HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Subject: Term Limits are Constitutional, Study Shows
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:08:43 GMT



  Term Limits are Constitutional, Study Shows

  Washington --  The Constitution allows states to limit the terms of their
  members of Congress, despite the attempts of opponents of term limitation
  to claim otherwise, argue attorneys Neil Gorsuch and Michael Guzman in a
  new study from the Cato Institute.

    According to Gorsuch and Guzman, the Framers' debate during the 
  ratification of the Constitution proves that they considered rotation in
  office necessary to prevent a stagnant and unresponsive legislature. The
  only reason rotation was not incorporated into the Constitution was that
  the customs of that time dictated that members of Congress should
  represent their fellow citizens for a short time and then return to 
  private life.

    In addition, electoral turnover was much larger then. In the first
  House election after Washington was elected president, 40 percentof the
  incumbents were defeated. By 1989, however, fewer than 8 percent of
  members of Congress were newcomers.

     Article I, section 4 of the Constitution explicitely allows the states
  to determine the time, place, and manner of congressional elections, and
  Gorsuch and Guzman demonstrate through a detailed analysis of the 
  existing case law that term limits fall under the "manner" provision and
  are thus constitutional.

    "Will the Gentlemen Please Yield? A Defense of the Constitutionality of
  State-Imposed Term Limitations" by Neil Gorsuch and Michael Guzman is no.
  178 in the Policy Analysis series published by the Cato Institute, an
  independent public policy research organization in Washington, DC.



Available from:
  Cato Institute
  224 Second Street SE
  Washington, DC  20003
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49233 sci.environment:11706 talk.environment:4036
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.environment,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Subsidies for Roads and Cars in the USA
Date: 2 Oct 92 19:06:36 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen)
Distribution: na
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

In article <1992Oct2.183458.2087@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct1.113017.4473@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
|> >	A solution, if you are interested in charging per mile driven to gauge
|> >wear and tear, is to add a little more functionality to the current computers
|> >in cars.  
|> 
|> Could you tell me where I find the computer in my 85 Civic ? 
|> 
The engine control computer or the one in your radio?

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
From: DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Medical costs for various groups (was 'tolerance')
Date: 1 Oct 92 14:32:35 GMT
 <lchrs0INNeo@spim.mti.sgi.com> <12565@optilink.UUCP>
Organization: Penn State University

In article <12565@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) says:
>
>In article <lchrs0INNeo@spim.mti.sgi.com>, mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael
>Polen) writes:
>> I am only trying to help one individual learn how to use data
>> properly.  I think that most of our readers new how ridiculous
>> is was to blame $75.25 of a $77.00 pill to treatment of the
>> uninsured.  Hell.  Some hospitals don't treat any uninsured,
>> and I'll bet their costs for an asprin are the same or higher.
>
>Hospitals, by law, aren't allowed to turn away anyone who is
>in need of immediate care, regardless of their insurance.
>Therefore, if you can find a hospital that doesn't treat
>"any uninsured," they must not have an emergency room.

However, hospitals can, once a patient is stable, transfer them to another
facility.  This is sometimes used to evacuate high cost patients.  In
addition, a number of hospitals have been closing their ERs in order to avoid
the high cost/uninsured type of patient.




Dennis G. Shea, Penn State
<<DISCLAIMER>>
Ain't nobody's bizness but my own. I'll be happy to accept all
the credit for anything I've written.  It's funny, however, how
employers only acknowledge the profitable ideas.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: Jack S Defends MLKing Slur (Was: ARF DEFENDS HIS HONOR)
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:10:50 GMT

To avoid running around in circles, maybe ARF would like to
tell us his opinion about MLK and about D.Duke. This is what
this thread is about anyway, not about facts or anything of the
sort.

-Danny Keren.
From: psmith@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Paul Smith)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: You're NO John Kennedy
Date: 6 Oct 92 14:54:56 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <7610059@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers) writes:
>> Hello, everyone,
>> 
>> 
>> Who said "I knew John Kennedy. You're no John Kennedy", and to
>> whom was it said? Could you phrase it exactly, more or less?
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> Nick
>
>Sen. Lloyd Bentsen of Texas, then the Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate,
>to then-Sen. J. Danforth Quayle of Indiana, during the 1988 Vice-Presidential
>Debate.
>
>A closer quote is "Senator, I knew Jack Kennedy - Jack Kennedy was a personal
>friend of mine.  And Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy!"  Not exact, but that's
>the best I can dredge up from my memory.  As I recall, Quayle had no reply -
>he just stood there looking somewhat stunned.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
He responded: he tried to say something like: "That was uncalled for Senator",
but I think he was interrupted a couple of times before he could get it out.  
(I don't think he said anything else because it wasn't his turn to talk)

And in my opinion that is all he needed to say.  Bentson was his own undoing.
-Paul
--
---
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.marrou
From: adams@liszt.berkeley.edu (Adam L. Schwartz)
Subject: Re: Polling errors
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:43:31 GMT

In article <Bvns4C.HJz@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>
>The flaw in this has already been explained:  The typical margin of
>error in a major poll is 3-5%, which is way over the % of the voters
>who have voted for the L.P. in any presidential campaign, so there's
>simply no rational reason for any polling company to include them.

I believe this is an overly simplistic application of statistics.  There are a
lot of assumptions that go behind calculating the margin of error (typically
the margin of error corresponds the 95% confidence level in a statistic and
is computed as 1/sqrt(n) where n is number of people polled).

Let's say 1% of people polled would vote Libertarian.  To say that there is a
3-5% polling error is ludicrous because that would mean that it is possilbe for
-4% of the populace to vote Libertarian.  The problem has something to do with
the underlying probability distribution of the sampling process which makes margin
of error calculations unrealiable at the extremes.  Intuitively, if 1000 people are
polled and 10 say they would vote Libertarian I would say that more then 1% of
the people are going to vote Libertarian.

(Caveat: my statistics is rusty so I could be wrong.  But give it some thought.)

-Adam
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:49450 alt.politics.elections:15105
From: stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU ()
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
Subject: Re: Homosexual Employment Problems (Re: NEWSWEEK POLL: Plurality of Americans support GAY RIGHTS)
Date: 28 Sep 1992 03:24:59 GMT
Organization: Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: orchid.ucsc.edu

In article <12401@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>From soc.motss:
>
>In article <rick.716657771@pegasus>, rick@siemens.com. (Rick Taft) writes:
># 	 [The following is strictly my opinion and I can't back it up
># 	 with any statistics.  Here goes anyway:]
># 
># 	 For the most part, LBG-folks are not any more unemployed or
># 	 underemployed than the average American.  We are represented
># 	 in all facets of the workforce in roughly proportional
># 	 numbers to our existence in society.  We have been able to
># 	 achieve this because most of us have passed for straight in
># 	 our professional lives.  We do not, therefore, need quotas to
># 	 get us in the workplace.
># -- 
># 			   rick@siemens.com
>
>Hmmm.  Even homosexuals aren't uniform in agreeing that they are
>being driven into the streets.
>-- 
Quite right!!  How many heterosexuals aren't uniform in agreeing
about anything.

Now about in Rick's statement that as long as gays pass for straight
that is pretend to be such, that they have no problems in the work
force overall.  Well, I know from first hand experience about such
matters and how one has to hide in order to avoid ridicule or the
at worst being subjected to conditons that make it intolerable to
continue in a work related position.  Or worst yet, having to live
in a world where one suppresses one's true being.

I agree that in a sane and intelligent society, one free of bigotry,
racism, and hatred of the unknown, we do not need quotas.  But, we
don't live in such a world yet...

So, as those who would see certain groups of people kept in their
'predefined' places, these groups should flex all of the power
they can, and gain the right to be free of persecution.


If you haven't been there or experienced the process of being
made to feel like you are a second class citizen, or less of 
a human being than others- then don't speak about it, because
you simply don;t know.

>Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
>There can be no peace as long as AB 2601 lives.
From: fehr@ms.uky.edu (Jeff Davis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Media coverage for Marrou/Lord (call these #'s!)
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:00:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Austerlitz, Gershovitz, and Carmichael

Michael R Linksvayer writes:
>
>To:    All Libertarians and anyone else who wants to see the media
>       cover the Marrou/Lord Campaign.
>

This should give you all either heart or a peptic ulcer...a couple of
days ago, in an editorial in the Lexington Herald-Leader which discussed
the rights of Ross Perot to be in on the Presidential debates, they
said that the 3rd party candidate which fit the criteria to be in
on the debates was Marrou. If the media down here is "hep" to your
campaign then you can be sure the other, big-league media heavies
have made a conscious decision to ignore you. Just so you know the
inertia that you face.
-- 
Jeff Davis <davis@keats.ca.uky.edu>
From: cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker)
Subject: Re: rights and responsibilities
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 04:18:56 GMT

stank@perrault.unet.com (Stan Knight) writes:

>In article <1992Oct1.133221.20020@meaddata.com> johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend) writes:
>>   Democrats believe that Clinton has always been pro-choice, but
>>   this is not true.

>And Reps. beleive that George has always been pro-life. 

Not to mention Ronald Reagan - who signed a law greatly liberalizing
abortion laws in California - BEFORE Roe v. Wade was decided.

>Stan Knight

                 -rocker
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:48879 alt.politics.clinton:8012
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Smoot-Hawley-Gore....
Date: 1 Oct 92 05:51:45 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.


	Al Gore: protectionist, xenophobe, economic illiterate.

	Geez, you'd think Honduran workers were the next Great Threat to the US
:).

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Statistical Aberration -- Parties Represent Less Than 20% ...
Date: 5 Oct 92 21:52:00 GMT

For the presidential election less than 50% of eligible voters
participate. Split these in half and assume some people voted
because there were no good choices, and the Democrat and GOP
party represent less than 20% of the people at best.

It's even less if we look at local and congressional elections.
More like 5% or less.  And now that other choices are coming 
into play even less.

It's a joke to chastise libertarians for only representing a 
small percent of the populace. 

-- Stephen D. Tice    "Think About It... Harder, Harder!!"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.clinton
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: AIDS crisis
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 02:08:07 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:

: >AIDS is not a punishment from God at all. It is a natural consequence
: >of ignoring the users manual. Sort of like jumping of a cliff. No punishment
: >but a lot of consequences.
: 
: What user's manual?

eng-nxt03 [3] ~> man sex
No manual entry for sex.

Hmmm..... Perhaps this could be part of the problem....   ;)

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92



Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism,misc.headlines,sci.econ
From: thf2@quads.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Re: taxes. (Was: Re: A Simple Thought Experiment)
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 22:52:10 GMT

In article <Bv0327.GIM@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>In article <1992Sep20.194943.19577@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>>>>>Subtotal percentage taxes	52.5%
>
>>More like 36% for most middle-class people.  Move to Texas and get it
>>knocked down even further.
> 
>True enough, but whether it's 52% or 36%, don't you think it's FAR too much?
>Do you really get 1/2 or 1/3 of your desires from the government?  

I've probably gotten more.  Government paid for the first twelve years of
my education, greatly subsidized the two universities I've went to since,
increased the social welfare of the society I live in by providing protection
for private property, encouraged invention that increased social welfare by
providing protection for intellectual property, built and maintained the 
roads and public transportation that I needed to access the majority of 
my jobs, and provided a safe haven from religious persecution for my 
ancestors.  And that's before the subjective utility I receive from 
knowing that I live in a society which doesn't have the poverty of a 
New Delhi because of the safety net provided by the welfare system, 
as much as I'd like to see that welfare system made more efficient.

They're also footing much of the bill for this wonderful medium of
communication that you and I are debating on.
-- 
           .. . . .  .  .   .    .     .     .    .   .  .  . . . ..
          ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
         the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: JZ lands in a Hot LZ...
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:30:17 GMT
	    <Oct.2.08.10.09.1992.28715@romulus.rutgers.edu>
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <Oct.2.08.10.09.1992.28715@romulus.rutgers.edu>
kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) writes about Sodom
and Gomorrah:

>_THIS_ is what God thinks of homosexuality.  Let's get it right, why
>don't we?

Ted, since you claim to be the press agent for Jesus Christ, perhaps
you should ask your boss what he said about Sodom and Gomorrah. He said
that the sin was inhospitability, not homosexuality. There are other
references to this, as well. But I would imagine you would have to
believe Jesus himself instead of some outdated popular "scholarship".

Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kane@{buast7,astro}.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) Astronomy Dept, Boston University,
Boston, MA 02215. True personal salvation is achieved by absolute faith in
ones true self.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Summary: Notice the changed newsgroups lines, folks... 
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 23:10:58 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.032630.27507@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>An unborn child is innocent, and deserves a chance to live. A murderer has

An "unborn child" is neither innocent or guilty, as those are terms which
can only apply to a BORN entity.

>obviously done something heinous-execution is not just some arbitrary
>killing.

I think the people who have been executed for being on the losing side of
a political power struggle would disagree with you.

I can think of a lot of reports from people in South American countries that
disagree with you.

>Abortion has the potential to be used liked this.  I'm

Abortion can be used like *WHAT*?

>concerened about abortion being used as a method of eugenics, abortion
>when an unborn child is deemed "inferior" or "undesirable" by someone
>else's standards.

As long as the *ONLY* person who gets to make the choice about whether or
not to obtain an abortion is the *WOMAN WHO IS PREGNANT*, you don't have
anything to worry about.

>I was born with certain physical problems.

So was I.  I'm pro-choice.  What's the connection?

>When I was younger a common
>unwarranted attack at me was the comment "After you were born, I bet your
>mother is pro-abortion..".  That's probably one of the few times I wanted
>to fight someone.  Irrellavent comment, I know.  Getting carried away.

Completly irrevelant.  Pro-abortion is not the same as Pro-choice.



--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu | B(0-4) c- d- e++ f- g++ k(+) m r(-) s++(+) t | TSAKC=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  OK???=
= "I warned Larry about such intellectually dishonest posting."               =
=    -- Peter Nyikos in article <nyikos.717105984@milo.math.scarolina.edu>    =
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.abortion,alt.sex
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: A Clear And Compelling Argument
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 19:14:38 GMT

kristyp@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kristy Patterson) writes:
] In article <Bv20t2.JEx@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> varney@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bruce Varney) writes:
] >	A couple DOES consent to the possibility of pregnancy when they
] >consent to sex.
] 
] Please provide some documentation for this assertion. (Hint: so far not one
] person has shown that this is anything more than a personal opinion.) I, for
] one (as I think I've mentioned repeatedly) do not share this opinion.
] 
] >			Bruce
 
Kristy,

Let us try this again....

It is a Consent at a Non_Rational Level.

We all Know that HeteroSexualityTheDeathKult is this way,
as the Consent to Engage In Heterosexual activities Implies
the Consent to Gestate, and that the Consent to Gestat Implies
the Consent to Death By Gestational Complications.

It is a Clear Chain of Logic!

Had there been no desire for the possibility of A Gestational Event,
then the Person(s) would NOT engage in said HeteroSexual Activity.

Only Those Willing, Daring, Brave Enough to "JUST SAY NO! TO HETRO!"
Are Standing FOR LIFE!!!!

They do not wish to IMPLY DEATH!!!!

So They JUST SAY NO!


ciao
drieux

ps: brought to you as a public service of the Committee to Cure Hetro's.


-- 
Modern Day Problems

Does that 'answer' your question,
or should I be a little more vague.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
In-reply-to: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu's message of Tue, 6 Oct 1992 02:40:00 GMT
Organization: pubs
	<1992Oct6.003817.15753@pony.Ingres.COM>
	<5OCT199221402013@utarlg.uta.edu>
Date: 6 Oct 92 12:35:20 CDT

Stephen Tice writes (apparently with a straight face):

   Going to Oxford is very like going to Canada. Protesting the war
   by going to Moscow is very like Jane Fonda in Hanoi. I don't
   like it, but I can live with it. 

   I have a problem beyond this, which has to do with how effective
   the soviets were in recruiting people. This is where my concern 
   is. (Kim Philby and company, considered)

You actually mean this.  You're saying Clinton might have been RECRUITED
by the Soviets?  I admire people with active imaginations.

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion,alt.activism.d
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992 04:20:55 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Oct6.014712.26704@cs.yale.edu>  rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
> In article <1992Oct06.002612.118841@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com write
> >In  <1992Oct5.201136.23879@cs.yale.edu>  rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Res
> >I assume the following is what she's referring to.
> Interestingly enough, no.

That *is* interesting.  Multiple independant confirmation.

> The study you cite here does not control for the women's emotional
> states before the pregnancy, as far as I can tell.

I gave you everything I've got; you'd have to contact Johns Hopkins
for more details.

> To conclude that abortions are likely to be beneficial
> (i.e. a good choice) would be post hoc in the extreme.

I don't think that anyone's suggesting that teenagers go out, get pregnant,
and get an abortion in order to do well in school.  I do think that it
helps repudiate the (unsupported) claims regarding emotional trauma.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc