HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Human sexuality (maybe this should go to .flame)
From: karsten@nic.gac.edu (Karsten Hendrick)
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:02:58 -0600
Distribution: world

In article <1992Apr4.155222.4005@amhux2.amherst.edu>  writes:
> In article <10334@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)  
writes:

> ># #Odd.  When I was in high school in the early 1970s, it ["nigger"] was     
> ># #used a
> ># #lot as a term of endearment by black students to refer to other
> ># #black students.

It still is in certain parts of the country, and in certain areas,
times, and places.  When one person calls another person "my nigger"
it doens't necessariy denote racism.  A word's harmfulness depends 
very much on its connotation.
 
> ># Odd.  When I was in high school in the early 1970s, "nigger"
> ># was used a lot as a term of endearment by white students to
> ># let black students know that they didn't necessarily agree
> ># that integration had been such a good idea, after all.

No, I don't think that the use in that case was endearing.
Good sarcasm, but unfortunately off-base when answering
Mr. Cramer's perfectly legitimate and correct observation.

> >Gee, Melinda, I missed so much going to a high school that was
> >already integrated, and didn't need any help.
 
> Yeah, I guess you're right.  Once a school has been integrated, it
> must not have any more problems with racism, right?  Just like the
> Union, of course.
 
> I knew you were a homophobe, Clayton.  I didn't know you were racist
> as well.

Where does Mr. Cramer exhibit racism, Tim?

Karsten Hendrick
karsten@nic.gac.edu
karsten@lavatch.gac.edu

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism,alt.activism
From: bobh@twinkie.bellcore.com (Robert Hettmansperger)
Subject: Re: Class Warfare is STUPID: (Was: : Where Have All the Liberals Gone?)
Reply-To: bobh@twinkie.UUCP (Robert Hettmansperger)
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Red Bank, New Jersey
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 14:42:09 GMT

In article <15081@drutx.ATT.COM> dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL) writes:
>In article <1992Apr1.154750.14064@walter.bellcore.com>, bobh@twinkie.bellcore.com (Robert Hettmansperger) writes:
>} ... as a society, we have decided that the wealthy (i.e. those who
>} have gained most out of our system of government) deserve a greater burden
>} to bear in order to protect and maintain the system.
>
>That all sounds so fair and reasonable -- and it is so obnoxious.
>
>The notion "as a society, we have decided that..." has given people
>permission to stick their noses into places where it does not belong, and
>has been the rationale for much of the evils that have occurred throughout
>history --
>

I agree with you totally.  But, you must admit that unless you believe that 
there is some sort of divinly created "best" system, we have nothing to rely 
on but what we *think* is best.  When it turns out not to be the case, we
must be prepared to modify it and move on.  We have a baseline in our 
Constitution.  It lays out what some group of people thought was best way
to run things.  Over the years, ceratin failings in that approach were
modified.  You may not agree with the original or with the changes, and that
is fine...you are welcome to try to change them to something else.

If you believe that flat or no taxes are more fair, fine... lobby for them.
But what will your basis for your argument be?  That it is more fair?  Based 
on what?  How do you justify it?

It is my understanding that the constitution came from ideas from the 
Enlightenment, and that one of the tenets was that mankind is capable of
self regulation, and that we don't need an absolute set of rules imposed on
us from religion or monarchy, etc.  That leaves us *only* with what our own
intellectual abilities and analysis of the past tells us is the right thing
to do.  

Just because the system has been abused doesn't mean the system is broken
beyond repair.

-Bob
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18123 ca.politics:3462 ba.politics:2654 alt.politics.homosexuality:2087
From: djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Straight Child molesters?
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 19:03:50 PDT
Distribution: world
Organization: NMS&Systems Engineering

twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:

> I do not know how you can extrapolate from a single example to the
> rest of society.  Because you once saw a mother who appeared to be a
> lesbian who you thought was raising her child inappropriately, you
> conclude that no homosexual should have children?  You still seem to
> think that it is all right for women to have children.  Growing up in
> Brooklyn, I was mugged several times by young black men who lived in
> our area.  I was intelligent enough, however, to realize that this
> kind of behavior was not in any way representative of black people.
> Hopefully when you finish your junior high equivalency program, you'll
> be able to figure out the same thing.
> 


Actually, that example was the most vivid of several such parents 
I have encountered..

