HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Conservative Values (Re: New group prop
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 16:55:59 GMT

Jon S. Wood (jsw@cray.com) wrote:
: In article 23826@hemlock.cray.com, rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) w
rites:
: >
: >In article <1gq80kINNb9@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULM
AN.EDU (if God's your father then call home!) writes:
: >> Russ Anderson writes in response to my post:
: >> >In article <1gl52rINN4mf@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-
HULMAN.EDU (if God's your father then call home!) writes:
: >> >> I would like to formally propose a new group, alt.conservative.forum,
: >> >> a moderated group to discuss conservative values and assorted political
: >> >> goings-on from a distinctly right-wing standpoint.
: >> >
: >> >What are "conservative values"?
: >> >
: >> >Take the following issues:
: >> >
: >> (several awesome issues addressed)
: >>
: >> I dunno, Russ.  Help me create alt.politics.conservative and find out.  8-
)
: >
: >How would that help me find out?  The whole point of creating that group,
: >as opposed to this group, is to prevent liberals like me from posting.
: >
: >--
: >Russ Anderson
:
:  The only moderated (P.C. term for censorship) group I'm aware of is
: by alt.feminism. Oui?
:
: Jon

alt.athiesm.moderated, soc.religion.islam, rec.humor.funny, and many others.  
In one of the news.* groups there is a list of all moderated newsgroups.  It is
rather long.
-- 
Mike McAngus 			 | As if I needed Another time consuming hobby.
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | 
The Truth is still the Truth	 | This Post exploits illiterates.
Even if you choose to ignore it. |
From: dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Transcripts of Bob Dornan wanted.
Date: 26 Dec 92 19:48:32 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

hey,

i just caught a rebroadcast of Bob Dornan's assessment of why
Bush lost. I can't believe it. It was some of the most brilliant
analysis i've ever heard. i agree 100%!!!! usually i turn off
rush when he's not there, because all other hosts pale by
comparison...but now i think i'll listen to this guy.

does anybody have a transcript of his comments??? i think they
first aired on monday or tuesday of christmass week.

thanks,

don.

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: johng@oce.orst.edu (John A. Gregor)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why can SNL get away with it....
Date: 30 Dec 1992 19:29:36 GMT
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: speedy.oce.orst.edu

In article <nancyo.723879906@sfu.ca> nancyo@fraser.sfu.ca (Nancy Patricia O'Connor) writes:
> and on a show which is revered by her peers!

What, are they making fun of her on Beverly Hills 90210 as well?
-JohnG
-- 
         John A. Gregor			USmail:	College of Oceanography
 E-mail: johng@oce.orst.edu			Oregon State University
Voice #: +1 503 737-3022			Oceanography Admin Bldg. #104
  Fax #: +1 503 737-2064			Corvallis, OR  97331-5503
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11352 talk.politics.misc:66104
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Conservative?  Hahaha....
Date: 4 Jan 1993 00:56:16 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Distribution: world
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
NNTP-Posting-Host: zorba7.larc.nasa.gov

In article <C08L2F.I7F@ddsw1.mcs.com>, karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) 
writes:
> 
> I have noticed a definite hypocrisy in the term "Conservative", especially
> as applied by Rush...
> 
> Has anyone noted that Rush, and most other "Conservatives", support the
> measure which passed in Colorado (family values and all that)?
> 
> Yet, is not one of the founding principles of conservative thought that the
> government should make fewer laws, and leave people more alone (than the
> liberals)?
> 
> Indeed, just what kind of hypocrits are these folks?
> 
> (Note that I do not stake claim to either popular political ideology)
> 
Are you talking about Ammendment 2?  Because, if you are, Ammendment 2,
as I understand it, *prohibits* establishment of special rights and
therefore, is consistant with conservative views.

Mike

Mike Rowland (Contractor),  MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Whining bastards
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:14:12 GMT

Followups out of talk.abortion.

vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
# You can earn more money working at McDonalds than on welfare.

A dubious claim, probably backed up with dubious statistics.

# Let's talk about welfare then... in this country we spend $7,000/year
# per PERSON on welfare.  So an average family of 3-4 costs us around
# $25,000 per year.  Are you trying to tell me there's not some incredible
# fraud going on somewhere here?

Evidently.

Lessee... $25K/yr is ~$2100/mo.  AFDC for a family composed of a
single mother and two children in California (not a very chincy state
as states go) is $505/mo.  WIC comes in at somewhere around $150/mo if
you qualify.  Food stamps -- I have no clue; gotta be at least
$100/mo.  Still, the numbers don't look promising.

Minimum wage is $4.35/hr, or $754/mo gross with a 40/hr work week.
Typically, no benefits (oh, sorry, I forgot Medicaid doesn't cost
anything and we were talking about cash flow weren't we... oops).
Often not even full time because full-time employees have legal
protection that part-time employees don't.

What was that about fraud?

Anyway, what's the deal here?  Is welfare a `cycle of poverty' that
traps people on welfare because they make less money at minimum wage
jobs than on welfare, or are welfare recipients mostly a bunch of
fat, lazy `welfare queens' bilking the taxpayers out of hard-earned
lucre just because they don't want to work for more money than they
get on welfate?

#                                 Even if that money is just eaten up in
# the bureaucracy it's still fraud.

Why?  Because bureacracy is *ALWAYS* fraud.  (Unless it's *your*
bureaucracy, in which case, it's simply waste, or better yet, fat.)

I wouldn't be so pissy about this if you dittoheads would just admit
that you simply don't want the poor to receive any help whatsoever
from the government.  Jeez.  At least the Libertarians can do that.
Get some spine, you simpering fools.


-- 
+---------------------------+  ``Man has not a single right which is
| J H Woodyatt              |  the product of anything but might.''
| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |                           -- Mark Twain
+---------------------------+  

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood)
Subject: Re: Conservative Values (Re: New group prop
Reply-To: jsw@cray.com
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 23 Dec 92 10:01:33 CST

In article 23826@hemlock.cray.com, rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>
>In article <1gq80kINNb9@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU (if God's your father then call home!) writes:
>> Russ Anderson writes in response to my post:
>> >In article <1gl52rINN4mf@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU (if God's your father then call home!) writes:
>> >> I would like to formally propose a new group, alt.conservative.forum, 
>> >> a moderated group to discuss conservative values and assorted political
>> >> goings-on from a distinctly right-wing standpoint.
>> >
>> >What are "conservative values"?
>> >
>> >Take the following issues:
>> >
>> (several awesome issues addressed)
>> 
>> I dunno, Russ.  Help me create alt.politics.conservative and find out.  8-)
>
>How would that help me find out?  The whole point of creating that group,
>as opposed to this group, is to prevent liberals like me from posting.
>
>-- 
>Russ Anderson    

 The only moderated (P.C. term for censorship) group I'm aware of is 
by alt.feminism. Oui?

Jon 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: freier@mail.physics.utah.edu (rodney james freier)
Subject: Valid Space-related research...
Organization: University of Utah - Physics Department
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 09:23:10 GMT

  IMHO, there is some valid research going on as far as the space program
is concerned.... it just isn't being done by NASA.  I feel that Biosphere II is
the most important bit of space related research we could possibly support.
From: byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Twists on gays in military
Keywords: practicality
Date: 30 Dec 92 18:59:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rice University

In article <1992Dec29.190851.31809@rchland.ibm.com>, jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:
|> In article <C00xG4.3oA@rice.edu>, byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:
|> [beaten to death stuff deleted]
|> |> 
|> |> Q:  How about those who like to have sex with dead people
|> |> (necro-sexuals?)?  Don't they have a right to serve in the
|> |> military?  Where would they be housed? 
|> 
|> Once again we come back to the "Gays are criminals" viewpoint.
|> I've heard this argument a hundred times in this group.  This
|> is just like comparing a homosexual to a pedophile or a serial
|> rapist.  ONCE AND FOR ALL:
|> 
|>     How does homosexual activity between two consenting adults
|>     constitute a crime?  Who's rights does it violate?
|> 

How does sexual activity between a consenting adult and an
inanimate dead person constitute a crime?  Who's rights does
it violate?  (For better parallel, say the dead person put in their
will that he/she wouldn't mind).

By the way, I highly resent having words put in my mouth ("gays
are criminals").  

-- 
Marc J. Byrd - byrd@rice.edu       |  United We Stand. 
Rice University                    |  Whether or not you accept it, you are 
Dept of Elec & Comp Engr           |  responsible for the actions and 
XUV Holographic Microscope Project |  inactions of your government. 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: Flush Limburger
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
	<1992Dec17.230601.15301@u.washington.edu>
	<BzFwA9.CJy@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:24:13 GMT

>>>>> On Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:18:08 GMT, graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM) said:
  [...]
>>Can you provide at least one reference to substantiate, without
>>question, that Rush is a "bigot"?
>>
>>I'd really like to know.

> 
>Definition (roughly) BIGOT: Someone who discriminates against another because
>                            of a group that the other person belongs to.
>                            Thus, all anti-homosexual type people are bigots.
>                            So are all anti-feminists.  So are all
>                            anti-aardvarks (a.s.s. joke =)

JIM> Ok.  Let me rephrase....
JIM> In what way, specifically, has Rush shown himself to be a "bigot" by the
JIM> above definition?

bigot: (from the Spanish, hombre de bigote, lit. "man with a moustache"),
n. 1. a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed,
opinion, etc. 2. a narrow-minded, intolerant person. -SYN. see _zealot_.

I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide whether either
definition from _Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language_ 
describes Rush or not.

(I wonder what Rush looks like in a moustache..)

 (..)
  ~~
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..
I saw God. He rides a motorcycle. He's coming back soon, and He's real pissed.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Twists on gays in military
Keywords: practicality
Date: 31 Dec 92 14:34:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rice University

In article <1992Dec31.010140.4531@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
|> 
|> >|> Q:  How about those who like to have sex with dead people
|> >|> (necro-sexuals?)?  Don't they have a right to serve in the
|> >|> military?  Where would they be housed? 
|> >
|> >Once again we come back to the "Gays are criminals" viewpoint.
|> >I've heard this argument a hundred times in this group.  This
|> >is just like comparing a homosexual to a pedophile or a serial
|> >rapist.  ONCE AND FOR ALL:  [stuff deleted]
|> 
|> No, he has a point.  If the military starts allowing avowed
|> necrophiles to serve, then the military would have to build
|> seperate shower and sleeping facilities for all the dead people
|> already serving in the military.   So either they can't allow 
|> necrophiles to serve, or they will have to allow all the dead 
|> people to retire or discharge them.

Finally someone picked up on the tone of my original post! ;^)


-- 
Marc J. Byrd - byrd@rice.edu       |  United We Stand. 
Rice University                    |  Whether or not you accept it, you are 
Dept of Elec & Comp Engr           |  responsible for the actions and 
XUV Holographic Microscope Project |  inactions of your government.
From: cc774@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Robert M Connelly)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Posts by Rush? NOT!
Date: 26 Dec 1992 00:35:29 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Rush's compuserve mailbox is almost always full and he admits it 
on the air. He empties it, apparently in the early am and again
when he gets home in the evening. He also can do one emptying by
"remote control" once a day but only once. His program won't 
permit more than one. However for those who say you can't get in,
I have sent him three e-mails and only one was returned. The
others were sent late in the evening (between 11pm and midnite
as I recall) and early in the morning - around 7 or 7:30. For
whatever use this may be to anyone.

-- 

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: doel@bae.bellcore.com (Michael Doel)
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Organization: Bell Communications Research
	<1hslhgINNpae@shelley.u.washington.edu>
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:08:50


Ryan Mcneilly writes:

> You are correct.  I am not the original poster but am a Christian.  The
> original poster needs to look at his posts and evaluate to see if it is
> what Jesus would be saying in a forum like this.  I think testing to see
> if is what Jesus would see is a good test as to whether or not it should
> be posted.

I too strive to be a Christian, but somehow I've got to believe Jesus would
have better things to do with his time than post to alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.
But then again, maybe Rush is more popular than we think :-)

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Doel				<doel@bae.bellcore.com>
444 Hoes Lane RRC 1B-209
Piscataway, NJ 08854

"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat
 and wrong." - H.L. Mencken
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: The Way Things Ought to Be
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:25:54 GMT

scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn) writes:
>mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson) writes:
>>So how many of you got a copy of the book for Christmas?

>     I did! I did!

    Not me, unfortunately. I did get a copy of Garry Trudeau's 
_Action_Figure_ (which comes with a life-like plastic figure of Zonker's
Uncle Duke with extra attachments [Uzi, chain saw, and cocktail glass]), 
but no dittohead stuff whatsoever. My left-wing, liberal family doesn't 
have much interest in Rush, and I'm afraid that they view my avid listening 
as something of an embarassment.

>>Slow start. He keeps emphasizing how hard he worked to actually
>>*write* a book, then describes in detail how much other people did to
>>actually *write* the book.
>> [...]
>>But the pace picks up nicely about a third of the way through, and
>>becomes vintage Limbaugh.

>     I agree that the book started slow, but, IMO, it didn't really hit its
>stride until late -- like around Chapter 18 or so. I was pretty disappointed
>with the first 175 pages. Long on abuse; short on substance. I hope Rush wasn't
>trying to win over liberals with the book; none of them will read it to the
>point where he starts to score heavily.

    That's unfortunate. I believe that there's a great deal of substance 
in what Rush has to say, but it doesn't do Rush or anybody else any good 
if all he's going to do is preach to the already-converted.

>     On the whole I like the book, but it's not written for the Limbaugh
>novice. It's solely for the hard core.

    I'll bear that in mind; I was thinking that maybe I should toddle over 
to the bookstore and pick up a copy sometime, but I already had this feeling 
that the contents of the book are basically just a restatement of the line 
of reasoning I hear on his radio show every day and see on his TV program 
at night.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 23:22:28 GMT

vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes:

>jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:

>>How are we going to do this?  I don't know, but until we figure it 
>>out, these people have to eat somehow.  Welfare was never meant to
>>be a permanent program, and it has not worked well in the long run.

>"I don't know"-- spoken like a true liberal.  Welfare has become permanent.
>Since FDR there are generations of families who have lived on welfare.
>It will never work.  The cycle of poverty has shifted and is now perpetuated
>by the welfare state.   

Hey, I've got an idea:  Let's not let anyone in "poverty" (or on welfare) have
any more children.  Then children won't be born into poverty and in a couple
generations things would be much better.   ;)
I don't think most people would go for that, especially since it could involve
forced-abortion.

>>Jared Dahl

>Edward Simmonds

-Rob
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu ()
Subject: Re: I'm Famous!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 23:09:53 GMT

tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates) writes:

[Stuff deleted]


>See you. Oh, thanks Edward Simmonds for the oblig sig.  I feel better
>now.


Anything I can do to preserve your towering intellect in the history
books.


Edward Simmonds


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Stupid obligatory sig to satisfy the Great Brain Tony Zugates           -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

- standard disclaimers -

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: leahy@math.rutgers.edu (Andrew Leahy)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Transcript newsgroup?
Keywords: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.transcripts
Date: 22 Dec 92 13:29:01 GMT
Distribution: inet
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


There is a group called `alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.transcripts' that
appeared recently in my .newsrc file.  Is this where the Limbaugh 
summaries by jrs@netcom.com are going to be posted from now on?  
If so, when?

A. Leahy
leahy@math.rutgers.edu
From: dodsonsl@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Misconseptions of Christianity...
Date: 22 Dec 92 10:21:43 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University


In article <1992Dec18.171113.9132@u.washington.edu>, ryanm@hardy.u.washington.edu (Ryan Mcneilly) writes:
> 
> I have seen many positions stating that Christians want to supress free
> speech and everything else.  I will not attempt to explain individual
> views or excuse others only explain from a Biblical prospective.  I will
> explain what I have seen in the Bible and is only an interpretation.
> 
> 
> [BIBLICAL VIEW]
> 
> The Bible doesn't promote any kind of censorship.  God has never imposed
> his will on people (Christian, Jewish, other regions or Athiests).  He has
> placed a free will in everyone to make their own decisions.  If one wants
> to do something he/she will pay the consequenses in the end.......

Yeah, right. "God has never imposed his will on people..."?  I love reading
the Old Testament where God wants to get rid of a certain tribe of people, 
so he gets the Jews to do it for him.  I guess it's much more fun to watch 
two insects battle it out than just to step on them.  What happened when the
people of that time stopped believing in God?  He flooded the whole world.
Wouldn't you call that "imposing his will"?  The way salvation is offered is
very similar - accept Jesus as your personal savior and live your life the way
God commands, or else you will burn in hell's fires ETERNALLY!  Would God be
really that upset if I didn't worship him?  Does he somehow require my devo-
tion?  This is like a gangster's offer that can't be refused.  Why do people
even believe that God is a 'merciful' God?

In an earlier post there was mention of 7-year-old children singing that Rush
is "a conservative like ___", where the blank's where taken to be 'God', but
were removed from the audio portion of the tape.  Given the characteristic of
intolerance that all conservatives seem to share, I would definitely agree 
that both God and Rush are conservatives. 

-Scott