx.politics
From: johniac@austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti)
Subject: Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 00:28:15 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: IBM Advanced Workstations and Systems, Austin, TX
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

John F. Haugh II (jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org) wrote:
: But there is a Constitutional restriction against prohibiting the free
: exercise of religion.  "Shall make no law" means NO law.  Which part of
: NO don't you understand?

They're not prohibiting his free exercise of religion--they're dictating
under what conditions they will pay him a salary.  He's FREE to get a 
different job.

--
John Iacoletti       IBM AWS Austin       Internet: johniac@austin.ibm.com
        My opinions do not reflect the views of the IBM Corporation
    "Egad, a base tone denotes a bad age" -- TMBG   "I Palindrome I"
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: CSPAN Voter Manipulation
Date: 21 Nov 92 14:41:42 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: tx
Organization: Los Tejanos SCUBA Club and Beer Joint, Austin, Tejas

In article <Bxz05K.46n@NeoSoft.com> hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen) writes:
>What promise did Clinton already break.  

His promise to both lower taxes on the middle class and raise taxes on
the middle class.  You can't do both ...

It also appears that he will break his promise to stimulate the economy
with an early spending program.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                  [  TSAKC  ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151           [ DoF #17 ]        @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Bush Vetoes Stupid Education Reform Bill
Date: 17 Nov 1992 12:50:52 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <BxuBn8.7Bz@NeoSoft.com> rocky@NeoSoft.com (Joe Mullally) writes:
>	Do you think it's possible that the Christian God exists?

Yes, I think it's possible.

>I have
>to say I find it hard to reconcile your "I do not believe that there is
>a God" with your "I simply do not have enough evidence to form an
>opinion...".

I do not believe in the sense that is commonly expressed by Christians. There
is a difference between "I do not believe that there is" and "I believe that
there is not". It is the former that goes with my lack of evidence, and I
cannot find it in my heart to take anything on blind faith.

>Those seem to me to be the atheist/agnostic stances, in
>order. I must now confess that my perception of atheism has to be the
>fault. I've always thought atheists were absolutely sure there was no
>God, and that agnostics weren't sure. Where do I now draw the line?

I don't care which label is used. I know what I think, and that's enough.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
           "Cat: Four legs and an attitude." -- Jim Reese
Newsgroups: tx.politics