HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:09:01 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

In article 9007@tellab5.tellabs.com, linda@tellabs.com (Linda Jensen) writes:
>> I am not going to argue the merits of either of these people's "war
>> record", but I would like to discuss this double standard the Democrats
>> have on these two.  It was OK for Clinton to do anything legal to 
>> avoid being drafted, yet Quayle is not afforded that right?
>	Clinton is on record as opposing the Vietnam war.  True, 
>	it was probably 10% 'I oppose the Vietnam Policy' and 90%
>	'I don't want to die'.
>	Whereas Quayle was always been a pro-military hawk.  Have
>	you ever heard the phase "Having the courage of your 
>	convictions" ??
>	Guess it's o.k. to 'fight the good fight' as long as others
>	do the dirty work.  And please don't try to equate the
>	Indiana National Guard with the jungles of Vietnam.

Comparing an intellectual with antiwar sentiment to a rich kid
chickenhawk is both insulting and unfair to Clinton.

---
===============================================================================
Mitch Sako	LSI Computing Systems			Office	408-433-4187
internet:	msako@lsil.com				FAX	408-433-8796
uucp:		lsil!msako
RIME:		->REDBARON, conference=POLITICS
Disclaimer:	Opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone and do not
		reflect those of anyone else including my organization,
		my management or my mother
From: ADB103@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: SPINDOCTORS
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:18:08 GMT
Organization: Penn State University


 On tuesday I heard Rush use "Little Miss Can't Be Wrong" by the Spin Doctors a
s his lead in music. I found this strange for several reasons:
    The majority of the Spin's fans are "Deadheads" i.e. fans of The Grateful D
ead.  I seriously doubt that Rush would use a Dead tune as lead in, so why give
 a band that belongs to the same movement ear service.  Also the Spins are also
 very vocal supporters of Marijuana legalization (NORML).  The lead singer will
 frequently bring his "bong" onstage and smoke publically.  Again,would Rush su
pport this mode of political expression????  I can see how in an election year
Rush might find the notion of a band called the " Spin Doctors" sort of cute.
And, the title, "Little Miss Cant Be Wrong" is an easy  stab at the "feminazis"
 However, I find it ironic that the person (Rush) who would be the most outspok
en\offended by the Spin Doctor's political allingment is the first to offer the
m another feather for their hat and more fuel for their fire.  Rush, I think yo
u ought to see a "spin doctor."
   "Little RushRushRushRush CAN BE WRONG "
  It would be nice if someone with the time would post this file to Rush' addre
ss on Compuserve or a related newsgroup. Thanks for reading.Ed Beecher PSU
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Subject: Re: Republicans and the Far Right
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:28:16 GMT

tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey) writes:
>>acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams) writes:
>>>
>>>The Republican party is being very distinctly taken over by its radical
>>>right wing, dominated by extremist religious fundamentalists and crackpots.
>>
>>Yup.  I voted Reagan in '84 and Bush in '88, and I will *not* vote for
>>them again until they can loosen religious right's grip on the party.
>
>Religious ideas have always had a "grip" on the republican party.

I said loosen, not release altogether.  The current hammerlock they have is
unacceptable.

>                                                                   And
>especially great presidents of the U.S.  Go and read Abraham Lincoln and you
>will be amazed.

Go find some of the anti-Christian quotes of some of the Founding Fathers
(Jefferson, Adams).  You will be amazed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hulsey%dbsun.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Jim Hulsey)   TBDBITL '84 ('85 Rose Bowl)
An Ohioan living in Misery (Missouri, same difference)

Watch what you say!                Won't you sign up your name
They'll be calling you a radical   So you can be their dependable
A liberal, fanatical criminal      Respectable, presentable vegetable
--  Supertramp "The Logical Song"
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Pat Buchanan on usenet
Date: 31 Aug 92 13:24:32 GMT
Distribution: usa, na
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug30.231220.27477@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
>
>
>Rumor has it that Pat Buchanan wanted a usenet account until somebody
>pointed out that the news poster appends a ".sig file",  and not
>a ".sieg heil".

Boy, this one offends on so many levels, which, of course, is de rigueur 
for any pun worth its salt.
-- 
John Switzer               | "Don't mess with me, man!
                           | I'm a higher mammal!"
74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | 
jrs@netcom.com             | 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Why Bush whould/will burn for the delay in florida
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Distribution: usa
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:42:10 CDT


In article <1992Sep3.153745.21964@dbsun.uucp>, hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey) writes:
> 
> Seriously, I think both liberals and conservatives have done their fair
> share of spitting.  Liberals have invented laws in courts (Roe v. Wade).

There are cases to support your contention (esp after FDR packed the 
court), but Roe v Wade is not one of them.

The justices in the Roe vs Wade decision:

Voting for Roe (7):

Name			Term	President
----			----	---------
William O. Douglass	1939-75	Roosevelt
William J. Brennan	1956-90	Eisenhower
Potter Stewart		1958-81	Eisenhower
Thurgood Marshal	1967-91	Johnson
Warren E. Burger	1969-86	Nixon
Harry A. Blackmun	1970-	Nixon
Lewis F. Powell Jr	1972-87	Nixon

Voting against Roe (2):

Byron R. White		1962-	Kennedy
William H. Renquist	1972-	Nixon

Other Notes:
Burger was the Chief Justice.
Blackmun wrote the majority decision.

> Conservatives have ignored laws (Supplying aid to the Contras in spite
> of laws forbidding it).
-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: Woody Allen, evil Democrat example
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
	<1992Aug28.134954.18001@webo.dg.com>
Distribution: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 02:46:41 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.134954.18001@webo.dg.com> lyford@dagny.webo.dg.com (Lyford Beverage) writes:
   In article <LARRY.92Aug26122656@peak.psl.nmsu.edu>, larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
   |> 
   |> My, what a broad brush Rush paints with! 
   |> 
   |> Every Rush diatribe like this reminds me again what a jerk this 
   |> sermocinatious bellwether of the New Right really is. You can keep him.
   |> 

   So why are you listening?

I stopped. Three hours of music on Fiesta Mexicana is superior in every
way to Rush's self-righteous blatherings. I'm completely sick of this
sad piece of humanity and his ilk. Whatever it is, if Rush is one, 
I don't wanta be.

Viva! La Puerta Negra!

  (..)
   ~~
L.
"Yeh, Buddy..            | larry@psl.nmsu.edu (Larry Cunningham)|  _~~_
 I've got your COMPUTER! | % Physical Science Laboratory        | (O)(-)
 Right HERE!!"           | New Mexico State University          |  /..\ 
 (computer THIS!)        | Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA 88003    |   <> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are CORRECT, mine, and not PSLs or NMSUs..
Because the plot demands: an EVIL man!


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco)
Subject: Re: SPINDOCTORS
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 21:18:14 GMT

This article was probably generated by a buggy news reader.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: lyle@fidalgo.Stanford.EDU (Lyle Brenner)
Subject: Re: Summary Fri 8/28/92
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Distribution: world,usa,na
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 23:45:39 GMT

In article <BttIrA.DoL@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, slkg9733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven L. Kellmeyer) writes:
|> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
|> >MORNING UPDATE
|> 
|> >Rush has decided to read the Murphy Brown script, at least the
|> >most important part. Murphy and Frank are watching the news, and
|> >Vice President Quayle is shown making his famous comments about
|> >the Murphy Brown show. Brown wonders how she could be glamorizing
|> >single motherhood - "look at me, Frank," she says, "am I
|> >glamorous?" Frank answers "of course not, you look disgusting."
|>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >Brown replies "you're damn right, people in prison get to shower
|>                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >more than I do, and what was that crack about `just another
|> >life-style choice'?"
|> 
|> 
|> >-- 
|> >John Switzer               | "Don't mess with me, man!
|> >                           | I'm a higher mammal!"
|> >74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | 
|> >jrs@netcom.com             | 
|> 
|> This is an excellent example of the liberal "value system".
|> Notice that a pregnant woman is told "you look disgusting" and replies
|> "you're damn right" then going on to make a comparison between 
|> prison and pregnancy.  Why is it that women can be safely derided 
|> for the correct biological functioning of their reproductive system?
|> Several million years of evolution went into the design, and it is
|> called "disgusting".  Life-creation is compared to unfavorably to prison.

etc. etc. etc.

|> 
|> Steve Kellmeyer

Dude, she was pregnant LAST season.  She already had the baby.  So she isn't pregnant now; she must be disgusting for some other liberal reason.  Nice little diatribe though.

--lyle
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Subject: Re: Oregon Health Care Plan
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 17:28:27 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.230621.12293@leela.cs.orst.edu>,
   chrisda@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (David Christensen) writes:

>Where do you get this information?  Bush vetoed the plan because, he said,
>it conflicted with the new Americans with Disabilities Act.  Oregon supporters
>of the plan have apparently been meeting with Bush advisors today to work
>out some compromise on whatever clauses Bush objects to.

If Bush had truly supported the plan, he would have let the Supreme Court
decide what provisions violated the ADA and signed the bill.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hulsey%dbsun.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Jim Hulsey)   TBDBITL '84 ('85 Rose Bowl)
An Ohioan living in Misery (Missouri, same difference)

Watch what you say!                Won't you sign up your name
They'll be calling you a radical   So you can be their dependable
A liberal, fanatical criminal      Respectable, presentable vegetable
--  Supertramp "The Logical Song"
From: todd.paulus%theweb@meaddata.com (Todd Paulus) 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton & Taxes: 7% f
Date: 3 Sep 92 11:34:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Web BBS 1-513-436-9011 6 Lines 1200 News groups 50,000 files!
Reply-To: todd.paulus%theweb@meaddata.com (Todd Paulus) 

To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,peter@NeoSoft.com


PDS>Subject: Re: Clinton & Taxes: 7% f
PDS>Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 20:03:35 GMT
PDS>Message-ID: <1992Aug29.200335.29640@NeoSoft.com>

(Peter da Silva) writes:

PDS>In article <4668.577.uupcb@meaddata.com> todd.paulus%theweb@meaddata.com (To
PDS>aulus)  writes:
PDS>> It's difficult to communicate a concept, capitalism, that doesn't
PDS>> presume to provide any safety nets.

PDS>Capitalism is a mechanism for distributing resources. It has nothing to say,
PDS>pro or con, about charity either personal or institutionalised. Capitalism i
PDS>blamed for all manner of ills, held up as a complete solution to all woes, a
PDS>so on. It's not so black or so golden as all that... it's just a useful tool

PDS>> If we would spend less money on
PDS>> real or perceived guarantees, all of the population would be better off.

PDS>Once upon a time, if you got sick, you died. That's no longer true. Many
PDS>people can be cured and return to the mainstream of society as productive
PDS>individuals. It costs some money to do this, but a lot less than growing new
PDS>entrepreneurs all the time. If there's no safety net, the risks of striking
PDS>out on your own are suddenly much greater than they were in the 18th and 19t
PDS>centuries, so a new incentive that works against risk-taking has sprung up.

PDS>It's reasonable to consider ways of countering it, and returning the balance
PDS>to where it was in 1800.


You make a good point, Peter, and you are certainly correct that it is
not all black and white, simplistic.  But I simply have trouble
accepting the concept that everyone has a _right_ to good health and
health care, regardless of the cost.  I don't have a problem with the
idea that Rockafeller can afford better health care than I can.  I do
have a problem with assuming that the homeless person, or the guy who
would rather live on welfare than work, has a right to the same level of
care as the Rockafellers.  So, how does one draw the line?  At what
point does investing in a health care system support the economy, as an
investment in human endeavor and its future, without the ever present
risk of fraud, intentional and otherwise, in the hands of an uncaring,
non incentive based, gov't agency?

Regards,
Todd

---
 . OLX 2.2 . Never play leapfrog with a unicorn.
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Date: 2 Sep 92 01:05:32 GMT
Distribution: world, usa, na
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

Doug Page says;

> I see what you are saying, "the only moral thing to teach is amorality".
> Sounds "logical" doesn't it?

No, I didn't say that...

How about not teaching morality, and letting the parents teach it at home?
Or would you prefer that the government, or it's representatives (teachers)
instill their morality on your kids?

Of course, this will probably devolve into a claim that science is a
religion...   This is a silly claim, generaly made by religionists who feel
bad because their particular form of voodoo is not being forced onto the
kids of today...    Science is knowledge (which fundies tend to think is
evil per se').  What MORAL choices you make with that knowledge is
not science, that is philosophy, ethics, religion, etc...   

Sure,  no science is 100% complete...   so we can poke holes in
science.  For example, some people seem to have trouble grasping
the fact that todays paradigm can be tossed out tomorrow in the light
of a better paradigm or new evidence.  That doesn't mean that 
science qua science is flawed... in fact, this constant revision is
one of the strongest most important parts of science.   Only religion
works froma  body of "revealed truth".   Science admist that it makes
mistakes...  in fact, it is required for advancement.   Other wise we
would come to a dilemma wherein we could either never advance a new
paradigm until it was 100% non-refutable (never),  or we could
never be allowed to refute a paradigm once we had accepted it...

Either case leads to the sort of stagnation we see in Iran...