-djk

--- Daniel J. Karnes / WA6NDT --------------------------------------
--- NMS&Systems Engineering ----------------------------------------
--- Djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM / ..CtEdge!Nitro!Djk ----------------------
-- 'innovative solutions for modern problems' ----------------------
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18381 alt.society.civil-liberty:3491
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: Smart highways near  (was Re: What keeps me from being Lib.)
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:52:29 EST
 <rdippold.702939428@cancun><1992Apr13.103910.924@desire.wright.edu> <STEINAR.92Apr15171135@faust.solan.unit.no>
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <STEINAR.92Apr15171135@faust.solan.unit.no>, steinar@faust.solan.unit.no (Cindy Kandolf) writes:
> The person who prefers to identify himself as just "Brett" writes:
>>        Speaking of toll roads, AT&T and Lockheed announced that they will
>>jointly construct the world's first "smart highway" with computerized toll
>>booths that automatically debit your monthly account.
> 
> We already have that in Trondheim.  You have a small chunk of plastic 
> fastened to the windshield of your car.  The plastic contains a tiny
> transmitter that sends out a very weak signal identifying your car.
> At the toll booths, a receiver sends the information to the computer
> and the computer automatically deducts the appropriate charge from
> your account.  It's been in service since October.
> 
> Okay, it's not a "highway", but it is a system of toll booths.  The toll
> is for driving into downtown, and is to be used for new roads and to
> pay the debt on a few new roads already built or under construction.
> If you don't want to have the thing in your car, or don't live in 
> Trondheim but pass through now and then, you pay a coin into an automat.
> (If you don't want to do either, your car is automatically photographed
> and you are sent your ticket in the mail.)  There are only two manned
> toll booths, one on the main road coming from the south and the other
> on the main road coming from the north.
> 
> This thing AT&T and Lockheed are talking about may be the first one
> owned by a private corporation, but the idea is already working in
> practice.
> 

	Thanx for the info!  I wasn't aware that anyone had implemented one
yet.  It's nice to know that (at least in other countries) it doesn't require
two companies the size of AT&T and Lockheed to do it.
                                                    
Brett (Kottmann)
===============================================================================
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                            CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
===============================================================================
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17216 rec.sport.hockey:9157
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Greedy Athletes
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:42:41 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Apr7.133957.1036@oz.plymouth.edu> m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier) writes:
>I'm sorry.  I have no sympathy for athletes making hundreds of
>thousands or even millions of dollars a year.  

Why athletes?  They do more to earn their money than CEO's.  Since
when were you upset by the free market?

>Unfortunately, many of
>the fiscal woes of the NHL are due to the mismanagement of John
>Ziegler.  Because of this, there is no major network contract in the
>United States and only six teams routinely make a profit.  

There's no major network contract in the US because well over half
the country doesn't care about a Canadian three-game-in-one (cf.
George Carlin).  As for "only six teams routinely mak[ing] a profit,"
how do you know this?  Have you seen the books, or are you just
eating up the self-serving owners talk hook, line, and sinker?
-- 
Ted Frank          + "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in
U o' C Law Skool   +  color and content according to the circumstances and
Chi, IL 60637      +  the time in which it is used."  --  Holmes
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: LP, GATT, and Beer (Was: Ross Perot)
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 19:56:08 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.181904.1173@kpc.com>,
emmett@kpc.com (Emmett Kilgariff) writes:
>In article <1992Apr5.165021.18118@morrow.stanford.edu> GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>>
>>Thanks for the explanation.  While the LP favors any step which
>>increases free trade, what we really believe in in unilateral
>>removal of trade barriers.  Consumers in any country which imposes
>>trade barriers are the ones who suffer.  Even Japanese consumers
>>suffer because of the restrictions placed there on the importation
>>of foreign goods.  We think consumers should not have to pay the
>>price for government power games to protect favored industries.  We
>>would work to eliminate any and all trade barriers any place we can.
>>
>
>The Japanese consumers suffer from trade barriers now that they're a major
>econimic force. In the Post WWII trade barriers on key products (like
>televisions) enabled their industries to survive and grow, since they had no
>external competition. Japan's consumers would not be as well off today
>if trade barriers weren't in place when they were needed.

When trade barriers raise the price (either by limiting the supply
or causing duties to be added to costs) consumers have to pay more
for the products they wish to purchase.  This was just as true for
the Japanese after WWII as it was been for everyone everywhere.
While I don't have any specific data handy on this particular
subject I would be willing to bet that when the restrictions you
cite were in effect, Japanese consumers were paying more for their
TVs than they would have had to in the absence of any such
restrictions.

/June
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:18374 alt.politics.elections:980 misc.taxes:2276 alt.society.civil-liberty:3486
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.sex
Subject: Re: LeHoullier And AIDS
Date: 6 Apr 92 00:07:00 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Apr04.115414.23784@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us> rstevew@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us (Richard Steven Walz) writes:
>Actually, Ted, that's not high. Population at large with HIV+ is
>currently 1 in 200 or 1%. It truly is 1% of males. Now many of these
>are gay, in this country, although worlwide it is more generally
>spread. But where did we/you/them get the figure about priests. That
>IS interesting!
>                                         - Steve

That 1 in 200 figure is high also.  An upper bound on HIV+ people in the
US is one million, and probably less.  Given a 125 million male population
in this country, even if all of the HIV+ cases were men (and a more
realistic upper bound is 80-90%), that would still be well short of 1%,
even with very broad overestimates.

The info on priests is from the 9/16/1990 New York Newsday.
-- 
Ted Frank          + "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it
1307 E 60 St, #109 +  is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in
U o' C Law Skool   +  color and content according to the circumstances and
Chi, IL 60637      +  the time in which it is used."  --  Holmes
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17023 sci.econ:3566 alt.individualism:2292
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.econ,alt.individualism
Subject: John Engler's (MI) Performance on Spending and Tax Issues
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:21:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: nuscc.1992Apr7.022103.19055
Organization: National University of Singapore



  A Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors

  ...

  John Engler, Republican
  Legislature: Split
  Took Office: 1/91
  Grade: B

  Engler won a razor-thin victory over incumbent Jim Blanchard in 1990 by
  pledging reform of Michigan's bloated budget and significant property tax
  relief. Thus far he has delivered on the first promise but not the
  second, although it is on his 1992 agenda. In his first-year budget,
  Engler pruned real state general fund spending by 3 percent, or almost
  $100 per family. His proposal to eliminate general welfare assistance to
  employable adults without children has become a national test case. Even
  with those spending cuts, Engler still faces a substantial deficit (3
  percent of expenditures) in 1992 thanks to the state's faltering economy.
  Engler has not raised a single major tax, nor does his second budget
  propose new taxes, despite revenues that are rapidly declining because of
  the recession. If Engler can succeed in pushing through a promised 20
  percent reduction in Michigan's very high property taxes, he will really
  make a difference in Michigan's economy.

  ...



---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  "A Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors" is no. 167 in the
  Policy Analysis series published by the Cato Institute, an independent
  public policy research organization in Washington, D.C.



Available from:
  Cato Institute
  224 Second Street SE
  Washington, DC  20003
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: hhuang@m4-035-15.MIT.EDU (Han-Young Huang)
Subject: The Nation on Clinton
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 04:57:45 GMT


4/13/92's The Nation, a pro-Democratic periodical, had Tom Ferguson's article,
"Democrats Deal for Dollars."  I think the following quotes from page 476 it
help point out why I always distrusted Clinton:

"Running out of money, by contrast, was one problem that Clinton never had to
face...This practically guarantees what is in any case obvious from a close
study of the campaign's policy pronouncements: that, for all its election-year
posturing about "change," a Clinton Administration would not depart radically
from the Bush team's policies, particularly in regard to the critical questions
of international trade and finance.  At most, there would be more investment in
"human capital" and some small programs targeting investment in civilian
technology.  A Clinton Administration is also likely to strike a different tone
on race relations even as it declines to spend money on cities.  It would also
nominate different kinds of judes to all levels of the federal bench, and take
a slightly softer line than the Bush Administration on the Israeli settlements
issue.
  What a Clinton Administration almost certainly will not do, however, is put
forward a sweeping health insurance reform.  If anything is clear from the FEC
roster of contributors, it is that the Arkansas Governor's lack of clarity
about his plans for medical insurance is strategic.  The lists are full of
donations from various parts of the medical-industrial complex, whose interest
in blocking major reform is all too apparent.  Trial lawyers are also abundant,
suggesting that a Clinton Administration will not soon be tampering with the
fabulously costly laws on liability or otherwise attempting to regulate
expensive lawsuits (a cause the Bush Administration is now taking up, both to
strike a populist pose and to satisfy its insurance constituency)."
  For further insight on the author, pp. 477 :
  "...American management practices are the real root of many (not all) of the
economy's long-term problems.  Bloated, inflexible and frequently disdainful of
the work force...such companies are now regularly being outperformed by
foreign-owned companies operating withing the United States using American
workers--as for example in the auto industry."
  I'd like Tsongas, Brown, or even an unknown Perot for president, in about
that order of preference.  The way the Democratic party treats Tsongas, and the
near-lies Clinton used against Tsongas in Florida angers enough that if Clinton
is the nominee, I see a Bush victory and major Democratic losses in Congress
this November.  Maybe then, Bush will make some changes.  Doubtful, though.  It
seems the old left guard of the Democratic party is opposed to reforming
bloated government, and would rather talk about the 20.3% defense budget than
the large and ever-enlargening 45.7% entitlements which are out of control.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: ACLU
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
	<1992Apr7.023024.1152@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
	<ART.92Apr7113917@world.std.com>
	<1992Apr8.002940.23633@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 05:48:15 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.002940.23633@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:

   In article <ART.92Apr7113917@world.std.com> art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
   >In article <1992Apr7.023024.1152@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:
   >
   >   In article <rqo3nINN6sl@agate.berkeley.edu> mitja@hera.Berkeley.EDU (Mitja Baumhackl) writes:
   >   >Sorry to break the news, but communities DON'T have rights.  Read the
   >   >Bill of Rights and I don't think it talks about groups but instead
   >   >defines rights for individuals.
   >
   >   Read the whole Constitution.  Its principle purpose is to grant certain
   >   rights to the federal government: the right to declare war, the right
   >   to regulate interstate trade, the right to collect taxes, etc.  If you
   >   don't want to use the word "rights" for the government's prerogatives,
   >   that is fine -- but juggling definitions isn't going to make your
   >   argument any stronger.
   >
   >I suggest you take your own advice and read the whole constitution.  It
   >refers to POWERS granted to the gov't, not to rights.  There is a big
   >difference here....

   Sorry, this difference escapes me and is in any case irrelevant to the
   issue under discussion, namely a library's right/power/privilege/prerogative
   to exclude the noisome.

Sorry, but again, I suggest you try reading.  The library issue is
irrelevant, in the light of your quasi semantic quibblings.  You raise
the point of the statements in the constitution, misquote them and then
don't like having your error called to attention.  Sorry, you're wrong.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Ozone problem burns Politically Correct
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 00:24:55 GMT

The problem with this "ozone hole in northern hemisphere" thing might
be a misunderstanding.  As far as I am aware, they have not measured
ozone loss there.  They have, however, measured increased amounts of
chemicals which are believed to cause ozone depletion.  I know at
least one case in which the media reported an increased concentration
like this as an "ozone hole," rather than a possible ozone trouble
point that needs to be watched.  But I don't expect much more from
media science reporting.
-- 
Insanity is inherited; you get it from your kids!
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis
Date:         Fri, 17 Apr 92 14:01:54 CST
From:         C05705DA@WUVMD
To:           NETNEWS@WUVMD
Subject:      Re: Israeli Excesses Must Stop
Newsgroups:   talk.politics.misc

I agree completely, except ahnding over the Alamo.  The Alamo has a
strong hold in American culture, maybe Utah.
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Libertarian Indian-Giving-and-Taking
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:35:09 GMT
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Curious Goods (formerly Louis Vendredi Antiques)

GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis) writes:
>niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>>And how did you *gain* your property originally, if it wasn't through
>>the initiation of force?  Yes, you might have inherited it, or bought
>>it, but how did the original owner get it without initiating force?
>
>On the other hand, a nomadic hunter gather who periodically wander
>across the same land has not established an ownership right as he 
>has left no permanent enhancement to its value.
>
>Of course, over the history of human kind much land which may have
>been originally acquired in just Lockian fashion has likely been
>transferred unjustly.  Libertarians support the return of all stolen
>property to the just owners WHEN THE CLAIM CAN BE ADEQUATELY DOCUMENTED.

While this may not have been an original intention, this is a good way
to sidestep most Native land claims in the event of a Libertarian US
federal government.  In Canada, large areas have been reclaimed by
natives based on broken treaties with the Crown (first British, then
Canadian) and historical records.

On the other hand, the logbook of a U.S. Army Cavalry captain making
mention of a Native settlement might well be legitimate ... but if a
massacre had taken place at his hands then there'd be nobody around 
to claim anyways.  So, here's the question of the day ... would any
territorial clauses of the Seven Nations Confederacy (e.g., Iroquois,
Hurons, etc.) records/constitution/ whatever be considered legitimate
by a US Libertarian government?  After all, they are recognized as
indigenous nations ... and if the answer is Yes, would the transfer
then be immediate?

I hope this is an easier question than the last one on GATT, as it
lies within U.S. borders.  (-;

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				U.S. Elections 1992, Vote Now:
> gld@cunixB.cc.columbia.EDU		a) Elvis 50's stamp, or
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			b) Elvis 70's stamp?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,rec.sport.hockey