HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: coolidge@speaker.wpd.sgi.com (Don Coolidge)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:25:20 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

|> William.A.Hall.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (William A. Hall Jr.) ejaculates:
|> # 
|> # This is why all of you liberals are so whacked-out. Allow me to give
|> # y'all a lesson in Biology 101. 

And this is where it gets amusing, because for all his lecturing, Mr. Hall 
knows squat about biology. You'd think an Ivy League education would be
better than that, yes? I suppose his conservative ideology is more than
a match for the otherwise-advantages of four years at Dartmouth :^)

|> # When a baby is conceived, his/her
|> # genetic blueprint is formed. He (or she) is unique, and so are his/her
|> # characteristics -- big feet, blue eyes, brown hair, pug nose, et
|> # cetera. Before conception, that doesn't exist. Millions of sperm with
|> # millions of blueprints and millions of ovums with millions of
|> # blueprints are floating in their respective ovaries and vesicles. When
|> # the two are brought together, they form the blueprint for an
|> # INDIVIDUAL.

With you so far...blueprint. Remember you said that. (I am amused by
the thought of millions of ova, though. It would be interesting for
Mr. Hall to see the reaction of any lady friend of his acquaintance
when asked during her menses to consider *millions* of ova acting on
her system, rather than just the one...:^)

|> # When that individual is aborted,

And here's where you blow it. Conception does not create an individual.
The fertilized ovum, or even later the blastula, may fission into two
or more identical individuals ("twins", "quads", and the like, for the
less-than-scientifically-gifted among us). Moreover, two or more fertilized
ova, or even blastulae, may combine to form a single mosaic individual
with more than one genetic blueprint. (These are fairly common, too,
but weren't suspected until recent advances in genetic analysis made
their detection possible.)

So, a fertilized egg is *not* an individual. It is a *blueprint* (to use
your own word, thanks for suggesting it!) for one, or more, or less, 
individuals, but it is not at that point an individual itself.

|> # that blueprint for life is
|> # terminated. A baby that may have been a genius. The baby that may have
|> # the found the cure for AIDS, or the cure for cancer, now lying in a
|> # dumpster outside an abortion clinic. No, excuse me... following in the
|> # words of others on the net, that PARASITE is in the dumpster. Sorry.
|> # Excuse me.

See, you almost get it right again. But then you drifted off into,
first ideology, and then low sarcasm. What a waste!
 
|> # When you PREVENT pregnancy, an individual blueprint for life is not
|> # terminated... because one was never made in the first place!

Now, this I can agree with, because unlike the previous part, it makes 
both scientific and logical sense.

- Don Coolidge
From: kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh on Feminism
Date: 12 Oct 92 05:33:17 GMT
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services

lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> 
> 	It is sometimes said of RL's use of "feminazi" that there is a
> certain kind of extremist feminist that it appropriately refers to.
> While there are _some_ feminists that can be called extremists, I
> think that RL is trying to smear _all_ feminists, since he has not
> described what he considers legitimate feminist positions.
> 
> 	To make myself clearer on this, let us suppose that RL had a
> habit of denouncing "shylock" Jewish bankers. Would it be a legitimate
> defense of him to insist that some Jewish bankers are indeed little
> better than loan sharks? This kind of remark would make it sound like
> he considers _all_ Jews to be the sort of sleazy characters who become
> loansharking bankers.
> 

Rush has said, about 8 zillion times, that he figures that there are less
than two dozen "femi-nazis" in America; he defines "femi-nazi" as a person
who gets angry when an abortion DOES NOT happen. 

Ken Mitchell
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 19:20:43 GMT
X-Posted-From: eng-nxt10.cso.uiuc.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

William.A.Hall.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (William A. Hall Jr.) writes:
: In article <1992Oct11.152434.17046@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>
: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl) writes:
: > ["]I believe every individual -- born or unborn -- has the potential to
: > make a negative impact on society."  You never know if that clump
: > of cells in a woman's body is going to become the world's next
: > politician, lawyer, mass-murderer, or Klan leader.
: 
: Then this argument boils down to your basic view of human existence. Do
: you believe that humans are inheritly good, or inheritly evil? I
: believe the former.

I want to believe in the former.  The reason I made the above comment
was because someone posted the statement "I believe every individual --
born or unborn -- has the potential to make a negative impact on
society."  I agree, but that is not the be-all and end-all of anti-
abortion arguments.  That kind of statement can cut both ways.

: I happen to respect the pro-choice argument, even if I rabidly disagree
: with it... except when it is taken to an extreme!

And from my "anti-abortion but pro-choice" position, I respect the pro-life
stance in general, even though I disagree with several of its arguments
and I cannot respect the actions of the more radical pro-life organizations.
:)

: Frankly, I also don't like it when Operation Rescue does what it does.
: It only causes the media to label pro-lifers as being "like" these
: activists, while most pro-life people I have met are not nearly as
: rabid and offensive. Operation Rescue only hurts the pro-life cause,
: IMO.

Agreed.  It's very easy to "agree to disagree" with The Other Side's ideas
when the "debate" retains some semblance of rationality.  I find it
very hard to respect radical pro-lifers and radical pro-choice people
simply because of some of their actions.

: Pro-lifers, for the most part, aren't "hateful", as someone else said.
: I don't hate anybody. (I dislike people, though. 8)

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92



Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7090 alt.activism.d:3763 alt.politics.elections:16090 alt.politics.bush:8618 alt.politics.clinton:9683 talk.politics.misc:50874 talk.abortion:41949
From: keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 11 Oct 92 13:43:36 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
->keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
->>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
->>->87% of americans have comprehensive health 
->>->care plans. 
->>
->>can you support this statement?

->Of course not.  

i didn't think so. thank you.

->I only heard it on Rush's show about 11 times in the 
->last three weeks.  

that's what i thought.

->But of course Rush always lies, so I guess I must 
->be lying.

if you say so.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Subject: Simon Admits he's a Nazi (no film at 11 due to lack of interest) 
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 02:40:22 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.211237.18170@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>Well, I am most definitely pro-life.  In the above scenario, the police
>had standing orders to use whateve force necessary to stop the pro-choice
>demonstrators.  Now, I haven't really written much so far, but the basic
>storyline is: The future.  Liberalism has run amok in our society, the people
>are fed up with this trend and demand a solution to this problem.  The people
>find their solution embodied in the ideas promoted by the New Order Party,
>who is elected by a landslide on their candidate's promise to stamp out
>liberalism once and for all. You're right, to make the world a better place.

Thank you Simon. I always thought you were a fascist. Having you state it
plainly on the net is very honest of you.
 

-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
From: yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Comparing Rush and Bob Grant.
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:19:43 GMT
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

Another point is that Rush seems to get a lot of callers
that promote his book and agree with him and promote his 
other endeavors.  Sometimes, I think I am listening to a mutual    
admiration society that is stuck going in one direction.

Bob would not stand for such a thing (Okay, occassionally,
but they are usually humorous.)  Bob gets truly upset
if the caller even says "How are you doin, Bob?"  Bob
response is almost always "What's on your mind?".  

I listen to talk radio for a little controversy and two way
debates and conversation.  Rush's show may have controversy but 
it lacks a lot of two way conversation and debate.

Some of Bob's callers bring up Rush and Bob has only nice
things to say about Rush.  But he also says that you need a lot
of luck in the radio business and Rush came along at the right time
and made the most of his opportunity.   I'll GRANT him that.
(No pun intented.)


-- 
--
 Ralph Yozzo (yozzo@watson.ibm.com)  
 From the beautiful and historic Mid-Hudson Valley area of NY state
From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:48:03 GMT
Subject: Please Help
Organization: HP Western Response Center
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh

              Please answer these 9 questions and return.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9.) How many years of education have you completed?
Grade School       [ ]
High School        [ ]
College            [ ]
More               [ ]
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 07:51:03 GMT


Perhaps I am the challenger here, but there must be others that feel the same
way I do.   I cannot accept that I am the only person who belives that the
unborn have a right to live.

Simon

______________________________________________________________________
The end of the world on USENET: There will be flame-wars and rumors of flame
wars........
               Simon Booth  sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: reaper@wixer.cactus.org (Keath Milligan)
Subject: Re: More deception from your hero, not mine
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 21:06:23 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.030042.16802@cbnewse.cb.att.com> harryo@cbnewse.cb.att.com (harold.r.holm) writes:
>Tell us, what is conservatism as a philosophical viewpoint for you?
>What would you say constitutes it, and *how* do Limbaugh/Buchanan
>differ from it?  I'd say you really don't have much to go on.  YOU
>PEOPLE are just intimidated because there are now strident spokesmen
>out their who don't fit your convenient little image as shy, withdrawn
>"pocket mice", but who are as fierce and in-your-face as any militant feminist,
>and you just are so frustrated and don't know how to *deal* with it,  
>DO YOU?  Well, get used to it.  Your meek little pet pocket mice
>have been supplanted by a couple of guardian dobermans, and it's about
>time conservatism had a couple to keep all you liberal-left alley cats 
>from having total run of the neighborhood.  ROWF!!  They're here to stay!
>
>                                                H.R. Holm
>*comment my own, standard disclaimers;
> replies to the newsgroup only, please*
>

Good.  Because every time Limbaugh or Buchanan get on TV or radio to
spew their hatred, they, the Republican Party and all the H.R. Holm's in
the world are further alienated from mainstream, MODERATE America and
are pushed further toward the edge of the abyss of obscurity.

-- 
oooooo ooo o o  o            Keath Milligan            o  o  ooooo oooo oooooo
oooo oo ooo  o   o   Prometheus Light and Sound, Inc.   o   o  o ooooooooooooo
oooooooo o oo  o         Real/Time Communications        o    o o ooo oooooooo
oooooo oooo ooo  o  internet: reaper@wixer.cactus.org  o   o  o ooo oo ooooooo
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 08:46:55 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed
Followup-To: talk.abortion

In  <1992Oct9.204843.20175@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>  sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
> There have been discussions about the possiblility that a fetus does show
> brainwave activity.  This would make a fetus a living child, and thus make
> abortion the killing of that child.

There have been discussions about scientists detecting brain waves from
three neurons in a petri dish.  I don't see how your conclusion follows...

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bob Dornan on Bill Clinton - IMPORTANT
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:53:25 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

> 
>>     This is the same Bill Clinton who, while at Oxford, sought
>>information on either obtaining dual citizenship or obtaining
>>British citizenship.
> 
> There is absolutely no proof of these charges whatsoever. And Monday night
> on live TV, Clinton denied the allegations.

I can't say whether these are valid charges or not. I will say that based
on Clintons comments and behavior in the past, it doesn't mean a thing when
Clinton denies charges. My big problem with Clinton as I have stated in the
past is I can trust him to tell the truth or even a half truth. Bill did you
ever get a draft notice????


Ken
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7554 alt.activism.d:3908 alt.politics.elections:17140
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
From: jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu (j. tinkle )
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:54:30 PDT
Distribution: usa
Organization: California State University, Bakersfield

In article <1992Oct5.075320.16290@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>In article <1992Oct3.030602.952@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (
Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>I have one solution, and I'll get nuclear flamed for it, but what is
>>wrong with abstinence as a means to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

>	So one must never have sex unless one wants to produce
>children?

>	Baloney.
No, just what it says.  One method of avoiding unwanted pregnancies is to
abstain.  It's the ONLY 100% effective method.
Jennifer
******************************************************************************
Yet another college age Republican, Disney and Tiny Toons fan, Rush Limbaugh
fan, Aussiephile, Bible-believing, PS-2 owning, Computer Science major!
Whew!  I think I got 'em all.  So sue me for having wholesome family values.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know you've been on the Usenet a long time when they've cancelled one
of your newsgroups!
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bush's attack on Clinton's Arkansas have some
From: jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu (j. tinkle )
Date: 9 Oct 92 23:12:15 PDT
Organization: California State University, Bakersfield

>In article <clinton-arkansasUR4d2_2SQ@clarinet.com>, clarinews@clarinet.com
>(STEPHEN BUEL) writes:
>>  _U_P_I _N_e_w_s_F_e_a_t_u_r_e
>>  
>> 	LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (UPI) - President Bush turned up the heat on his
>> Democratic opponent last week, aiming at Bill Clinton's record as
>> governor in a series of harshly critical speeches delivered in a six-
>> state encirclement of Arkansas.
[Clinton support / excuses deleted]
>> 	``The more the day went on, the more his hyperbole grew,'' said
>> Betsey Wright, deputy chair of the Clinton campaign, who compiled last
>> week a lengthy rebuttal of several of the Bush assertions.
>> 	``When he went on about glowing fish, I nearly fell out. I remember
...
>> 	``I think it's unprecedented,'' Wright said. ``I've never heard of a
>> president campaign against a state before.''

Hedge, hedge.
Phbbbbbbbtt-ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!
Well, if she had ANY credibility, she just LOST it there!!
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
"The more the day went on"?  Isn't that a tad redundant??
"hyperbole"?  What does she think she's talking about?? Calculus?
"I nearly fell out."  Of what?????  Ha ha ha.  Just that much conjures up 
funny images!
Jennifer
******************************************************************************
Yet another college age Republican, Disney and Tiny Toons fan, Rush Limbaugh
fan, Aussiephile, Bible-believing, PS-2 owning, Computer Science major!
Whew!  I think I got 'em all.  So sue me for having wholesome family values.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know you've been on the Usenet a long time when they've cancelled one
of your newsgroups!
******************************************************************************
From: andy@wpi.WPI.EDU (Andrew T Hodgkins)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Quayle won the debate.
Date: 17 Oct 92 03:23:04 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu

In article <DZ6qsB1w164w@cellar.org> kml@cellar.org (Scott Tiger) writes:

>> Any unbiased observer would conclude that Quayle won the debate last night.
>> Most people have trouble believing Clinton (indeed, it's the cover story 
>> of this week's Time Magazine) and Dan kept hammering the issue.  "Do you real
>> trust Clinton to be President?"  I think most would answer "no".  And he and
>> the Admiral had Gore running away from his book on the environment (supposedl
>> his strong point), making him look like an extremist.  yeah, he exaggerated
>> with the facts, but so did Gore.  Gore looked so stiff.  How many times did
>> you hear "Bill Clinton and I think ...." at the beginning of a sentence?
>> 
>> This is NOT to say that Quayle is a good VP or that Bush is a good president.
>> But reading the papers today, you have to believe that either 1) they watched
>> a different debate, or 2) they are biased.  I mean, it wasn't even close.
>
>
>Unbiased observers obviously exclude the writer of this blather.  Quayle
>was a petulant whining pipsqueak who got his ass kicked on the facts.
>I thought it was the most disgraceful display by an elected official
>that I have ever witnessed.  Gore refused to sink to Quayle's level.
>That, my friend, makes him a winner.
>

Obviously the above poster is not free from bias on this issue either.

From what I saw, Gore was in no position to sink to Quayle's level, since
he was already well below it.  Gore came across as a completely partisan,
smooth talking professional politician, which is also the same impression
I get from Clinton.  The Democrats keep calling their ticket the choice for
change, but all I see is more of the same.

I see a lot more sincerity from the Bush and Perot camps, and a lot more
strength of character.  Shouldn't character be as big a factor as where a
candidate stands on the issues?  IMHO, it is...I sure wouldn't want someone
with all the right positions on the issues in office if he had no principles.

	--Andy
From: jxxl@huxley.cs.nps.navy.mil (John Locke)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: "Proof" of liberal media bias
Keywords: Rush Liberal Media Anita Hill Clarence Thomas
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:56:00 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:

> I really wish I had the ability to note a fact and instantly deduce the
> evidence without a shred of proof. Could it be that the attacks on Anita
> Hill faded while her testimony did not? Could it be all the politicians
> who were on the committee running for cover? Perhaps there has been a shift
> in bias from for conservatives to against conservatives due to shifts in
> the economy?

Question for the conservorrhoids: Why has Clarence Thomas hidden from the
public since his confirmation? Could it be that he finds it painful to
keep telling the same lie? Could it be for the same reason he could not
bring himself to call Hill a liar, even though he was prompted in that
direction by the Senators many times?

John