Which, I think would suit a lot of Fundies just fine.   Hog tie
science and technology,  make it subservient to revealed doctrine,
and move us firmly back into the dark ages.

No thank you Mr Fundie

Scince has given us antibiotics, medical proceedures, technology, space
warnings of hurricanes, transportation, etc...  (did usenet come from
the bible?   Did your terminal?)

What has the bible given us?  Some vague and questionable moral precepts... 
on which we have based everything from the love of Sister Theresa to the 
evil of Torquemada...     I could agree to the former,  but we
don't need another Spanish Inquisition, no thank you...

How do you feel about the inquisition?   

Science is a way to gain knowledge... to try to make life better for mankind
now.  Fundamentalism is a way to cut mankind off at the knees, on a vague
hope for pie in the sky...

Fooey on you.
From: pearsodc@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (D)
Subject: Re: The George Bush Fan Club?
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:53:59 GMT


Mike Van Pelt writes
> In article <1992Sep1.181026.25252@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com writes:
> >Clinton took more bashing from the media than has ever been unleashed 
> >on a public figure regarding, inhalation, Gennifer, draft-dodging, 
> >taxes, etc., etc.  What about that?
> 
> Clinton definitely took a pounding... but all of it was pre-Perot-
> withdrawal.  Now, all three networks are practically part of Clinton's
> campaign organization.
> 
> Remember Rush saying, in the Clinton campaign's darkest days when it
> looked like he'd come in a distant third, that Perot was going to
> withdraw, and when he did, the media was going to perform the most
> heroic act of CPR on Clinton that's ever been seen this side of a
> "Rescue 911" episode.   He sure pegged that one.

Question for all the Clinton folk out there...what happened?  Why, during  
the primaries, did it look like George was going to run away with this  
whole thing and leave Clinton (and even Perot, at the beginning) eating  
his dust, and now, just six months later, Bush's campaign is in disarray  
and he can't catch Clinton no matter what he does?

What do the American people know now that they didn't know six months ago?

(Note - if this question sounds familiar, it should.  I couldn't make up  
anything original if I had The Great One himself locked in my closet...

..then again, neither could he.)

clueless chuck
PearsoDC@NeXTWork.Rose-Hulman.Edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Info on Dan Quayle's camera coverage during Buchanan's speech
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:26:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.183449.22561@athena.cs.uga.edu>, tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:

|> Could you qive your source for Quayle having smoked cannabis in college.

	The same source that described Clinton's drug use, his college buddies.
In Quayle's case, there's a guy who claims to have been Quayles dealer who's
been talking about selling Quayle small amounts of dope on a dozen or so
occasions. He's been backed up by a half dozen or so other witnesses who
have (as yet) declined to go public.

	Quayle has denied it, of course, but the dealer has managed to get
all of the details right (re dates and times) so it's certainly possible.
Dan is on record as supporting marijuana legalization while he was in the
senate, although I think he's dropped the subject since then. I think, 
though, that anyone who is willing to go out on a limb for grass has probably
tried it.

	It wouldn't get Quayle convicted, I know, but if it's good enough
for the GOP, it's good enough for me. I can produce the dealers name, if
anyone cares, I just don't remember it off-hand.

-- 
Anybody who agrees with me deserves what they get.

                                        Alex Crain
                                        UMBC Academic Computing Services
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Keywords: 'Y'
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:49:02 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug28.185900.6768@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
->	What country are you from? Where I live, the oppertunity to vote
->out a congress member comes up every couple of years, regardless of who's
->in office. It sounds like you've been listening to Jerry Brown (Or Rush
->Limbuagh) long enough to completely detach from reality.

 Reality ? Why are the people having to force congress to accept term limits ?
Why do we have term limits for the president but not the congress or senate ?
Why are congress members granted free mailing rights ? Why has it taken a major
voter revolt to start to clean the house ? Why has one party controlled con-
grees for over 30 years ? We the people have had enough. We are currently
throwing out members of the house just because they are current members of the
house. Dosent that tell you something.

->	Yes. Most people in this country are quite happy with their reps,
->although they don't like congress as a whole. While most of the country
->is displeased with the government debt, those same people would be even 
->more displeased if they were forced to fork out more taxes or lose the 
->services that are the source of the debt. Again, what they want is to
->take away other people services while preserving their own.

 The current grand total for turnover rate for the US House of Representatives
is 20 percent. 86 members wont be back. Most have retired because they are
disgusted with the political corruption. We havent even finished all the pri-
maries yet.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.