HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Subject: Re: Rush is bad for our country
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:53:39 GMT


In a previous article, madkins@lonestar.utsa.edu (Martin L. Adkins) says:
>See more name calling.....I can assure you sir...I am no lunatic. And guess
>what i listen to get a laugh too.  That's the point information and
>entertainment.  Another thing are you saying that since Rush is "dangerous"
>he should be censored?
>

The term "Lunatic fringe" refers to the far left or far right of any
political concept.  It does not imply that the person subscribing to
that concept is a lunatic.

And let me be clear on this: No, NO,No,No, NO, I do not think rush should
be censored.  I believe the right to free speech extends to everyone.  That
means I think Rush should be free to make his pronouncements, an I should
be free to call him, and anyone who agrees with him on it.

>
>
>
>>>Lighten up and get over it.
>>>
>>
>>Two points on this...
>>
>>First, whether you realize it or not, this statement is CLASSIC Rush Limbaugh.
>>It is, in fact, a catch-phrase for him.  I would be curious to know whether
>>used it previous to becoming a Rush devotee'.
>I've been saying lighten up for years.>
>>Second, I'm sorry, I can't afford to lighten up.  I agree with the sentiment
>>that Rush Limbaugh may be the most dangerous person in America right now, and
>>as long as he has a forum to preach his hate and intolerance of all that is
>>not of his liking, and has an audience of willing followers, I will continue
>>to call that fact to people's attention.
>Is the sky falling here?  Is his intolerance any different from you intolerance
>of him?  Again are you advocating censorship?

See above.  He SHOULD NOT  be censored.  However, censoring him is not the 
same as striving to make folks see what a moron he is...

(BTW, I'm sure a great deal of the regular readers of this group have 
formulated the same opinion of me, and that's fine.  Gadflies usually are
designated as morons, and though the term is not accurate in my case, I
can live with it...)



>
>>
>
-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist  //  Newsflash from the Vatican: *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller  //  "Easter has been cancelled...*    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu  //  Someone found the body...."   *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.***************
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6966 alt.rush-limbaugh:7576
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE #1
From: kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 05:05:17 GMT
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services

Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> In article <grendel.719085040@camelot>, grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha
> Bourgea) says:
> 
> >And as far as the Veep contest goes, Gore clearly won.
> >Quayle made the usual idiot of himself.  The man needs no help from the
> >media; he perpetuates the myth with every word he speaks.  Stockdale was
> >a joke.  Only Gore maintained a sense of maturity and a command of the facts.
> 
> This is further evidence, to me, that debates generally serve to reinforce
> people's prejudices and preferences regarding the candidates.
> 
> Kurt Ludwick

I agree. Gore was wooden and stiff; he just gave speeches. How can Bourgea
say that Gore "won"? 

Ken Mitchell
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: The Limbaugh Poll
Date: 15 Oct 92 05:04:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <Bw56Gw.M7L@cda.mrs.umn.edu> luhmanjp@nxsci173a.mrs.umn.edu (Joe Luhman) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.220836.5004@afterlife.ncsc.mil>  
>acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams) writes:

>[stuff deleted]

The reason Rush conducts these polls is $$$$.  He claims over 1 million
phone calls to his 900 number for this poll.  The call costs $0.90.   If he 
gets $0.01 to $0.10 for each call, he has earned from $10,000 to $100,000 
for this poll alone (assuming he's not lying about the numbers).

According to some radio program I was listening to last month, Rush's
take for last year was estimated at about $1.7 Million.  No wonder he doesn't
want us to tax the rich!   He might be just a bit self interested, ehhhh?

The guy is a genius. He is a slimey, reprehensible, revolting con artist
who is getting rich off of peddling hate, devisivness, and bile.  But,
he _is_ a genius.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Religious rights and responsibilities
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:16:10 GMT
Distribution: world, na, usa
Organization: Texas Instruments

In article <1992Oct9.181010.9931@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct9.041211.7852@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> griffin@eecae.ee.msu.edu (Danny Griffin) writes:
|> >tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
|> >
|> >>Okay,  then are you sayin the Roman Catholic Church, which based the
|> >>inquisition on the Bible
|> >
|> >NOT!  Where do you learn your history?
|> 
|> It just so happens that I have read parts of the Bulls of Inquisition.   How 
|> much would you like to bet (real money) that the scriptures form the basis 
|> of the arguement?    Hmmm?  Willing to bet money????

As I sasked earlier, what Christian principles?  All we ever see from you is
the "Bull."

Doug Page

***  The opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent those of my  ***
***  employer.                                                           ***
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Subject: Re: Rush is bad for our country
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:34:00 GMT

alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:

>	Yea, Nathan, but would you call yourself a "dittohead"? 

>	I think that anyone who considers themselves a "dittohead" is
>probably a good candidate for the Limbaugh Lemmings. I don't think that
>this includes every Rush fan, or even every Rush fan that agrees with
>Rush, but make no mistake, there are people who take Rushs word over
>empirical evidance any day of the week.

Someone once described a politician as someone who sees a group of
people running down a road.  He determines their direction, takes a 
short-cut across a field, runs out in front of them and yells, "Follow me!"

We all have our own ideas about The Way Things Ought To Be.  Those ideas
are (more or less) embraced by whichever political party we support.
When the folks running those parties realize that their crowd is running
down a different road, they change direction.  If they don't, the crowd
follows whoever's going that way.

I think the same thing could be said of Rush Limbaugh.  In my view, he is
simply a spokesman for the ideas of a majority of his listeners.  To suggest
that he somehow changes the way everyone thinks is just a little bit silly.
People who believe in much of what he says enjoy listening to a public
figure who's willing to verbalize those beliefs.  People who disagree with
most of what he says are hardly going to be transformed into some sort of
"Limbaugh Lemming."

 ===========================================================================|
 |Don Wiggins                           | Success is getting what you want. |
 |USACERL Environmental Lab             | Happiness is wanting what you get.|
 |Champaign, IL                         |       -Brother Dave Gardner       |
 |Internet: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu |                                   |
 ===========================================================================|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: The End of Rush? - NOT!
Organization: The Rhode Island Internet Systems Cooperative Network
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 10:58:51 GMT

mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako) writes:

>Is limbaugh on lithium?  I saw him on Buckley's show last night and he was
>appearing to be perspiring profusely.  This is one sign of lithium treatments.

Its also a sign of bad make-up on a set with hot lights.

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / Sex is hereditary. If your 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /  parents never had it, chances 
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won't either...
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: ed@cwis.unomaha.edu (Ed Stastny)
Subject: Re: A Note on Book Sales
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 07:11:04 GMT

daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom) writes:
>In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l) writes:
>> ed@cwis.unomaha.edu (Ed Stastny) writes:
>> 
>> Publicity for a product only works if people have any propensity at all
>> for desiring the product.  If they couldn't care less about the product
>> you could hype it from now til Doomsday on every available media channel
>> and still not sell one bit of it.  The sale of Clinton/Gore books, given
>> the incredibly wide media coverage those two dipper-heads have been 
>> getting, may be a very good indication that the polls are not polling
>> what the pollsters think they are.  

(I'd just like to state that I didn't write the above as the header
leads people to believe.  This was probably an accidental attribution,
but I feel the need to separate myself from the opinion expressed in
that text.)

Oh, and I didn't write this either...

>> It certainly demonstrates that Rush's
>> conservative audience is a lot more interested in educating themselves
>> about the people they hear on media channels than are the liberals who
>> follow a deFlowered Clinton and the Gour(d) Head.
 
The real...
--
 ____                     + Editor, SOUND News and Arts magazine
|____                     + PO BX 31104, Omaha,NE 68131 (lg SASE for copy)
|____ D@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU  + SOUND FTPable: quartz.rutgers.edu(pub/journals) 
(Ed Stastny/UNO/Omaha,NE) +                141.214.4.135(docs/zines/sound)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: Two down... one to go!
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Distribution: world 
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 00:10:48 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.073557.5066@mv.mv.com> mem@mv.mv.com (Mark E. Mallett) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.004510.22586@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
>>If he becomes the MOST watched person on TV, it'll make Rush Limbaugh
>>the absolutely most paid-attention-to person in the United States of
>>America, all around. 
>
>Hmm, do you really get to count all those people 3 times each?  Methinks
>there's probably a large overlap in the populations you are summing.

So? There would be a large overlap in the readers of Gloria Steinem
and the viewers of Murphy Brown. 


>Even so, I would think it would be easy to find people who are paid attention
>by more than even your total.  Ted Koppel?  Alex Trebeck?  George Bush?
>The editors of the TV Guide?  Jim Davis?  Bill Gates?  :-)

If he beats Murphy Brown, I'll be satisfied. 


=============================================================================
! "He's very smart and he does his homework. And you ignore him at your
peril." - Ted Koppel, on Rush Limbaugh. 

! "I'm still trying to sort out what I'm permitted to laugh at and
what is not politically acceptable for me to laugh at" - Feminist
Lawyer Gloria Allred, on Rush Limbaugh. 
 
				- Vanity Fair, May 1992 
=============================================================================
-----Steve Chaney: Founder, Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.0-------
	           The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS. 
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 05:34:47 GMT
Subject: Re: GEORGE BUSH, STOP THE RED-BAITING
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, jbuckner@lonestar.utsa.edu (James A. Buckner) writes:

> > *    Bush said last night it's been an ugly political year.  He's
> > right -- and he's responsible for it.  It's smear campaigns like he's
> > running that have turned off the American people.
> 
> Wrongo. Bill Clinton is running all the smear campaigns. Bush is telling
> the truth. The media is on Bill Clinton's side!!!

Of course it is.

> 
> > *    The American people don't want to hear about Bill Clinton's 1969
> > itinerary, they want to hear about the course America is going to
> > take.
> 
> I would like to know why Bill Went to Moscow to protest the Vietnam War.
> I'm against anybody bad-mouthing the U.S. while abroad!
> 

The wonder of this country is that people are free to do whatever the
hell they want to.  If you want to criticize America while you
are on vacation in Mexico, then, by all means, do it.

> >  Bill ClInton has a plan to create millions of new jobs,
> > provide every American with affordable health care, and improve our
> > schools.  George Bush can only offer more of the same.
> 
> Wrong. Bill Clinton advocates Socialism! He wats to do a massive transfer of
> wealth from those who have money to those lazy bums who feed off the 
> government like parasites!

Bush is a socialist too.  If you want to avoid socialism, vote libertarian.

> 
> Go BUSH & Qualye!

Oh, they will.  They will.
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 16:34:16 GMT
Subject: Re: TV show + Miscellaneous Stuff
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel) writes:

> In article <1992Sep17.203339.1@cstp.umkc.edu> rdale@cstp.umkc.edu writes:
> >> Isn't Rush so ridiculous?!?!?
> >
> >	You've grasped Point #1!  Rush *is* ridiculous!  He's also
> >sarcastic, satirical, full of parody, and funny.  People who don't
> >see that are the ones who grump around, whining about "equal access
> >to opposing views" and such.
> 
> Sounds like you need to order that vocabulary extender that Rush touts on
> his program.
> 
> Just to let you know, "ridiculous" is a pejorative description.  It is NOT a
> positive statement about Rush, but a negative one.  It means "arousing or
> deserving ridicule", synonyms are "absurd, preposterous, laughable".

Yes, buffoon is accurate.  Also, in the Sinead O'Conner segment, Rush
came real close to earning the sobriquet "Carpet Chewer."

> 
> Rush is also illogical, whiny, and funny -- but funny-strange, not
> funny-hah-hah.  He *is* sarcastic and satirical, but not in a pejorative
> way.  He is more full of self-parody than anything else.
> 
> Note that I have listened to him for more than just a few minutes -- I
> listen to him quite often.  But I find I get angrier and angrier the more
> I listen to him.

Me too, and not because I disagree with everything he says.


Oh yeah, Rush's mother's singing was awful!  It was much
worse than even Sinead's wretched performance.

doug
From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:11:39 GMT
Subject: Please Help
Organization: HP Western Response Center
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

              Please answer these 9 questions and return.

1.) Do you think equal rights for men and women is generally a good idea?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

2.) Are you pro choice?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

3.) Are you in favor of adoption?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

4.) Do you think men should be allowed to legally terminate their parental
rights and responsibilities before fetal viability?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

5.) What sex are you?
Male               [ ]
Female             [ ]

6.) How old are you?
Under 18           [ ]
19 to 65           [ ]
Over 65            [ ]

7.) What religion are you?
Protestant         [ ]
Catholic           [ ]
Jewish             [ ]
Other              [ ]

8.) What political party are you affiliated with?
Democratic         [ ]
Republican         [ ]
Other              [ ]

9.) How many years of education have you completed?
Grade School       [ ]
High School        [ ]
College            [ ]
More               [ ]
From: nobody@KODAK.COM (Dan Schaertel)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: TEST
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:03:44 GMT
Reply-To: nobody@Kodak.COM


This is another test!
From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Subject: The Bush Lexicon (was: Re: The Clinton Lexicon)
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 03:36:47 GMT


In a previous article, crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) says:

>Inspired by a cartoon in Reason Magazine.
>
>What he says.                          What he means.
>
>The rich must pay their fair share.    I'm going to raise taxes.
>We must invest in America.             I'm going to raise taxes a lot.
>I have a plan to revitalize America.   I'm going to raise taxes so high it'll 
>					  make your ears bleed.
>The Republicans are raising that       I haven't figured out a good story
>   issue because they're desperate.       to tell yet.
>

OK, now Bush...

	...what he says...			...what he means...

Read my lips, no new taxes...			The second highest tax 
						increase in history.

Bill Clinton should come clean with the         I have no record to run on... 
American people...

Bill Clinton is the failed governor of a        I _REALLY_ have no record to
small state...					run on.

The socialistic policies of the tax and         I have to direct attention 
spend Democrats...				away from the record I _REALLY_
 						don't have to run on...

Bill Clinton was a leader of the anti-          I'm really _DESPERATE_ to
war movement, and went to Moscow...		direct attention away from
						the really poor record I have
						to run on...

-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist  //  Newsflash from the Vatican: *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller  //  "Easter has been cancelled...*    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu  //  Someone found the body...."   *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.***************
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:30:37 GMT
Subject: Re: CC limbaugh
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom) writes:

> Last night Rush showed some videos of Gephart commenting
                                        ^^^^^^^
Sorry, this was Biden..
> 
doug
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:56:44 EDT
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: rush
 <1992Oct14.151907.16304@news.ysu.edu>

>>To all Rush's Supporters wherever you are:
>>               RUSH MUST DIE!!!!!!!!!

Lighten up.

>However, this kind of bullshit is completely out of line, and the poster
>should be warned that he is very close to breaking the law by making such
>a statement.

You lighten up, too.

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: Bob Dornan on Bill Clinton - IMPORTANT
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
	<BvnuG9.M5o@hpuerca.atl.hp.com> <1992Oct5.204026.15899@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:39:58 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.204026.15899@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:

   In article <BvnuG9.M5o@hpuerca.atl.hp.com> mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser) writes:
   >In <Oct.4.01.04.33.1992.21162@andromeda.rutgers.edu> detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:
   >
   >Let's see ...
   >
   >When challenged, Dornan can produce __NO__ proof for any of his
   >allegations.

   Uh, the Portis biography plus the admission of the Clinton campaign (Dee Dee
   Meyers) seem to be pretty good evidence. 

Wonder why Dornan didn't cite this? And wonder why the Bush/Quayle 
campaign hasn't seized it and run with it? (Maybe they're saving it for
the debate!)

   >Dornan appears on C-SPAN, speaking to an empty House chamber.

   This is a common practice, designed to get the remarks into the 
   Congressional Record. If you don't like it, then get the Democratic 
   majority to change their policies.

And here we thought it was just the grade of tripe Bob Dornan was 
dispensing...

   -- 
   John Switzer               | 50 years from now, nobody will
			      | remember Candice Bergen or Murphy
   74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | Brown, but every school kid will
   jrs@netcom.com             | be taught about President Quayle.

50 years from now, John Switzer will remember fondly "them net days", and
tell his grandkiddies how he though Quayle would end up president..

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..
"We will be asking them to join with us. I'm also going to ask them to help us
to change Congress. It's not just enough to change the president if we want to
change America." - Dan Quayle, on courting Ross Perot's supporters. 

From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 20:34:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Magic Johnson's Book (was Re: Quayle is more charitable than Gore)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:

>       How about if I post something from The Progressive?  I skimmed
>  through the Sept. 1992 issue and saw an interesting piece on
>  pg. 9 -- Magic Censored.  They lamented the fact that Magic
>  Johnson's paperback, _What_You_Can_Do_to_Avoid_AIDS_, was
>  being "censored" by K-mart, Walgreen's, and Wal-Mart.  Here is
>  a quote from this article (forgive the language):

What, do you mean English?


>  
>       "Johnson's book, written so teenagers can understand it,
>        once uses in parentheses the term 'ass hole' and has an
>        illustration on how to put on a condom."

Oh, I see now.  Yes, I am usually offended when someone has the
lack of discretion to actually use the word _illustration_ in
a post.  Of course, I only use the word illustration in and
expemlary fashion myself.  Oh, and again in that last sentence.
Oh, you know.

>  
>  I never thought condoms were to be applied like suppositories,
>  but then again Magic is a Clinton supporter. :-)

Clever clever..

doug
From: mckernan@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Robert L Mckernan)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Quayle Smashes Gore...
Date: 14 Oct 92 02:43:43 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

What a sad sight the Admiral was. It seemed he wasn't even prepared
for the issues. Perot shows his stupidity once again!
Quayle clearly won the debate. He is clearly smarter than anyone
gives him credit for. He had Gore on the ropes all night. Gore is
an environmental extremist and Quayle and Stockdale exposed it!
				Rob
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Religious rights and responsibilities
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:25:33 GMT
Organization: A.I. Chem Lab, University of Arizona

In article <phurley.50@tamu.edu> phurley@tamu.edu (Philip W. Hurley) writes:

[various drivel deleted]

>                     ... but even no religion is religion ...

If you believe that, then I'll happily admit that you're no fool.