HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Turn out the lights as you leave...
Date: 6 Nov 92 02:00:07 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

htuttle@nyx.cs.du.edu (Harry Tuttle) writes:

  >Well, Now that PRESIDENT CLINTON will be in the White House, I imagine
  >that ole Rush Limburger should be on the last train to Dinosaur Land.
  >I'll miss Rush when he's gone.

Jeez, Harry, sounds like somebody must have crapped in your Cheerios this
morning!

As the Rushmeister said on last night's tv show, the next four years
are going to be great!  The ultra-liberals who waited patiently in the
wings for Willie to get elected will now return to power.  Their
policies won't work, of course, but _this_ time they have absolutely no
one else to blame it on.  He predicted that they'll then try to excuse their
failures by claiming that the roots of Reagan/Bush policies went far
deeper than they imagined, etc, etc.

But the best part is that they'll be providing his material for four years,
and they'll be doing it for nothing.  I'm sorta looking forward to it
myself.  

P.S.  The main difference between liberals and dogs is that dogs stop whining
eventually.

 ===========================================================================|
 |                                      | Success is getting what you want. |
 |Don Wiggins                           | Happiness is wanting what you get.|
 |Internet: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu |     -- Brother Dave Gardner       |
 ===========================================================================|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.guns
From: crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun)
Subject: Re: The Rush Blimp?
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:33:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

In article <nate.766@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>>>jkapson@ad-29.Naitc.Com (John Kapson) writes:
>>>>  While you're at it, explain how the
>>>>current ban on cocaine has worked so well...
>>>
>>>    Easy. The ban on cocaine has been accompanied with what I would 
>>>consider to be a very effective grass-roots educational effort. Drug users 
>>>seem to be coming to the agreement among themselves that cocaine is just a 
>>>lousy high
>
>>       I believe you missed the point.   Cocaine is still available to 
>>anyone who wants some.  The ban on cocaine hasn't worked.  Only education, 
>>attacking the root of the problem, works.
>
>    I thought that was exactly my point. I have to disagree with your 
>statement that cocaine is still available to anyone who wants it. I don't 
>know any dealers; I suppose that if I was really adamant I might be able 
>to hang out in places frequented by sleazy people and eventually find 
>something. In all probability it would be so badly adulterated that it 
>would be stretching the truth to call it cocaine.
>
>    Alex Crain set a great honesty example a while back when he was upfront 
>about having used marijuana; I'll try to emulate him (and go him one 
>better). Not only have I smoked pot, I've used cocaine. However, I learned 
>as a cocaine user that I was getting a very inferior high, and "I don't do 
>that no more" (to coin a phrase from the Smothers brothers). I don't see how 
>education can get any more personal than that. I *know* it to be true, and I 
>have absolutely zero further interest in cocaine.

This is impossible.  Cocaine and marijuana are illegal because they are
addictive drugs, a single use of which will addict you and ruin your life.
You're telling us that you've used these drugs and are neither addicted nor
ruined?  You must be lying. (Or somebody else is.)

>--
>Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
>Psychology Department               Indiana University
>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu


===============================================================================
William Crosmun
crosmun@dg-rtp.dg.com

===============================================================================
"No matter what the subject, there is some group which wants government
 to regulate or  subsidize it, and  there are always those  in Congress
 eager to take  over more power  and control.  But it  is impossible to
 get something for  nothing.  The government  produces no goods, so  it
 can hand out  favors to some  people only by taking  the earnings  and
 property of others first."

                       From the Libertarian Party platform - 1992

===============================================================================
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: November 3, the day Rush dies!
Date: 5 Nov 92 08:45:12 GMT
Distribution: na, world
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

>>Oh, believe me, there will be a lot of people moving to Canada in the
>>next four years....
>
Yeah yeah yeah....  fr the last few months dittoheads have been pointing at the
Canadian Health care system, and saying "If Clinton gets selected, our system
will become as bad as theirs.

Well, if we are going to become "as bad as", then what would the reason be
for leaving.  You should have been saying "worse than" to make such a 
silly claim at all credible.  And hen some other wanker suggests that
he'll be flying to Russia... what a twit!  I suppose the sky is falling
too, eh?  What a bunch of Chicken Littles.

