HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (Jack Stecher)
Subject: Rush the blowhard
Organization: Department of Economics, Univ of Minn
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:13:52 GMT

Uggh.  Did everyone hear, toward the end of the second hour
of today's show, Rush proclaim that one ought pay no heed to
Nobel prize winning economists because "John Kenneth Galbraith
is a Nobel prize winning economist, and he doesn't know [anything]?"

Ignore the obvious fallacy with the syllogism.
Just how did Rush determine that Galbraith, whose writings are
all on popular economics rather than on scholarly research,
won the Nobel?  If Rush were to look more closely, he'd find
the following Nobel laureates:  Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek,
and James Buchanan, all of whom Rush has appealed to as authorities
(directly for the first two, indirectly for Buchanan via appeals to
public choice economics).  He would not find Galbraith's name on
the list.  True, he'd find the names of Paul Samuelson and Ken Arrow
(the former a liberal, the latter a technocrat), but, unlike Friedman,
Hayek, and Buchanan, neither Samuelson nor Arrow received his prize
for work related to his political views.  (In fact, much of Arrow's
contribution was proving the impossibility of finding a consistent
social welfare function.)

The caller Rush was replying to had commented on all the Nobel laureates
advising Clinton on economics, and Rush wished, I presume, to convey that
winning a Nobel prize does not make one's views on political economy
valid.  Rather than point out that the Nobel is awarded politically, or
that Nobel laureates have been known to give advice on areas outside their
expertise, Rush chose to bash any distinguished economist as a mere theorist.
This is certainly a tenable position, but not if invoked selectively.  I.e.,
if Rush wishes to criticize Samuelson because of his being a theorist (rather
than, say, because of Samuelson's political views), then Rush cannot credibly
invoke Hayek or Friedman as having provided rigorous confirmation of what
(Rush and I would agree) most Americans intuitively believe to be a correct
description of how markets work.

Bah.

Jack Stecher
stecher@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: the kettle calls the pot...
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
Distribution: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 02:15:10 GMT

I see New Mexico's own Pete Domenici is pointing at Arkansas and making
accusations that Clinton's record in running that state is pretty poor.

Pete ought to look at his home state before he complains too loudly. New
Mexico came out the second poorest state, beating only Mississippi in
1991. We have something approaching 1 in 4 persons below poverty level.

Of course, our Governor, the illustrious Bruce King (a Democrat), makes 
an interesting [non-]comparison to Governor Clinton. The mind truly 
boggles at the thought!

	(..)
  	 ~~
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..
The first time I had sex, I was terrified. I was alone..
From: mjb@acsu.buffalo.edu (Matthew J. Bernhardt)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Military service...
Date: 8 Sep 92 12:58:34 GMT
Distribution: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: UB

larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:

>Since military service is apparently so relevant and so admired by all
>Dittoheads everywhere, would anyone care to comment on the Rush Limbaugh's
>own record on this issue? Did Rush see combat in Vietnam? How did he serve
>his country? Was he every 1A? 4F? ROTC? What then?

	I seem to recall that he was 4F, courtesy of a pylenidal (sp?) cyst.
-- 
Matt Bernhardt
University of Buffalo             THIS SPACE FOR RENT.
mjb@acsu.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: fishead@cwis.unomaha.edu (David L. Britton)
Subject: Re: Rush's TV Show
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:37:52 GMT

I tend to agree that he needs an hour.  You can't accomplish what Rush 
wants to accomplish in 20 minutes (after commercials).  Neat football
story tho' (he should ditch the impersonations).
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:34:00 GMT
Distribution: na, world, usa
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <1992Sep4.053206.23468@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> rfa@Turing.ORG (Robert F. Alexander) writes:
>
> {buncha stuff remov }
>
>>The who issue is silly and stupid, however they are going to continue with
>>it because that's all they have.  Yesterday, the chief chickenhawk himself,
>>Danikins started blasting Clinton as a draft-dodger.  Calling the kettle
> ^^^^^^^^>
>black is more befitting of this ridiculous accusation.
>>===============================================================================
>
>>Mitch Sako	LSI Computing Systems			Office	408-433-418
>
>Hey MITCHIKINS, Haven't you learned that name calling
>brands you as a liberal, who has no real facts to argue.
>Sir, your credibility just went in the shitcan.. AGAIN.
>-- 
>rfa@turing.ORG    ( KD4QBD )         /      BROADCAST ENGINEER
>(804) 296-7697  Hm                   /      WCHV         WWWVV
>(804) 977-5566  Wk                   /      Oldies   AlbumRock 

Hey, Robbie...

If calling people by names, diminuatives, silly labels, and demeaning terms
brands someone as a liberal, who has no real facts to argue, then you must 
think that Rush Limbaugh is a liberal, who has no real facts to argue?

Rush:  "Fort Worthless Jim Wright",  "The (funny voice) Reverand Jackson",
"The Squeaker of the House",  feminazis, environmentalist whackos, etc.

But then again,  you are half right about Rush.
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Far Right's New "Bill of Rights"
Date: 14 Sep 92 16:43:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus

In article <1992Sep14.063848.8998@usl.edu>, das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes:

|> Funny, people view the Democrat Congress as the staple, the Way of doing things 
|> - permanent, eternal.  And that only the Presidency changes parties.
|> As George Bush has tried to explain many times, 'give me a Congress I can work
|> with'.  It solely depends on your political views.

	If things were different, they'd be different, but they're not,
	so they're the same.

George Bush would really like Republican congress. He would probably also
like to see the national debt go way all by itself. Unfortunately, neither
of these is very likely in the near future. It's not a subjective view,
it's the way things are.

With that in mind, blaming congress is like blaming gravity; even if the blame
is well placed, it doesn't help matters, as neither is likely to change much
next year. If George Bush is going to do better next term, he's going to
have to do something different, and he doesn't seem very interested in 
changing. With that in mind, a vote for Bush is a vote for more of the same.

-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens,
 nor should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God"
                                     - George Herbert Walker Bush, Feb 1989 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:47:14 GMT

In article <BuDJ3t.M9G@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
    tjz20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Zych) writes:

>BTW, don't you find it interesting that the cruise missle (as well as the
> F117,
>M1/2/3 series, Patriot) were all begun or first bought under the 'weak on
>defence' Carter administration?
>
>Tom Zych   tzj20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
>

I had some former coworkers say that while Carter was making speeches,
saying "we are not designing anti-satellite weapons", they were busily
working on a black program, where they were designing anti-satellite
weapons.

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

Watch what you say!                Won't you sign up your name
They'll be calling you a radical   So you can be their dependable
A liberal, fanatical criminal      Respectable, presentable vegetable
--  Supertramp "The Logical Song"
From: eric@wdl35.wdl.loral.com (Eric Kuhnen)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bush and the Debates
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:49:13 GMT
Organization: Loral Western Development Labs

kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell) writes:
>->Does anybody else have any ideas on why George is so bloomin' afraid?
>(note: I'm not a Bush supporter, but I like Clinton even less.) Bush has a
>history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Look at the
>miserable end to the Gulf War. Look at his timidity during the collapse of
>the USSR, and the way he counselled the former Yogoslav states to stay
>together. Bush is a creature of habit who thinks that things should be as
>they have been. He fears ANY change. 

Your assessment of Bush could not be more wrong.  Bush does not fear any
change.  He simply fears that change which arises out of mindless fear and
panic.  That is wisdom borne of common sense, and Bush has common sense.

The "miserable end" to the Gulf War was the restoration of oil flow at
free-market prices.  It was the return of Mr. Hussein to the borders of
his own country, with much of his Command and Control materiel unavailable
for further aggression and his military personnel beaten and humiliated.  It
was the accomplishment of these victories with a minimum loss of life against
the fifth largest standing army in the world.

Mr. Bush wisely recognized that while the collapse of the Soviet government 
structure was the result of U.S. Cold War policies, it was foolish for the
US to interfere in the actual restructuring process.  President Bush 
correctly supported the legal head of the Soviet government, Mr. Gorbachev,
until such time as that government no longer existed according the laws of
that country and region.  When the confederation of Russian states, under
Mr. Yeltsin, became a recognized country, then Bush recognized its legal
leader.  That's good foreign policy infused with common sense.

The current disposition of the former Yugoslav republic is no endorsement
of the quick dissolution of former countries into their ethnically divided
regions.  Again, President Bush displayed wise judgment when he counselled
the Serbs and Croats to settle their cultural differences under one flag,
thereby preserving their economic base.

Eric
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments and criticism are welcome.  Flames to /dev/null.  "Get a life"
drivel to /dev/mirror.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5398 alt.rush-limbaugh:4881
From: rnlee@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Profess'nal Agitator)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: TV Times for southern California
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:21:10 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Distribution: usa
Organization: MAWL - Mudd Alums Without Lives

In article <d2tn!hq.jrs@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>The new TV guide lists Rush's show as being on the following times and 
>channels:
>
>12 midnight, channel 29 KMPH Visalia
>12:30 am, channel 12 KCOY Santa Maria
>1:00 am, channel 13 KCOP Los Angeles

Another one for the FAQ:

12:30am, KGTV channel 10, San Diego  (after Nightline and A Current Affair)

Agitator
  #->

"A political deadend."                  Bruce Herschensohn for U.S. Senate!!!
    --Gore on the Vice Presidency when    Not the ten-year       //  The REAL
      asked about a Dukakis-Gore ticket   Congress insider      //   outsider
--------------- R E M E M B E R   B E I J I N G ------------\\ //------------
IBM PC - Who wants a politically correct computer?           \X/  Only AMIGA!
========================================== Bring Back the Caltech Cannon!! ==
Roderick Lee, HMC '91      "The Professional Agitator"      agitator@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 06:48:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.052403.18676@cs.rose-hulman.edu> waldbyjf@nextwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (persimmon) writes:
>Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,rec.humor,talk.politics.misc
>
>In article <1992Sep14.045804.20246@u.washington.edu>  
>diviney@milton.u.washington.edu (Pat Diviney) writes:
>> Actually, although the Constitution never spelled it out in any great  
>detail,
>> George Washington set the precedent (among others) that the President was
>> the Nation's chief diplomat as well as the prime architect of foreign
>> policy.
>
>However, this is not usually the case. More often than not, the president  
>does relatively little involving the foreign policy. Nixon was definitely  
>an exception.

Never before have I heard this statement before.  Therefore, sir, you 
*must* be mistaken...

Really, though, where did you get this idea?  The House majority leader
sure doesn't get deep involved in foreign policy.  He has constituents 
to look after.  :-)

>Uner kannt durch's marchenland


--
Dan Stephenson                                           das9674@usl.edu
" BERLIN WALL FALLS.  3 BORDER GUARDS LOSE JOBS.  CLINTON BLAMES BUSH! "
        -George Bush, '92 Republican nomination acceptance speech
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mwbg9715@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Wayne Blunier)
Subject: Re: Far Right's New "Bill of Rights"
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:20:14 GMT

>Not with a President who blames _every_ problem the country has
>on Congressional Democrats. 

>Harry Truman's Desk Sign: "The buck stops here."
>George Bush's Desk Sign: "The buck stops at the building with the dome."
..... but the tax payers bucks disapear in Washington.
mark
>-- 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: TV Show
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:00:49 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.102827.9314@usl.edu> mxa2677@usl.edu (Axelrod Michael) writes:

   How does one go about getting tickets to be in Rush's audience?

Send a request to Rush, on the back of a 20 dollar bill, in care of EIB..

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.
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Date: 14 Sep 92 05:28:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

>  Actually he did work for a few years in the private sector as an attorney,
>  He was a partner with his wife.

When Danno was an attorney he regularly screwed his partner!
Now he's a public servant so ...
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:45:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.182424.342@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako) writes:

   In article 27160@umbc3.umbc.edu, alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
   >In article <1898@celia.UUCP> steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree) writes:
   >>  You shouldnt compare a person who has financed his entire life through
   >> taxing the common people with a man who has worked hard his entire life
   >> in the private sector. He received no inheritance from his grandfather
   >> and only has stock from his mother.
   >	Is this supposed to refer to Dan Quayle, a three term congressman,
   >one term senator and 4 year VP? Lessee: If he was in college until he was
   >25, and he's 45 now, and he spent the last 20 years in public service, then
   >he didn't have much time to "work hard his entire ligfe in hte private
   >sector". Has Quayle Ever worked a non political job?

   Actually he did work for a few years in the private sector as an attorney,
   I believe a partner with his wife.  The work he did was less than extraordinary.

You are able to judge the quality of his legal work?  Or are you just
blowing more gas?  Get a reference to his work.

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco)
Subject: Re: Rush's TV Show: Will it Succeed?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:18:36 GMT

mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:

>Hey, now, Leno hits both sides.  In an interview, he said he was
>"Fiercely independant.  Every time I think I might be a Republican,
>they do something  greedy, and every time I think I might be a
>Democrat, they do something stupid."  True, he does lean pretty heavily
>on the Quayle jokes, but he gets in quite a few zingers on Clinton
>every night I've watched him.  And he's constantly going after Teddy
>Kennedy.  ("Teddy Kennedy has the election in his pocket.
>Unfortunately, he can't find his pants.")

Maybe so, but the first few weeks on his own, I really thought Jay showed
his true colors...he's been better as of late, however, although you may
have noticed that the California crowds he's getting in his audience don't
laugh as hard as the Clinton jokes...and sometimes even boo!
.
From: shawn@Aardvark.Rain.COM (Shawn Allen)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: To Attebury @ KU
Date: 8 Sep 92 06:14:36 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Steve's UNIX System, Portland, Oregon

To Attebury at KU RUSH's tv show will air in Portland Ore 
on Sept 14 on channel 6 KOIN (CBS affil.)

Sorry for posting this, but I don't have your email address.

ditto to all.


-- 
shawn@aardvark.rain.com                     |"The number of UNIX
"I'm with the government, I'm here to help!"|machines has grown to 10
"The God I believe in                       |with more expected." 
isn't short of cash, MISTER!!" -Bono        | -The UNIX manual, *1972*
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: tjz20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Zych)
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:55:03 GMT

jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:

>In article <BuC4wA.Gqo.2@cs.cmu.edu> msm@mse.cmu.edu (Mark S McWhinney) writes:
>>In article <BuBJJM.9Es@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mwbg9715@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Wayne
>> Blunier) writes:
>>Good old Dan heard this and just couldn't help but rush in to say
>>something stupid too. He said that they weren't Patriot missiles, they
>>were cruise missiles. (The correct answer is smart bombs.)

>What the heck do you think cruise missiles are? "Smart bombs" are 
>a group that is comprised of many different types of weapons, from 
>gravity bombs that glide to rocket-propelled missiles. One of the 
>main selling points of the cruise missile back in the late 70s
>was the promise that not only would it hit the target, but you 
>could tell it which window to go through. The reality has lived
>up to this 70s promise.

No, a missle is a weapon which has some form of on-board propulsive system, such
as the rocket engines in cruise missles.  A bomb has no on-board propulsive
system and relies primarily on gravity to reach its target.  A 'smart bomb' is
a bomb which has a rudimentary control system built in to allow the bomb to 
guide itself towards (usually) a reflected laser signal.  A guided missle is not
a 'smart bomb', but a 'smart weapon'.  Anyone who uses the former term to
describe a missle doesn't know enough about weaponry to claim to be an expert.
Cruise missles and smart bombs both performed remarkably well in Desert Storm,
at least in the carefully selected videos the public was allowed to see.

BTW, don't you find it interesting that the cruise missle (as well as the F117,
M1/2/3 series, Patriot) were all begun or first bought under the 'weak on
defence' Carter administration?

Tom Zych   tzj20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
From: acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Date: 9 Sep 92 11:35:54 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Great Beyond

In article <b0rns+h.jrs@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>Well, I don't know if I would call it a *conservative* strip, but the 
>BC comic strip has had a couple of zingers recently that conservatives
>would like. Last week Wiley was sitting by a tree writing a poem about
>how when the Supreme Court Justices find themselves in Heaven trying 
>to explain their rulings against prayer and such they'd look in the 
>Constitution and find nothing there to support them. The poem was 
>much better phrased that this explanation, though.
>
>Today's strip (9/8) has patient BC asking psychiatrist Peter "how can 
>you tell if you're mind starts to go?" Peter replies "it's hard 
>to say ... there is only one *sure* sign - you will start to do jokes
>about Dan Quayle."
>
>I've liked Johnny Hart for almost 15 years. Now I know why!

I've hated him for years. Now I know why.

The Wizard of Id, also by Hart, I think, recently did his something
similar. The Wizard informed the King that there were "some women" to see 
him. The King was worried. The Wiz responded that they were "anti-feminists."
The King then said, "Oh, they're _REAL_ women."

Now, of course, I haven't heard of one paper in the evil, liberal media
pulling B.C. or the Wizard of Id lately, but plenty of them yank
Doonesbury for daring to have an opinion. Go on. Tell me about
the liberal media. 
-- 
The world is not analog. The world is digital,
with an incredible number of bits.
Arthur C. Adams (not the comic-book artist)                        <fnord>
E-Mail acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: roberts@triton.unm.edu (Robert Smathers)
Subject: Re: TV Show
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 02:42:07 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Sep15.102827.9314@usl.edu> mxa2677@usl.edu (Axelrod Michael) writes:
>How does one go about getting tickets to be in Rush's audience?
>


First, you need to submit an application.  You need to have a good excuse
why you want to be on his show -- and be prepared to send in two or
more applications (Rush's screeners are tough!)

You can also phone in your application, but you can't call after 3pm ET.
They have caller ID and if you call after three, they will know who
you are and you will be disqualified forever.

Now if your application is chosen, you may have to undergo urine
analysis --- after all, then can tell from a urine sample who
is a liberal!

Isn't Rush so ridiculous?!?!?

Robert
roberts@triton.unm.edu
Dittos forever!