HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh



well... y'all are gonna get what you asked for--

zoe baird has stepped down and will not seek
confirmation as atty gen.  now cliton will
most likely come up with a far left replacement
who will cruise through his/her hearings...

can't wait to see the criminals hit the street 
when they get an early ticket out...

its really ironic that the majority of rush's
listeners & rush himself were in-line with the
liberal wackos on the senate judiciary committee
(course, its for different reasons...)

oh well, you reap what you sow...

peace out,
pjm.
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Blacks on TV
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:29:43 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

kebarnes@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
=eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
=> green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes:
=> -rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
=> ->	Or perhaps the whole idea is absurd.  Who cares is cosby is 
=> ->	a hypocrite?  Hell, anyone who didn't figure that out when he
=> ->	started complaining about the media portrayal of blacks on
=> ->	television (meanwhile, he just finished up the last season on
=> -
=> -Well, I think he had a point. Give me one example of a positive black person
=> -on TV, other than Tibbs on In The Heat Of The Night.
=> [snip!]
=> -maybe someone can give me some good role models for blacks on TV.
=> 
=> Lieutenant Uhura, Commander Sisko, Lt. Jordi (sp) LeForge :: all of Star
=> Trek series (pl) (original, Deep Space 9, Next Gen respectively). They
=> are all very intelligent people in positions of authority. I don't watch
=> Designing Women, so I can't comment on Meshach Taylor's role. Roc (Live)
=> has a wonderful ensemble of actors.
=> 
=> I do admit though, that there are not too many shows with
=> non-stereotypical blacks in key roles. Especially black Republicans. :)
=> -- 
=> Emil Thomas Chuck
=
=Three cheers for Gene Roddenberry-- and the content of his characters!
=
=If only real life worked as well as Star Trek.
=
=Did you hear about the protesters who wanted Paramount to make
=Geordi LaForge gay?  I'm not making this up.

I don't remember the protestors, but I admit I don't follow
behind-the-scenes stuff.

=So what if he is/was, but we don't really get to see anyone's sex life
=on ST:TNG anyway (except for Data and Tasha Yar that one time: "He's
=fully functional..") so should they make a big deal about it?
=I would think in Star Trek's time homosexuality would pass unnoticed.

TNG had that one episode in which Riker falls in love with someone whose
species has no gender. This episode was probably the most creatively
conceived episode that could've confronted the homosexuality debate.
(The species propagated by insemination into "fibrous husks.") [NB: I
wish I could remember the episode, but I don't make it a passion to
remember episode names. Unlike certain people in my dorm who can give
you every relevant piece of information on a specific episode given the
stardate mentioned in the episode.]
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	BSE in BME in 1993
"You just can't promise something like that just to get elected if you
 know there's a good chance that circumstances may overtake you."
	- Bill Clinton, East Lansing MI debate, Mon Oct 19 1992
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:49:48 GMT

In article <1jm9qnINNfo6@transfer.stratus.com> markc@eomer.hw.stratus.com (Mark Christensen) writes:

>You do not seem to understand the point.  It is not severity that
>matters and it is not law enforcment that most Christians are attempting.

We're not talking about *civil* laws, dear, we're talking about
*moral* laws.  You see, the laws of the Old Testament are grouped into
three categories, moral, ceremonial, and civil ...

>Sin is sin, plain and simple.  Severity is meaningless.  Sin separates
>us from God, no matter how "big or small".  And it is God who will meet out
>the punishment, not your fellow man.

So -- just to repeat a point -- if severity is meaningless, why is
homosexuality usually the one that is singled out from all the others
as a sin worth persecuting?

>When you say that some are trying to restrict the civil rights
>of certain groups (like homosexuals), what exactly do you mean?
>Should homosexuals be foster parents?  I would state an
>emphatic NO! just as I would also say NO to heterosexual couples
>who are living together without the benefit of marriage.

That's real ducky, but your judgmental moralizing is a little out of
fashion.  I'd be interested in hearing why you feel that either of
these things would be detrimental to childrearing, apart from the fact
that they'd make you toss and turn all night just thinking about it.

>>...other "stuff" deleted because I'm just plain tired of repeating
>myself.  Someone who doesn't want to listen, won't.  No use arguing.