Reminds me of Simple Simon's silly post about Bush winning... a lot of hot air,
based on weak predictions and a lot of wishful thinking.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7861 alt.politics.clinton:15696 alt.politics.bush:13082
From: greenjb@venus.cs.clemson.edu (Jeffrey B. Green)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.ru
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
Date: 4 Nov 92 18:51:48 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Clemson University Computer Science Dept.

In article <1992Nov4.163656.19620@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Steven M Casburn) writes:

>    Steve Casburn (scasburn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
>    They gave me derivative calculus, and I said "Hit me again"
                  ^^^^^^^^^^
	Isn't that differential calculus?

>    So they gave me integral calculus, and I said "Hit me again"
>    Now I have vector calculus, and...I'm starting to lose consciousness...

-- Jeff


J.B.Green (greenjb@cs.clemson.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: tom@uts.cc.wayne.edu (Thomas Richard Stevenson)
Subject: Re: Why alt.fan.rush-limbaugh????
Organization: Wayne State Univ.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:44:06 GMT

marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:

>In article <1992Nov9.153906.28199@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>>                           | Support the coup!

>Look!  This man HATES Clinton!  See!  Look!  Wants to lynch Clinton 
>before he can even do anything!  Hate-monger!


>Now when you people grow up enuf to break the concept of speaking against
>something is the same as hating it (cuz it's not) then perhaps you'll
>be happier.   I know it be nice to see you grow up.

First you say he's a hate-monger for speaking against Clinton, and then
you say he should grow up enough to understand the difference between
speaking against something and hating it. He didn't say hate once in
the part you pointed out. It seems as if you should grow up first before
telling someone else to.

>-- 
>Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that
>MS-DOS - it's not   marc@milestn.mil.wi.us    is your problem, not mine!
>my problem!     If it was said on UseNet, it must be true.
>   Unix - It's a nice place to live, but you don't want to visit there.
-- 
     ____  __   __       Tom@UTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
      /   /_/  /_        Thomas_Richard_Stevenson@MTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
     /.  /\ . __/.       Tom@CMS.CC.Wayne.Edu
                         UserTom@WayneMTS.Bitnet
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: budd@playfair.Stanford.EDU (David Budd)
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 07:42:51 GMT

In article <92310.210742KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>In article <40551@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs)

>
>Hmm, I forget.  Was it 51-49 or 52-48 that Boxer won by?...
>
>She -barely- won... in a state where Clinton dominated.  What happened to the
>coattail effect?   (Ditto for Yeakel here in PA)  Seems to me that a lot
>of people who voted for Clinton must have also voted for Herschensohn.  Hmm,
>imagine that... couldn't be because Clinton convinced a lot of conservatives
>that he was one of them, could it?


Rush, putting as much cologne as he could on this electoral pig stated,
and correctly, that the dems repackaged themselves as much more
pro-business and less liberal than they have been, adopting many
planks from republicans of the past. If the change is for real, (i am
still sceptical), than the next four years might not be a total 
disaster.

Anyway, the Boxer-Herschensohn campaign was particularly ugly, and
Mrs. Boxer was highly ungracious, even offencive, in her acceptance
speech out here. (the party was in San Francisco, of course. All that
was missing from the three-ring circus was the dancing bear.) SHe 
effectively did what Johnson did in 1964 against Goldwater, albeit with
much less potent results. She painted Mr. Herschensohn as an extremist
(and perhaps he is a bit right of centre). But, she accused him of
terrible bigotry which was not evident in the campaign. I disagree with
his stance on abortion rights and military spending (slash ALL spending).
But, I think that she was terribly personal and nasty. Maybe that is
why she jsut squeaked by (perhaps slid by on a couple of those
143 bounced cheques.)


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier)
Subject: Re: Hell revisited
Reply-To: m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Distribution: world, na, usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 01:32:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.195237.25627@csc.ti.com> dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.213232.15451@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
>|> In article <Eey26um00UhBQ3Y21D@andrew.cmu.edu> gp2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Gary James Patalsky) writes:
>|> 
>|> embargo, the Iran Hostage crises (wait, he did handle it, he bargined with
>|> the Ayatolah to keep them there until after the nomination), and other


I can't let you get away with that.  I can't believe there are people
out there who actually believe this slander campaign against Reagan.
Where's your proof?  Before making an allegation of this nature, you
better show us some proof and not the words of some liberal rag
newspaper who does nothing but slander Republicans.

God bless,

Michael
-- 
 Michael Le Houllier           *  John 3:16  * Nov 12, 1991 - Dili      
 (m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu.us) *  Remember: June 4, 1989 - Beijing
 GO BLUE JAYS!!!   BEAT THE BRAVES!!!!
 ANNOY THE MEDIA.  RE-ELECT BUSH!!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@red-dragon.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: November 3, the day Rush dies!
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:25:37 GMT

In article <mjenkins.720922553@cunews> mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson) writes:

>Oh, believe me, there will be a lot of people moving to Canada in the
>next four years....

	I love it: Right wingers, upset with the leftward shift of the 
country, are moving to *CANADA*, that model of free markets and enforced
christian beliefs. If you want 4 more years of Bush, move to El Salavdor,
where they know how to keep their people in line.







-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
  "[PBS viewers are] affluent, highly educated, the movers and the shakers,
   the socially conscious and the well informed. What about the rest of us?"
                                                       - Robert Dole
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: rja@mahogany.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Mo Clinton
Originator: rja@mahogany
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:24:26 CST


In article <1992Nov5.191325.23215@stortek.com>, v042517@stortek.com (Vince Dugar) writes:
> 
> It occured to me yesterday -- I was watching a lady being interviewed
> after coming out of the polling place.  When asked how she made her
> choices, she said she used the "eenie meenie miney mo" method.  "Mo"
> ended up on Bill Clinton.
> 
> So I think we should call him Mo Clinton.

That's fine, as long as there's no Mo Bush.  :-)

> And let's honor the media (the most *powerful* political party) for
> it's incessant slant against G Bush and blatant love affair with Bill
> C.  It's a shame when so much of America voted the way they were told
> to think by the liberal media.
> 
> I'm willing to bet that the 5% margin of victory for BC can be
> explained as people who voted for this "cross your fingers" candidate
> without *any* idea of what they were getting us into.

But they did know what they wanted to get out of...

Mo Clinton, no Mo Bush, Mo Clinton, no Mo Bush,... 


-- 
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!)
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Sore LosDEREGISTER
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:48:18 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

gspncm@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Minister of Misinformation) writes:

 >Well, not all.  His Pompousness continues to rain idiotic insults on
 >the character, family and motives of Governor Clinton.  His attacks
 >are, as always, mean in spirit, destructive and self-promoting.

Well, I must admit that I was put off by his crack about Clinton's
daughter, even though his follow-up line was quite humorous.

 ===========================================================================|
 |                                      | Success is getting what you want. |
 |Don Wiggins                           | Happiness is wanting what you get.|
 |Internet: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu |     -- Brother Dave Gardner       |
 ===========================================================================|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Subject: Re: Music on the Radio Show
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:24:15 GMT

BJGLEAS@auvm.american.edu (bj gleason) writes:

  >Does anybody know the name of the music that is played at the beginning
  >of the radio show?
  >>thanks...
  >>bj

No, but on last night's tv show, Rush mentioned the new song, "Inhale to the
Chief."

 ===========================================================================|
 |                                      | Success is getting what you want. |
 |Don Wiggins                           | Happiness is wanting what you get.|
 |Internet: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu |     -- Brother Dave Gardner       |
 ===========================================================================|
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7933 alt.rush-limbaugh:9044 alt.politics.bush:13184 misc.test:12687 talk.bizarre:36834 alt.politics.clinton:15841
From: stamber@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Kevin L. Stamber)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,misc.test,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Summary: disclaimer
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:47:59 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Nov5.173627.20201@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, stamber@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Kevin L. Stamber) writes:
> In article <1992Nov5.153402.22809@netcom.com>, jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
> > -- 
> > John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
> >                            | Support the coup!
> >                            |
> > jrs@netcom.com             | 
> 
>      Maybe we can get Stockdale to be in charge of the coup
>     attempt...Ross could always finance it...
  Anyone who takes these two lines seriously should be...I don't know...
given a CBS Election '92 reality check...or maybe a V-8.

    IT IS A JOKE PEOPLE.  LIGHTEN UP.

thanks.
                   stamber
.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.president.clinton
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: A TRUE LANDSLIDE
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:31:22 GMT

phil@ruapehu.ucsb.edu (Philip Papadopoulos) writes:
>>Actually, he isn't even President-elect yet.  He won't be that until
>>the electoral college votes are counted by Vice President Dan Quayle.
>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>A truly scary thought! ;)

    Hey, enough of these snide comments about Dan's ability to add. 
Remember, you have to be able to add to be able to figure out what your 
score is when you're out on the golf course.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: enor@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: Plurality wants LESS GOV SPENDING
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:57:00 GMT

I hope good old Bill read the USA Today today 11/13/92.  It shows that 40% of
americans want government spending to go DOWN.  Seemss that a PLURALITY(neat
word my PoliSci teacher taught us) wants to have less TRICKLE DOWN GOVERNMENT.

Well I guess we already have a good basis to through the BUM out in 1996. 
Because all his programs are Government Solutions to our Problems.

Robert R. Eno
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:02:04 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Sending E-mail to Rush
Distribution: usa

In article <68998@cup.portal.com>, FisKer@cup.portal.com (Scott M Martin) says:

>Okay, we all know that Rush has a Compuserve address (he brags about
>the joys of Compuserve -- he should take a look at the Usenet!).

So what's so great about Usenet?

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Now, to start working on the downfall of th
Date: 4 Nov 92 23:34:42 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

In article 6777@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu, tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
>
>Well, now that Clinton is in the White House (read it an weep),  it is time
>for us to start planning the destruction of the USA.   Our TRUE platform -
>
>1) Raise every bodies taxes by 50%
>2) Tax corporations at a rate of 100%
>3) Pass laws requiring Homosexual Prayer in school
>4) practice witchcraft, kill our children, break up families
>5) put Gorbachev in the Supreme Court
>
>Yes Dittoheads... it's NIGHTMARE ON PENNSYLVANIA STREET.
>
>
>
>(And if anybody actually believes this post... shame on you.  Clinton is
>duly elected by the people.  Time to get used to it, pull together and try 
>to heal the country from the ravages of 12 years of "borrow and spend" and
>wedge issue divisivness.)

Unfortunately, a majority of diddiotheads probably do believe this.
Oh no! Mr. Bill!



---
===============================================================================
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
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8506 alt.rush-limbaugh:9601 alt.politics.clinton:17041
From: jason@ab20.larc.nasa.gov (Jason Austin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: 13 Nov 92 08:13:29
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA
	<1992Nov5.082832.19492JPII@tygra.Michigan.COM>
	<1992Nov5.153402.22809@netcom.com> <rdippold.721181889@qualcom>
	<1992Nov12.071925.2654@netcom.com> <rdippold.721592462@qualcom>
	<92317.231441MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: Jason C. Austin <j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ab20.larc.nasa.gov
In-reply-to: Mark 'Mark' Sachs's message of Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:14:41 EST

In article <92317.231441MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
-> >>In <rdippold.721181889@qualcom> rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
-> >writes:
-> >>>What do you expect?  Liberals and free speech go together like oil and
-> >>>water (respectively).
-> 
-> Perhaps my memory fails me, but I don't recall too many significant
-> instances of "liberals" fighting free speech, beyond a few trivial
-> and likely unconstitutional speech codes at universities, and a **JOKE**
-> posting proposing the rmgroup of alt.rush-limbaugh. In my experience
-> liberals have been quite forthright in defense of the First Amendment.
-> 
-> Perhaps you can point out a few opposing examples for us?
-> 
->  "But Dr. Radium, was that necessary?" "Rez, _everything_ I do is necessary."
-> [Your blood pressure just went up.]        Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
-> DISCLAIMER: If PSU knew I had opinions they'd probably try to charge me for it.

	How about the protests and letters to get Rush taken off the
air whenever he moves into a new city?
--
Jason C. Austin
j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov



Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mitcheec@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (Elliott Mitchell)
Subject: Re: You probably missed this
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:23:00 GMT

In article <6912@news.duke.edu>, lanier@acpub.duke.edu (Dustin Lanier) writes...
>That commercial is wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>Eso si, que es does *NOT* mean "that's what it is"
>it means "Yes that, what is it?"
>It drives me absolutely nutty!  And it is amazing they
>would do that advertising with incorrect spanish!

You may not have heard the original version of the commercial where
"Eso si, que es?" was translated as "That's what I want!"

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
| Elliott Mitchell
|  Peabody College at Vanderbilt University
|  Nashville, Tenn. Home of the Grand Ole Opry
|  IN: mitcheec@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu | BN: MITCHEEC@VUCTRVAX
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton