HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Train vs. plane subsidies? (was Re: Private Discrimination)
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:48:15 GMT

In article <10968@platypus.uofs.uofs.edu> bill@platypus.uofs.edu writes:
>Trains have one other "minor" shortcoming in the US.

:How far is it from a house (any house, feel free to pick the worst case
:you can find) in Germany to a train station that offers passenger service??

	I'm just not familiar with Germany, so I really can't say. But
they have abundant train service, including some of their newer,
150-mph, models.

	In the Bay Area, the nearest intercity train service (as
opposed to urban railroads like BART) is courtesy of an Amtrak bus
that stops here in Livermore and which goes to Stockton to meet the
San Joaquin train to Bakersfield. From there, more bus to LA. To get
to Sacramento, I have to go to the Richmond BART station and take the
train from there.

:It's about 150 miles from my house. All the way to Philadelphia.

	Where do you live???

:And I live in that supposed Northeast Corridor.  

	Defined as Boston - Providence - New Haven - New York City -
Trenton - Philadelphia - Wilmington - Baltimore - Washington, DC.

:If you don't live in a major metro area you don't have train service.

	But a major metro area is where most of the people live, get it?

	I know that's unfortunate for people living in thinly
populated areas, but what can one say?

:As for extending the comparison.  I once took a train from Boston to
:New York (it wasn't planned, my plane was detoured because of weather
:and by morning everything was snowed in and the only way back was train
:or rental car, and all the cars were taken before we got there.)
:The train had seats like an old school bus and smelled of diesel exhaust 
:like an old Greyhound bus.  Not at all like what they show on the Amtrak 
:ads on TV.

	I've never had train service _that_ bad. When was it?

	None of the trains I've ridden in the Bay Area (all diesel, by
the way) smelled very much, and all of Amtrak's seats that I ever sat
on were very comfortable (they use airline seats in their more recent
passenger cars).

:Add into that the fact that once I got to NYC I had to take a cab to another
:train station to make connections.  Trip from Boston, MA. to West Point, NY
:took 14 hours.  I could have driven it in about 6.  Tell me again that trains
:are a viable transportation alternative n the states.

	They are -- between NYC and DC. I've gone to DC from Philly
several times by train to visit the museums in DC, and it usually
takes 2 hours. The average speed is about 90 mph, and can anyone top
_that_ in their cars?

:Not lately, and we have Teddy Roosevelt to thank for it!!

	Why's that???

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42812 alt.rush-limbaugh:4098
From: harryo@cbnewse.cb.att.com (harold.r.holm)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Keys to the election
Summary: Check the facts, Mack......
Date: 29 Aug 92 22:04:37 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <92240.164045DART@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, DART@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (415) writes:
> References: <1992Aug26.025832.16332@s1.gov> <ART.92Aug26144828@world.std.com>
> <1992Aug27.212402.10909@s1.gov>
> 
> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> 
> >>I'm sitting here listening to Rush Limbaugh and he just said that Hillary
> 
> Ahhh, that explains your radical rightwing extremist point of view.
> 
> >>is being considered for Attorney General, possibly even Secretary of
> >>State.  If that proves to be the case, then a very, very careful analysis
> >>of her legal and political positions is in order.
> 
> Well you know what they say, if you read it in People Magazine, the
> National Enquirer, or hear it on Rush Limbaugh, then it must be true.

It was referred to in the May '92 issue of Vanity Fair.  *I checked it*. 
Obviously more than some care to do, throwing out imagined references
instead.  Strictly for purposes of flamboyance, no doubt.  You must be
taking lessons from the Arkansas Dragon Lady herself......

                                                    H.R. Holm
*standared disclaimers, comment my own*
*pls post replies to the group only*
                                              **********************************
                                              Bill & Al have what it takes...
                                              to TAKE WHAT YOU'VE GOT.
                                              **********************************
From: lb@cs.man.ac.uk (Luben Boyanov)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Macedonia: What's in a Name? (was The New Greek Phobia)
Date: 3 Sep 92 09:33:46 GMT
Organization: Dept Computer Science, University of Manchester, U.K.

In article <Sep.2.12.00.08.1992.25989@math.rutgers.edu> cromar@math.rutgers.edu (Scott Cromar) writes:

>> Bulgaria
>> recognizes a coutry under this name, but no Macedonian nation,
>> etc.
>
>Well then the Bulgarian position strikes me as being as absurd as the
>Greek position.

This is a favourite excuse by some Greek to try and involve another country
as a scapegoat. It's ridiculous to say that somebody recognizes or not a
nation. The self consciousness is not a matter of recognition by a country.
It exists in people's mind or not. Borders are recognized but governments.
I never heard Bulgarian official claiming that Macedonians should not call
themselves so. It's absolute rubbish to talk about recognizing a nation or
not. This is consciousness and it matters little if somebody recognizes it
or not.

>--Scott
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: National Health Care
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: Curious Goods (formerly Louis Vendredi Antiques)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 03:03:25 GMT

golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>>
>>The article even fumbled handling of the only valid criticism (and
>>that of any actual concern to Canadian doctors) of our system, and
>>that is to add a market-based efficiency of token $5-$20 deductibles,
>
>User fees are not an efficiency...studies almost always show they
>increase costs because of delayed treatment...

Most of my M.D. friends and contacts advocate the token $5-$20
deductible system such as Quebec recently proposed not only to
dissuade hypochondriacs (I've yet to meet a doctor from back home who
doesn't bring that up).  However, another aspect is that they want
their patients to better appreciate their provision of services
because Canadian left-rhetoric gives people (and it seems Americans)
the *impression* that they're public servants, rather than fee-paid
professionals (the reality of it all); as you say, ...

>The main problem with the health insurance system in Canada is
>that the left for ideological purposes has tried to give the
>population the impression that it is free, whereas we really
>should be educating the population about how much it actually
>costs so more people will responsibly use the system.

This reminds me a joke by my uncle Oscar (who spends his retirement
winters in Arizona ... "Just like in the States, conservatives in
Canada want to make it seem like there's more socialism than there
really is; but in Canada, our socialists do the same thing!"  (-;

I know that when working in Ontario, I was aware that I was paying for
health insurance because OHIP fees were listed on my pay stub; neither
Alberta nor Manitoba collected at paycheque time, but only annually at
income tax time (built into the tax rate) -- I forget what Quebec did,
as I was dealing with two very different tax forms*.  But we're still
spending less for the kind of health care that middle class Americans
are literally dying for ...

gld

* Quebec is the only province that collects its own provincial income
tax, to give that aura of independance; the other provinces let the 
Feds do it on their behalf.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				Elections 1992-93:
> gld@cunixB.cc.columbia.EDU		* Jean Chretien (Canada)
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			* Perot^H^H^H^H^H Elvis! (USA)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: BCCI and Jimmy Carter (again)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 19:49:38 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.213824.23946@inel.gov> dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose) writes:
> > 	This is backtracking, but even so, there is no reason to suspect 
> > Carter of helping BCCI, except for his connections with a charity that
> > recieved BCCI funds.

> Much of the same was said about Regan and Bush concerning the "October 
> Surprise"

What, that the only benefit they would have gained is that a charity they
were connected with got a donation? I think the connection is a little more
direct than that.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
  'U`  
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42681 ca.politics:7200 ba.politics:4864
From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Subject: Re: Another good reason not to vote for Bush
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:25:24 GMT

> = (Martin Guerrero-LabA) writes:
>> = (Jennifer Brindle) writes:

>>Gee, you're still equating slavery with abortion?  Haven't you learned
>>that FORCED CHILDBIRTH EQUATES WITH SLAVERY.  And neither is right.

>This assumes, of course, that the unborn is just a scum sucking parasite
>stuck in the mother's womb sucking the life out of the mohter, and therefore,
>we should have the right to terminate that parasite.

No, you scum sucking parasite: it assumes nothing, it states quite clearly
that FORCED CHILDBIRTH EQUATES WITH SLAVERY, just as Jennifer stated
above.  How would _you_ characterize forced birth?  ...Without adding any
bullshit this time.

Martin, you bad boy, you should learn not to put words in people's mouths,
and just reply honestly to the original statement - something many of you
pro-life liars seem incapable of.

Now, go back to sweeping up LabA, and leave that computer alone :)!


-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Wacker the K"| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Bush loses post-convention bounce
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 12:33:15 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.012014.28819@pony.Ingres.COM>, garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE
OF THE YEAR) writes:

|>In article <BtLx26.MMx@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, daniels@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel
|>writes...
|>>sunder@altair.crhc.uiuc.edu (Srinivas Sunder) writes:
|>>  
|>>>The current standings in their poll are:
|>> 
|>>>Clinton: 51%
|>>>Bush:    36%
|>> 
|>>>This is widely different from a post-convention poll which showed
|>>>Clinton leading by 45% to 42%. That one was a poll of 1186 voters.
|>>>53% disapprove of Bush's handling of his job, 38% approve. This 
|>>>figure is virtually the same as before the convention.
|>> 
|>>Ah, but the polls can change quickly. Look what happened to a "reformed"
|>>Labour Party in the United Kingdom.  John Major STILL won, despite the
|>>worst recession since the 1930's.  AND all the polls said he would lose,
|>>right up to election day.

|>This is true, but there is something you are overlooking. The polls
|>before the elections in the U.K. had labor up by just 5 or 6% (with a 
|>improbability factor of 2 or 3%). So it was very close.
|>	Clinton is up by 15% (give or take 3-4%). Unless Bush starts
|>cutting into the lead he WON'T do a John Major.

There were other complicating factors. There was unusualy good weather on
polling day which brought an abnormally high turn out. The Tories had a large
number of supporters who they had alienated through their incompetence but were
not prepared to vote labour. These dweebs looked out of the window saw the nice
weather and decided to go off for a walk. Best laid plans of mice and men you
know...

If you have a margin of 3% in the polls factors like Fergie going off with rince
Edward are enough to change the result. With a 20% gap the polls are much more
likely to get it right!

--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42778 ca.politics:7237 soc.motss:37521
From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,soc.motss,alt.flam
Subject: Re: PLEASE VOTE!!! (Clayton flame)
Date: 30 Aug 92 02:54:50 GMT
	<37261@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> <1992Aug28.072509.27910@reed.edu>
	<11981@optilink.UUCP>
Followup-To: alt.flame
Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY

In article <11981@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

   Straightspace is for straight people only.  Please pay attention
   when you are told that homosexuals aren't welcome, and stop trying
   to use your control over California's state government to impose
   homosexuals into straightspace.

Yo!  Shit-for-brains!  You're welcome to create alt.straightspace, and
prohibit homosexuals from posting unrelated articles there.  Until then,
get a clue.  Or two, heck, most people find them lying around on corners.
Not you, apparently.

   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.

Homosexual prohibition won't work.

--
--russ <nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> I'm proud to be a humble Quaker.
Peace is not the absence of war.  Peace is the presence of a system for
resolving conflicts before war becomes necessary.  War never creates peace.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43407 talk.abortion:34617
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Mr. Kaldis's "misogyny"
Date: 3 Sep 92 00:38:06 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Sep2.171332.13426@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:

> You _have_ been hanging around Suzanne, haven't you?

I have never met Suzanne.  (Though I was in Tucson about a year and a
half ago and had suggested that we might meet, but she and her husband
had gone to a pro-Life rally in Phoenix on the day I was in town.)
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.elections
From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: See George Whine...
Date: 3 Sep 92 13:31:28 GMT
Organization: Betz & Associates

In <1992Aug30.050643.14992@ads.com> jtn@ADS.COM (John T. Nelson) writes:

>See George whine.  Whine George whine.  Whine whine whine.  Congress is
>all at fault.  The Democrats are all to blame.  Wah wah wah!

>Its ironic. Wasn't it Harry Truman who had the plaque on his desk that said
>"The Buck Stops Here"? George Bush likes to portray himself as the
>"come from behind" presidential candidate. A latter day Harry Truman. 

I'm waiting for Clinton to ask him, when he compares himself to
Harry Truman in the inevitable debate, "George, whom did you vote
for in 1948, Dewey or Truman?"

-- 
Tom Betz -- 512 Warburton Avenue - Yonkers, NY 10701-1832 -- (914) 375-1510
 tbetz@panix.com | "It's a sick world...          | tbetz@upaya.panix.com
-----------------+             I'm a happy guy."  +--------------------------
"I wouldn't say it if I didn't know it wasn't true." -- Emmanuel Transmission
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:43130 alt.politics.elections:12103 alt.politics.clinton:3700 alt.politics.bush:3715
From: ingria@bbn.com (Bob Ingria)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Kulturkampf
Date: 25 Aug 1992 22:53:10 GMT
Reply-To: ingria@BBN.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com
In-reply-to: steveh@thor.isc-br.com's message of 23 Aug 92 15:29:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug23.152947.10213@isc-br.isc-br.com> steveh@thor.isc-br.com (Steve Hendricks) writes:
   In article <PPESSI.92Aug23165423@vipunen.hut.fi> ppessi@vipunen.hut.fi (Pekka Pessi) writes:
   >In article <1992Aug19.174523.22812@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:

   >>The Nazis called the program _Kulturkampf_.  Is there any way in
   >>which the Buchanan proposal differs from the _Kulturkampf_?  Or are
   >>there defenders of Buchanan who would like to explain his statement
   >>otherwise?
   >
   >	I doubt that Pat Buchanan is planning any exhibition of
   >	decadent art.

Au contraire!  Buchanan used a clip of a film on female impersonators
in one of his TV ads to indicate the sort of threats he sees to family
values, truth, justice, apple pie, et cetera, et cetera.

		      Nor I think he wants to make any Landskirche,
   >	but he might be obsessed with an idea to use catholic priests
   >	as guinea pigs of the cosmetic industry.

   Just to keep the record straight, this post might suggest that Pat
   has made statements that could be considered anti-Catholic.  To my
   knowledge, that's unlikely since he's a committed right wing
   Catholic, himself.  On the other hand, his comments about American
   Jews' support of Israel has convinced even William F. Buckley that
   Buchanan has a significant anti-semitic streak.

Wasn't Buchanan one of the advisers who convinced Reagan that it was
perfectly fine to visit Bitburg?

-30-
Bob
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:42148 alt.activism:15493
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: steeg@cs.toronto.edu ("Evan W. Steeg")
Subject: Re: Activist shot at Berkeley Chancellor's home
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 26 Aug 92 22:55:55 GMT

In article <64717@cup.portal.com> Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com writes:
>A 19 year old nutcase was shot after she attacked a cop with a machete
>after breaking into the Chancellor's home in Berkeley. She had left a note
>saying that "they're probably going to shoot me, tell my friends goodbye,
>this is to defend People's Park against the University".
>....
>
>Related - other activists are calling for everyone to burn down LA
>again if the attackers of Reginald Denny are convicted, calling Denny's
>blood the justified reaction to oppression.
>
>Anybody out there agree with these nutcases?

 No.  And your intermittent attempts to pretend that all liberals/progressives/
activists/Democrats/whatever do share such insane beliefs are becoming
ever more tedious and childish.  "Do you agree with Charles Manson?"
"Do you agree with Josef Stalin?"   Give it a rest. 

 (Personally, my fond hope is that those who attacked Denny and the cops
who beat King will be put together in a cell, the lights turned off and
the key thrown away.  But justice is to be found less often than Elvis
these days....)

  -- Evan


-- 

Evan W. Steeg (416) 978-5182      steeg@ai.toronto.edu (CSnet,UUCP,Bitnet)
Dept of Computer Science          steeg@ai.utoronto    (other Bitnet)
University of Toronto,            steeg@ai.toronto.cdn (EAN X.400)
Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4           {seismo,watmath}!ai.toronto.edu!steeg
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
From: cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)
Subject: Re: My Purpose In Getting NAMBLA Shunned
Reply-To: cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 21:04:26 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc

As quoted from <p15onh0@fido.asd.sgi.com> by dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber):

> In article <11846@optilink.UUCP> manley@optilink.UUCP (Dave Manley) writes:
> 
> >Question: If these statements do in fact represent the beliefs of the
> >people, both hetero- and homosexual alike, how can anyone who opposes
> >child molestation find a way to support NAMBLA - when they refuse to
> >moderate their position to at least exclude prepubescent children? 
> 
> 
> Answer:  I can support someone's right to exist without supporting their
> goals.  I think that the OCA has every right to exist.  I think that the
> KKK has every right to exist.  I think that if any member of any of the
> above organizations breaks the law they should be prosecuted.  However,
> until they break the law, they can take part in any group advocating anything
> that they would like.

Keeping mind that respect for rights and respect for the individuals who 
possess them are a very different matter, were the American Nazi Party to form
an "Ernst Roehm" society comprised of gay Nazis, would you feel comfortable
marching next to them?

You can despise a person without despising his rights....

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

"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?" 
------------------------------------------------------------------  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,misc.headlines
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Eggert vs. Livni
Reply-To: Hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 18:47:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.212720.9962@bony1.bony.com>, jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake
Livni) writes:

|>In article <EGGERTJ.92Aug26135433@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu> eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu
|>writes:

|>>The Israelis then deduce that the Palestinians
|>>don't own the land, and that it belongs to Israel.
|>
|>In many of the most publicized cases of Arabs being evicted from houses
|>that they lay claim to "for generations", Israeli courts have found
|>documentation of prior Jewish ownership for these properties.  These 
|>properties had been taken by Jordan without compensation or agreement. 

Substantiate this claim with some examples Jake, people might beleive it then.
Just because you want something to be true does not make it true.


|>>Tell me, Jake, can
|>>you prove that the money in your pocket is yours?  If not, then hand
|>>it over.

|>If I were to claim that I own this Mercedes sedan but I have no papers
|>to prove it, nor can I come up with a reasonable explanation for how I 
|>got it, then I would be rather suspect.  There are lots of people in
|>the US with stories like this who end up in prison.

Only in cases where they have been convicted of drug dealing. This is a
different matter, if someone is found guilty of a criminal offence then it is
justifiable to assume that much of his wealth comes from crime, if he were rich
before why would he have stooped to crime in the first place.

What Jake seeks to justify is confiscation of property without compensation.

Even if his claim that the houses were at one time owned by a Jewish family does
not mean that the inhabitants should be turned out of it and the house seized by
the state. The house has quite likely been purchased in good faith. If the
original owners can back up a claim that they were unjustly deprived then there
is a case for either the rteturn of the property or just compensation. There is
no case for the state to intervene though.


|>Why should Arab thieves be treated differently from American thieves?

Only a racist bigot like Jake would assume that if an Arab is living in a house
he must have stolen it.


|>There is no such hypocritical demand.  The mezuzas on the doorposts
|>simply indicate that the Arab claim to have been living in the house
|>for generations is false. 

Jews have lived in the holy land for generations too you know.


--

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc