HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Date: 25 Aug 92 23:04:23 GMT
Reply-To: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Distribution: na
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Facility NASA


tk>In article <Aug.23.22.46.57.1992.18694@romulus.rutgers.edu>  kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore
A. Kaldis) writes:
cc>In article <azdy5xj@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
 
cc> Like being a man or a post-menopausal woman?

tk>Or a responsible woman who is not enslaved by her lusts.  Apparently
tk>those who are [so enslaved] seem to be in a perpetual state of denial.

Teddy is this were you preach responsibility?  Responsibility that includes
being responsible enough to lend your buddys a tire iron to bash gays with?
Your a fine example of responsible behavior teddy me boy.  Thats almost
like your republican buddys preaching family values isn't it?

Dan King

Friends don't let friends vote Republican
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Term Limits For All
Date: 1 Sep 92 22:17:11 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Aug29.045904.22170@auto-trol.com>, katbea@auto-trol.com (Kathy Beatty) writes:
} Term limitation is a foolish idea. All it really does is limit our
} choices. It is often the case that the best person for the job is
} someone who has had the job a while. Why limit our choices?

If term limits are good enough for the president, why aren't they good
enough for congress?

} If someone
} is doing a bad job, it is your right to vote that person out of office.

Oh really?  Tell me, how do I go about voting out someone who does
not represent my district yet creates laws, regulations and policies
that directly affect me in ways that I do not want?  How do I, a
resident of Colorado, vote people like Robert Byrd, Ted Kennedy,
Howard Metzenbaum, Robert Dornan and Jesse Helms out of office?
--
David Olson            dlo@drutx.att.com
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they
can bribe the people with their own money."  Alexis de Tocqueville
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pdl2r@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Peter D. Lauren)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Why I cannot vote Democratic
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:40:46 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <168507E8D.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:
> 
>Yes, the Russians didn't know what trouble was until JC pulled our
>Olympic team! That's playing hard ball, by god! The weapons the Reagan
>administration supplied probably just slowed down the pace of history
> 

Actually, millitary spending rose under Carter AND Reagan and fell under
Nixon, Ford and Bush.  I believe that the stealth bomber and cruise missile
were introduced under the Carter administration.

Peter Lauren.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Slick Willie and the Rapists
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:44:09 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Aug29.205350.23635@anomaly.sbs.risc.net> kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
>mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>>Well, Mike, that someone was me and that isn't what I wrote.  Either you
>>or this Bri person changed my post and I don't appreciate that.  I
>>called the president George Bush, not GHWB, and if people want to
>>paraphrase what I said they can damned well put it in brackets 
>>or otherwise indicate that it is not exactly what I said.

>I lost the first few lines of the posting, so put GHWB instead of 
>"George Bush", as I couldn't remember how you referred to Bush. The
>remainder of the quote was from you.

In that case braces where appropriate.

>Now, does changing GB to GHWB really change the intent of your
>message?

GHWB is generally used to imply that Bush is too rich and Waspish.
Apparently people with too many names are automatically no good in
some people's eyes.  I intended no such implication.

>How was your posting altered to modify the intent behind that which
>you were attempting to convey?

It wasn't significantly.  So what?  Does that mean I can parapharase
what you wrote and pass it off as your words?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
From: lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Another good reason to vote for Bush
Date: 27 Aug 92 18:36:13 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: /etc/organization

In article <94416@bu.edu> grue@csa.bu.edu (Philip Libin) writes:
>
>It has been said that:
>
>	Republicans believe that life starts at conception...and ends
>at birth.

Correction: That would be all pro-lifers. Because there are pro-choice
republicans...let us not forget that. But, that is a very true statement.
If all these people spending so much money, and spending so much time
barring women from entering abortion clinics, etc, would take an 
interest in the kids that are already BORN, and starving in the streets,
have parents that abuse them, etc, the world would be a better place.

BUT, all they care about is getting the woman who doesn't want the
kid in the first place to have it, no matter if it is being born into
a life of abuse, poverty, neglect, whatever...

You know what really makes me laugh, are the commercials that are
running on CNN right now....The ones that show all the happy WHITE
babies running and playing in thier brand new osh-kosh-b-gosh
overalls, and the line "Life. What a beutiful choice." Why don't
the commercials show the REAL story. Like the one of the poverty
stricken mother forced to have a kid, who can't put food on the 
table, and the father that beats the hell out of the kid? It reminds
me of the home pregnancy test commercials. Where the guy is all
googly-eyed going "wow! great! a baby!!!"...why not show the
other side of the story with the guy and girl going, "SHIT@#! What
are we gonna do!@#!#@"
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43667 soc.culture.yugoslavia:8480 soc.culture.greek:8442
From: michael.polymenakos@factory.com (Michael Polymenakos) 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.greek
Subject: Re: Scott-land: History and reality
Date: 2 Sep 92 01:03:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: michael.polymenakos@factory.com (Michael Polymenakos) 


Quoting Scott Cromar:
>"I can't stand to see my name used by anyone else, so I demand that
>all other Scotts renounce their claim to my name."

  Tell you what, Scott: Present your proposal to all the nations in the
world, the EEC and the UN. If 97% of them agree that you are right, then
congratulations: Scotland will have to find a new name to do it
international business under.

  You see, this is not over what the Vardaris will call themselves.
They can call themselves the Polymenakos nation for all I care. But
don't expect the rest of the world to go along with such a moronic
idea, any more than they won't go along with "Macedonia".

Michael.

PS: If any disenfranchiced nation out there is looking for a name, I am
pleased to offer the name "Polymenakos" for the small price of the title
of Emperor in the Polymenakos nation, and a lifetime salary of 10% of
the GNP of the same nation. Call now and I will also allow
the nation's capital to be named "Michaelsbourg" for FREE!. Contact me
ASAP at michael.polymenakos@factory.com. Only serious offers from
nations of 1 million people or more please. Extra fees apply for nations
wishing to worship me as a demi-god.

Michael.
From: sunder@altair.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Endorsement
Date: 26 Aug 1992 14:52:42 GMT
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: altair.crhc.uiuc.edu
Keywords: Endorse Bush US Senate female Pro-Choice

In article <galluzjj.714782156@craft.camp.clarkson.edu>, galluzjj@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Darkwing Duck) writes:
|> I have been working this summer as the Field Director for
|> Jean T. White, one of only two women running for the US
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think you mean "...one of only two GOP women...

-- 
Srinivas Sunder                                         sunder@crhc.uiuc.edu

If my employer shares these views, I'd be most surprised.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: brownfield!jbrow (Jim Brownfield)
Subject: Why term limits are needed (Was: Re: Endorsement)
Reply-To: <jbrow@glv.com>
Organization: Encompass
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:49:13 GMT

In article <MATT.92Aug25195149@physics16.berkeley.edu>  
matt@physics16.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) writes:
[deleted]
> The problem, of course, is that I do not get a chance to "vote out
> Congress."  I don't vote for Congress; I vote for two California
> senators, and one representative from an East Bay congressional
> district.

[deleted]
> 
> You will find that most people, when asked, say that "Congress," in
> the abstract, is bad, but that their particular incumbent is an
> exception, and that they wouldn't dream of voting against that one
> particular person---it's always the folks from *other* districts who
> are causing the trouble.  Until you understand this very basic
> political fact, and its implications, you do not understand American
> politics.
> --
> Matthew Austern

You are exactly right.  This is why congressional term limits are needed at the  
federal level.  It is also why the argument that politicians use "If the people  
wanted us out, they could vote us out." is invalid.

Congressmen gain power the longer they are in office.  They begin to preside  
over more and more important committees, and therefore to "bring home more and  
more bacon."  If the voters in a state vote out their representatives, they  
have in effect greatly lessened their power relative to other states.  This  
argument has been used effectively by politicians trying to prevent states from  
limiting terms of their own congressmen.

Term limits are needed so that all states can "lay down their weapons" at the  
same time.

Jim Brownfield
#include <standard/disclaimer.h>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Bush's acceptance speech -- @Clinton's taxes
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:23:27 GMT

In article <farenebt.714924805@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:

>In his acceptance speech Bush said that Clinton would raise taxes on the
>rich with the rich being defined (by Clinton) as anyone who has a job.
>
>Besides the fact that Clinton wants only to raise taxes on people making
>over $200,000:
>
>With the state of the economy at present, he is right. Anyone who
>has a job is rich, at least compared to a LOT of Americans.

     Has Clinton said exactly how much money he expects to raise with this
tax increase?

===========================================================================
|David Veal  PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  University of Tennessee             |  
|                                     Division of Continuing Education    |
===========================================================================

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43694 ca.politics:7424 ba.politics:5030 soc.motss:38176 ba.motss:1528
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,soc.motss,ba.motss
Subject: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:43:48 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA


Or maybe I will take the collection of garbage I've been collecting
from soc.motss and turn it over to Lou Sheldon at the Traditional
Values Coalition and the Yes on 9 campaign in Oregon.  You know what
powerful ammunition this stuff is for their side.

Do I make myself clear?
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Subject: Re: Taxing capital gains (was: why progressive tax rates)
Organization: Wayne State University, C&IT
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 13:08:37 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.215538.23921@panix.com>
eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler) writes:
 
  [...]
>
>Instead of offering this vague suggestion, why not give a sample
>calculation to prove your point?  You fellows are the ones alleging
>the supposedly inequitable treatment of CGs.
>
It might be more helpful for you to publish *your* calculations, as then
we might be able to follow your argument.
 
What's your point? The anti-tax argument is based on a couple of assumptions,
so perhaps you'd be good enough to address each individually:
 
1. Unidexed capital gains taxes tax inflation, resulting in exceptionally
high marginal rates. I've posted sample calculations, so perhaps you'd be
kind enough to post your calculations and show whay this isn't the case-
if that's your argument.
 
2. Capital gains taxes are a double tax.
 
3. Taxing capital gains is a net loss to the economy from a policy
stance, as it forces money out of productive investments into unproductive
ones.
 
Which of these are your disputing? Can you illustrate your argument?
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 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
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: lcypher@nuchat.sccsi.com (Louis Cypher)
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:46:40 GMT

In article <64927@cup.portal.com> ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) writes:
>>Why do you think he keeps a small apartment in Texas that he visits once
>>a year?  Gary Trudeau exposed his specious Texas residency for the purpose
>>of avoiding taxes in a series of Doonesbury cartoons.  He even published
>>a form which you could send to some Texas department which would establish
>>your Texas residency so you could avoid taxes too just like George Bush.
>
>Out of curiosity, where do you think he should pay taxes?  Washington DC
>doesn't tax high officials, Texas doesn't tax residents, and he *DOES* pay
>state taxes in Maine.  The Bushes give about $100K/year to charity, of which
>most goes to Texas charities, and he does have strong connections to Texas
>from before he became President, so Texas residency is not bogus.
>
>--Tim Smith

He *DOES* pay taxes in Maine? Documentaion please...since he is a legal
resident of Texas, why would he have to pay the state *INCOME* tax in
Maine, which is the reason why he is called a Tax-Dodger....I am sure he
does pay state *PROPERTY* taxes in Maine since he owns land there, but he
does *NOT* pay the state income tax, which is the reason he is a tax-dodger.
  
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42052 misc.education:3228
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.education
Subject: Re: US Public Schools: Get Rid of All the Bureaucrats!
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:06:02 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department

In article <BtJxD6.4qz@newcastle.ac.uk> Chris.Holt@newcastle.ac.uk (Chris Holt) writes:
>cote@cs.ucsd.edu (Brad Cote) writes:
>>ednschmi@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (John Schmidt) writes:

>>>The trouble with a voucher system is that it creates even more opportunities
>>>for marketing than it does for education.  Consider the proposition:
>>>Marketing is basically lying.

>>Wrong. Marketing is about communication and differentiation. Bad
>>marketing which lies about the attributes of a product results
>>in more problems for a company than the slight increase in
>>sales helps. A company which consistently lies about its
>>products will not be in business very long.

>Ho ho ho!!!  IBM: Our products are the best!  Marlboro: You too
>can have Clint Eastwood's sex appeal!  Budweiser: We sell beer! :-)

>A problem with education is that measuring how well a school is
>doing is *very* tricky, so the potential for selecting misleading
>statistics is high.

Agreed.  But there is a very strong argument that even what the public
schools are doing is wrong.  But there are some things which can be 
investigated.

It is possible to get those who understand a subject to see if the teachers
teaching that subject know beans about it.  Those of us who endeavor to 
impart knowledge into students at the collegiate level, many of them
prospective teachers, are very dubious about even a majority of the 
present practitioners having any understanding whatever.  Nor would
the efforts of an instituion to insist on standards do other than drive
out the students.

One could select a school by whether they were willing to teach a 
curriculum, and place children according to their knowledge and ability,
instead of the present system of placing them almost exclusively by age,
introduced somewhat more than a half-century ago.

One could select a school which awarded credentials on knowledge and
ability, not on accumulating credits.

One could look at the real contents of the courses,  not just at the
papers describing them.  It might be necessary to look at the exams
to do this.

None of these can be done now.  It is not a matter of comparing the
existing schools, few of which are worthy of any respect.  If everyone
wanted good academic schools NOW, it could not be done.  Using the
unemployed engineers, etc., to replace most of the current teachers
is not possible--there are not enough of them.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!pop.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy
From: andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Re: Kulturkampf
Organization: nope
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:26:39 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.032137.15749@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
>| In this USA, that dollar is extracted under threat of JAIL.  Even if
>| we accept Fitch's strawman, the two are the SAME.  Jail is jail.
>
>No, it isn't.  You won't go to jail for owing the IRS one
>dollar.

Really?  The IRS boys don't care as long as you pay something, even if
it isn't everything they think they're owed?  The war-tax protestors
will love to hear that.  That principle can be applied in general;
everyone just send in 10% less because Fitch says that the IRS won't
care.

Fitch can't have it both ways.  He has no legit claim on the money if
it is unimportant.  If he doesn't want to defend a "govt should force
my culture" position, he'll have to abandon it.  His principle IS the
money in this case.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
From: lbaum@atc.boeing.com (Larry Baum)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Capital gains (was Re: why progreesive tax rates)
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:37:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Boeing Computer Services

A lot of people, including many Democrats, agree that indexing capital gains
for tax purposes makes sense.

If we take the $1000, 10% gain, 5% infaltion example we get:

Indexed gain = $50, tax = $15 (30% tax), real gain = ~$35 
So ROI = 3.5%, which is pretty good in an economy with a 5% inflation rate.

If Bush understoood the art of compromise, eh could have easily gotten Congress
to go along with indexing capital gains; but he does not know how to work with
Congress.  He only knows how to make his semiannual speech calling for lower
tax rates for capital gains. 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: trev@hubcap.clemson.edu (Trevor Bauknight)
Subject: Re: What if America were a direct democracy?
Organization: Jes Grew Carriers -- Metaphysical Bunko Squad 
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 03:16:46 GMT

farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:

>Well, I guess the subject is pretty self-explainitory (sic?). 

Sic.  :-)

>prof seemed to think it was a good idea. The idea was to have both sides
>of an issue presented on the 6:30 news. The news would bring in two debaters

A good idea if it were feasible...but your class has already eliminated
the representation of those too poor to afford a television set.

I do agree that our country has the means to count actual votes, instead
of going through the Electoral College middleman.  It seems absurd to
vote for someone to vote for someone you want to elect.  Especially 
in light of the fact that they aren't obligated to follow through.

>question about voter fraud. The class thought that there had to be some way
>to do this (ie have everyone type in ss number or something like that). I 
>still don't think it's feasible nor do I think it's a very good idea. I 

Good for you.  No matter how many precautions or whatever you put between
the election and fraud, it would still be entirely possible to overcome
them.  For example, I just heard some guy's name and SS number read out
on my HF scanner.  He might well be in jail by now, but by golly I can
still vote on his behalf under your class's system.  It won't work, unless
you have something outrageous like fingerprint verification, in which
case it's too late to bother voting anyway.  You'd already be screwed.
 
Trevor Bauknight         trev@hubcap.clemson.edu    ...gatech!hubcap!trev
 
                                                     +-----------+
                                                     | _> ###    |
                  fish on                            |     |     |
                                                     +-----------+