For heaven's sake, Mark, what do you think I'm doing here but
repeating myself?  If I can be that patient, surely you can.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: New Kervorkian/Death Update?
From: lrvanh00@nx38.mik.uky.edu (lee r vanhorn)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:27:29 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

In article <1993Jan22.112214.5152@memstvx1.memst.edu>  
kebarnes@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
> Rush did a new "Dr. Kervorkian/Death Update" yesterday (1/21/93) with a
> really cheesy folky new theme? Anybody heard of it?
> 
> Lyrics include:
> "Well, I'm not afraid of dying..."
> and chorus "it's cold, really? cold, way down there..."
> 
> singer backed by banjo and drums.
> 
> Any clues? Send 'em in to 'HIT' LIST H.Q...
> 
> -- 
> *.x,*dna**************************************************************
> *(==) Ken Barnes, LifeSci Bldg.      * Conservative libertarians     *
> * \'  KEBARNES@memstvx1.memst.edu    *      for Pro-Balance!         *
> *(-)**Memphis,TN********75320,711@compuserve.com**********************
> "When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President;
> I'm beginning to believe it."--Clarence Darrow

Just curious, what was rush's position on the Kervorkian thing?  I mean,  
does he really believe that the government should controll our death AND  
our lives?
From: dwh@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Dean W. Handy)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: ARTS - MY WAY or NO WAY
Keywords: arts, taxes
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:59:57 GMT
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix


O>In Article Posted by: mjb10@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael J. Bumbulis)
O>
O>According to the Jan 23, 1993 issue of _The Advocate_:
O>
O>"Gays and lesbians are pressuring Clinton to...make
O>the following changes:
O>
O>-> Appointment of a National Endowment for the Arts 
O>   director who will provide grants to artists who 
O>   produce sexually explicit gay-themed works."

 
I beleive that YOU (collectively) and I pay taxes to
this GoVeRnMeNt or ours so that they can REpresent us
 . . . . or isn't that what the Boston Tea Party was
all about . . . . Taxation WITH Representation! ! !

Well, as long as I am paying taxes I would appreciate it
if MY government would do things that I like . . . and
NOT do things that I don't like!

I know that sounds like "I want it my way or No Way!"
but that's not what I really think or believe.  What I
really mean is that "me and all the people who think
like me want OUR Government to do what We would do if
We WERE the Government - because WE ARE (the Government!)!

Comprende, pardner!?!?

-0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0-
|   Dean W. Handy   |    E-Mail to me at:         |   --  --  |
|   ==== == =====   |   -dwh@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US-   |    O  o   |
|     SECURITY?     |  (Opinions are formed - not |     /_    |
|   I'm A Frayed    |  just acquired. You have to |  U__***   |
|       knot        |  acquire knowledge to form  |           |
|                   |   worthwhile opinions!)     |           |
-0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0-

-- 
-0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0--0-
|   Dean W. Handy   |    E-Mail to me at:         |   --  --  |
|   ==== == =====   |   -dwh@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US-   |    O  o   |
|     SECURITY?     |  (Opinions are formed - not |     /_    |
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: Rush Military Record
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
	<1993Jan21.073943.28505@mic.ucla.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:21:43 GMT

>>>>> On 21 Jan 93 07:39:43 PST, rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Brian Rush ) said:
  	[...]
>
>They ain't none. Adoring Dittos insist that he had some sort of physical
>problem which prevented his military service. The rest of us just think he
>must be a yellow hypocritical coward who managed to avoid the draft.

Brian> Be careful - you very successfully undermine your own
Brian> credibitly when you do things typically done by those of
Brian> very low inteligence, such as supporting ideas that you
Brian> just dream up with no factual basis, especially when all
Brian> the info you may have (e.g., Rush's word) is to the
Brian> contrary.  Alas, this is typical of your posts.

Oh, woo woo! Alas and aloo. Tell me all about those things done by those
of very low intelligence!

Brian, I really couldn't care less about my "credibility" with folks like
yourself in this group. With a few notable exceptions, the drek posted
here by adoring Dittos has little basis in fact; like Limbaugh's words, it
is mostly strong exaggeration and sweeping generalization, opinion, and only 
occasionally substantiated fact.

So what does factual basis have to do with anything? You've got Bob Dornan
salivating all over himself to read totally unsubstantiated allegations
against Clinton into the Congressional Record - you think that's factual 
basis? I wonder how graciously Rush might respond to such treatment?

Naa. Factual basis doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell around here.
Opinion! That's what counts. Words MEAN things! Don't ya know?

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..
Wonder if Sununu's fired now?

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore)
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:42:28 GMT

In article <1jm6pcINNekg@transfer.stratus.com> markc@eomer.hw.stratus.com (Mark Christensen) writes:
>What a shame that Robert and Melinda, who have such a high regard for the
>civil rights of others, including homosexuals, have such a disdain for the
>rights of those religious men and women who do not agree with them.  I guess
>Robert and Melinda, who appear to be stone throwing themselves, feel it's
>acceptable to throw those stones at people or groups of people that THEY
>feel should be excluded.  

Please point to one statement that we have made suggesting
that anybody we disagree with should lose their jobs,
homes, or children.  That they should be beaten up or
murdered on the streets.  That their civil rights should in
any way, shape, or form be curtailed.

I am emphatically not anti-Christian.  The problem I have
here is that some self-identified Christians are using
inconsistent application of Biblical precepts to justify
persecuting gay, lesbian, and bisexual people, and that
they're trying to put the weight of law behind their
religious beliefs.  I am not even suggesting that these
idiots don't have a right to their hatred.  It's important,
however, that we recognize that those who hate are the ones
who are responsible for their own hatred, rather than
expecting the targets of that hatred to have their rights
abrogated.  If you want to hate homosexuals, by all means,
do so.  Do not expect, however, that I should be subjected
to arbitrary discrimination because you can't control your
response to difference.
--
       Melinda Shore - Cornell Theory Center - shore@tc.cornell.edu
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:14672 alt.politics.homosexuality:9949
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: God is intolerant of sin!
Date: 21 Jan 1993 18:04:08 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
> In article <1jmdmsINNkei@hp-col.col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> >So what do _you_ think the 
> >Bible says about homosexuality, Tim? 
> 
> Nothing.

Really?  Paul had nothing to say in the Bible about it?  What does 
the recently cited parts of Romans, etc, mean to you?  

Walter

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS (Re: Read this if you are straight!)
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 04:31:44 GMT

gadson@zeus.tamu.edu wrote:
: In article <1993Jan25.002341.4612@midway.uchicago.edu>, sals@deirdre.uchicago.edu (red-head fancier) writes...
: 
: |The point of anti-discrimination laws is to interfer with a person's  
: |ability to choose who he wants to deal with based on his personal criteria  
: |and to enforce what modern liberals say should be the "correct" decisions. 
: 
: 	True.  So, do you think we'd be better off without 
: anti-discrimination laws?
: 

Look up Plessy v Ferguson sometime.  We'd be better off without 
anti-discrimination laws - YES.  We'd be much better off without
laws that discriminate, which is a better place to focus.

cheers.

: Gadson
: 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: Different Point
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:06:34 GMT

In article <C16xCv.47L@unix.portal.com> mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
>rocker (cookc@aix.rpi.edu) wrote:
>: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
>: >Planting the idea that a fetus is an unviable tissue mass is simply propaganda
>: >aimed at easing peoples' consciences.  In France, they show a woman the
>: >actual remains of an abortion and some change their minds and many don't.
>: Are these remains age-specific?  You do, of course, realize that the
>: "remains" from a first-tri abortion fit in a teaspoon.
>The remains are from the previous woman's abortion.  The abortions are done
>with the RU487 pill, in clinics there.  The women see the remains of the
>abortion, which are indeed small because RU487 is only allowed in the
>first trimester, and considered dangerous into the 9th week and beyond.
>The women accept it and do it anyway.  What's the problem?
Maybe I'm behind the times, but I thought that the pill was called
RU-486. If you're going to get RU-487, I don't see why you didn't buy
the RU-486DX in the first place.
-Ekr




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
                        Don't believe anything you hear.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: gplong@nyx.cs.du.edu (George Long)
Subject: Re: Mr. Clintons' Neighborhood
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.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:11:10 GMT

In article <2182@blue.cis.pitt.edu> mpc+@pitt.edu (Mike Contento) writes:
>
>     "The Clinton family likes `Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood,' and if we cou
d
>      make every neighborhood like Mr Rogers Neighborhood, America would
>      be a happier place."    
>                                            President Bill Clinton
>
>        Someone should tell President Clinton that there are no human
>        chop shops (population control centers to you PC folk) in
>        Mr. Rogers Neighborhood ....
>-- 
>[mike contento] Truth stands the test of time; 
>[ univ.of pgh.] lies are soon exposed. 
>[mpc+@pitt.edu]                - Proverbs 12:19 


    Huh?  Wow, I guess this is a subtle, yet caustic reference to
    abortion.  And a quote from the bible no less!  My cup 
    runneth over...

    Sorry, I shouldn't be responding to this, because I really 
    have nothing substantive to say on the abortion issue, its'
   just that I have a weak spot for moronic posts.  

   I'm a sucker -- I have to respond.

   GPL
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.sex
From: fjvwing@cs.vu.nl (FJ!!)
Subject: Re: Lesbians are INVISIBLE!!!!
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:46:49 GMT

markc@eomer.hw.stratus.com (Mark Christensen) writes:

>You can now go on your one woman crusade, but I have better things to

Whatever made you think that she is alone?

A lot of people are reading her words, and soaking them up into their mind,
just like me.

More power to us.

								FJ!!
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:15030 talk.abortion:57692
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:40:39 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: control
 <93023.075047KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> <1993Jan23.173939.18362@rotag.mi.org>

In article <1993Jan23.173939.18362@rotag.mi.org>, kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin
Darcy) says:

>>>But it's ok to deal with the consequences of a rapist's act by taking
>>>an innocent life?
>>
>>In my opinion, yes, since it wasn't any deliberate act of the woman to cause
>>the situation.
>Normally, in our systems of law and morality, the only time deliberateness
>becomes an issue is when the intention of the deliberate act is to cause the
>proscribed result. If a hunter were to accidentally shoot another hunter in
>the woods, thinking that the movement in the bushes was a deer, then the
>issue of deliberateness does not come into play (although the issue of
>recklessness would)...

But the hunter -is- responsible for the consequences of his own recklessness,
no?  To extend the analogy (oh boy, another fun analogy!), what if the hunter
were to dispose of the body of his unintended victim, so that it wouldn't be
found by the authorities, so nobody would know what he'd accidentally done.
Would that be okay?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Kurt  E.  Ludwick     | If PRO is the opposite of CON, then
 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -|
 kel111@psuvm.psu.edu  |             what's the opposite of Progress...?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ez012344@chip.ucdavis.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Dole promotes big, intrusive government!
Date: 26 Jan 93 04:21:34 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis

In article <AfM01vm00UhW01RI18@andrew.cmu.edu> aw3a+@andrew.cmu.edu (Anatole Wilson) writes:
> stuff about Robert Dole sponsoring a bill to create a national police force.

There are, already, "federal police." They police federal property, including
some Army posts. (to my knowledge, and to their credit, these people don't
work on Air Force bases -- to the credit, that is, of the Air Force). They
tend to do traffic patrol and other typical cop duties on the Army posts; 
weapons storage security and such are still handled by active-duty MPs and
line troops.  

Where else has anyone seen the federal police? In the US, I mean. There is
an extensive federal police force in Germany; local police forces seem
(and I believe are, practically nonexistent there). There is also a 
national paramilitary force in Italy -- carabineri -- who are usually not
to be messed with.

While the sight of someone strolling the streets with a machine gun may be
disturbing in the US, fact is that in Germany, the "police presence" is
much, much less than in the US. No patrolling squad cars, etc. I'd take that,
punctuated with a few minutes of a carload of Uzi-toting federal police
booking past, to the stream of local, regional and state cops (amply assisted
by the FBI, ATFB, INS, IRS, and what have you) who blanket the countryside in
the US in their late-model US-made sedans.

Dan
deherrin@ucdavis.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green)
Subject: Re: C'mon, get it right! (Was Re: America Held Hostage: Day 1
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 04:06:13 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

In article <93021.161941KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>It's Slick-Willie Thomas Jefferson Franklin Delano Fitzgerald Kennedy Roosevelt
>           Blythe-Clinton!

No, Kurt, YOU get it right.  You left out Lincoln, and probably a more accurate
one: Caligula II.


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:15253 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13929
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:15:00 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Blacks on TV (was Re: LET THE BOYCOTT BEGIN!)
 <1993Jan26.025815.8046@wam.umd.edu> <C1H2u8.Cu9@ns1.nodak.edu>
 <C1HDMy.KGt@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1993Jan26.232350.25390@rchland.ibm.com>

In article <1993Jan26.232350.25390@rchland.ibm.com>, jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com
(Jared Dahl) says:

>|> And the best part is they all achieved their success as individuals.
>|> There was no government program to "help" them.

>They also live in a world where there is no racism,
>people are fully educated, and the human race is united.
>A little more ideal than anything on earth these days.

Means nothing.  The show is being aired right here and now, in the evil
latter 20th century.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Kurt  E.  Ludwick     | If PRO is the opposite of CON, then
 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -|
 kel111@psuvm.psu.edu  |             what's the opposite of Progress...?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: gatortop@IASTATE.EDU (Mike W Kuenkel)
Subject: Re: Rush and the Gulf War
Reply-To: gatortop@IASTATE.EDU (Mike W Kuenkel)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:39:31 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.135525.16601@athena.mit.edu>, gonzalez@athena.mit.edu
(John R Gonzalez) writes:
> 
> Rush on the Gulf War
> 
> I didn't start listening to Rush after the Gulf war.
> I was curious, what was his stance on our inter-
> vention before we sent troops to the Persian Gulf. 
>  Most conservatives were against going there(true 
> conservatives that is).  Did Rush first oppose our 
> going and then support our troops or what?
> 
> 
> 				John R. Gonzalez


As far as I know Rush has always supported the Gulf war.
You might not like to admit it but oil is a vital interest.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion