HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: November 3, the day Rush dies!
Date: 10 Nov 92 03:37:34 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

In article 9143@EE.Stanford.EDU, budd@playfair.Stanford.EDU (David Budd) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.154053.19366@dg-rtp.dg.com> crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.020243.8240@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>>>
>>>>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>>>>                           | Support the coup!
>>>
>>>	John Switzer, you are not a very good loser.
>>
>>Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser.
>
>Actually, I believe that the quote was "Show me a good loser,
>and I'll show you someone who is good at losing."
>I think it was said by Casey Stengel.

I think Bush was a good loser this time.  He looked very relieved.
Quayl was almost as good but not quite.  He did not look relieved.



---
===============================================================================
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
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
From: anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:16:04 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1d97u0INN3vi@spool.mu.edu> marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.190809.2889@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes:
>>In article <1d8sc3INNs7r@spool.mu.edu> marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>>>Hmph.  How short memories are.  Do you remember the Reagan Landslide
>>>vs. Mondale?  Fritz got few elect. collage votes but was within a few %age of
>>I believe that Reagan won by over a 15% margin and collected almost
>>60% of the popular vote. IMHO that qualifies as a landslide.
>
>It would qualify as a landslide if your memory was correct.  But the
>percentage was less than 5%.  But do carry on, as it helps prove how
>short memories are.

You've done a very good jobs of proving how short *your* memory is.

Reagan got 59% of the popular vote, meaning that Mondale
could have gotten AT MOST 41% of the popular vote, giving Reagan at least an
18% margin of victory.  My source in this case is the American Heritage
Dictionary:

             The Democrats nominated former Vice-President Walter F. 
             MONDALE, who made history by selecting N.Y.  Rep.  Geraldine
             FERRARO as his running mate.  Yet the campaign of 1984
             developed no clear issues.  Mondale charged that REAGAN would  
             cut social security benefits and raise taxes after reelection
             and criticized the huge federal deficits.  REAGAN, who said
             little of his program for a second term (except that he would
             not raise taxes), spoke of America "standing tall" again.  The
             president's radiant optimism, plus the continued economic
             recovery, produced a stunning victory in November.  REAGAN
             gained 59% of the vote and won the electoral votes of every
             state except the challenger's home state of Minnesota (and the 
             District of Columbia), for a total of 525 electoral votes, the
             greatest number ever tallied by a presidential candidate in   
             U.S.  history. 




>
>
>-- 
>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.

cheers,
anwar

-- 
Anwar Mohammed <anwar+@cs.cmu.edu> Vox:(412) 268-3043 Fax:(412) 421-8661
ASAP PhD SCS CMU. "You'll note that politicians no longer spend money,
they invest it.  Don't worry about paying more to the [IRS].  You aren't
being taxed; you're taking a plunge on a fly-by-night stock issue." - P.J.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:22:03 GMT

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

  >Your .sig points out what kind of a narrow-minded person you are.
  >And your summaries point out not only your single-minded devotion to
  >whatever Rush limbaugh says, but the fact you have no life.  Why?
  >What kind of life must you have that the best thing you can think 
  >to do with your time is type up 'summaries' of the Rush Limbaugh
  >show.
  >-- 
  >Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that

Does this mean that we shouldn't count on your signature for the Clinton 
recall petition?

 ===========================================================================|
 |                                      | 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: mbur@nyx.cs.du.edu (MAC)
Subject: Re: Rush's Email Address
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.test,talk.bizarre,misc.jobs.offered
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 05:53:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.033245.16742@tamsun.tamu.edu> n352cb@tamuts.tamu.edu (James Johnson) writes:
>
>
>Could anyone please send me Rush's Email address at CompuServe?!?!?
>
>Thanks,
>Wayne
>
>Please mail it to: n352cb@tamuts.tamu.edu
>


Uh...lets see, that would be wanker@shithead.dick.nose.org.


Hope this helps

Ta-ta for now,
M
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:12:18 GMT
Subject: Re: fat lady
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman]) writes:

> Steve,
> 
> You have to remember the level of intelligence we are dealing with.

You have done an adequate job of reminding us, however.

doug
From: jfr@RedBrick.COM
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: The Election '92
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:53:03 GMT
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA

In article <1992Nov4.233530.19283@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com writes:
>In article 1d7q8sINNb7f@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu, andersmc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU () writes:
>>To the American People,
>>Does Bill have a mandate?  NO!!!!  He did not take a majority of the American
>>people. 

  I hate to point out that neither did George Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy
  Carter, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy, Ike Eisenhower,
  Harry S Truman, Franklin... Oops, I actually think FDR DID get a true
  mandate in ONE of his elections.

  NONE OF THE REST DID, at least by the above definition.  Only a bare
  majority of American people are even registered to vote (only counting
  qualified people, not kids, convicts, etc).  And of this number, only
  about 75% actually voted.  So, it is almost impossible for any candidate
  to get a "majority of the people" mandate (this would mean a 100%
  turnout all to vote for one candidate - hey, they used to do that in
  Russia, didn't they? :-)  Anyway, who cares!  All this mandate crap
  is just that.  Ronald Reagan didn't have a mandate either, not even
  a majority popular vote, as I assume you would really consider a 
  mandate, not in 1980 anyway.  John Anderson and other 3rd party
  candidates took enough votes to deny him a 50% majority (he got
  49.7%, I think I recall).  Republicans are SUCH sore losers, it
  always amazes me.  I don't remember any such teeth gnashing and
  handwringing when Bush blasted Dukakis.  Hell, even Dan Quayle
  had the decency to be graceful in defeat.  Too bad his followers
  don't learn something from him.  
  
>>I hope to GOD that I'm wrong when I say that this countryturned the wrong
>>corner.  Anyway... Gotta think positively!  Any one for Canada?

  Interesting.  The right-wing has no problem bashing a liberal for
  his supposed "anti-loyalty" position, but if they don't like the
  outcome, they're ready to take off in a second.  Sigh...  What
  ever happened to dignity in defeat.
>
>You needn't worry.  You are wrong.
>
>America has finally shown some intelligence after 12 years of stupidity.
>Hopefully now, America will be strong.

  Thanks Mitch, I couldn't have said it better.  

  "I still believe in a place called hope."
   (Brought a tear to my eye, a tear of joy, that is :-)

  Jon Rosen
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: enor@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: College Republicans
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:21:53 GMT

Does anyone know how to get in touch with the College Republicans?

I am semi-interested in starting a chapter here at UMass Lowell.

Any information would be greatly aappreciated

*******************
The Elephant Truth Justice and the Republican way.

Robert R. Eno A Conserative voice in Liberal Massachusetts.

Send replies to Enor@woods.ulowell.edu
                

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: Norman.Miller@launchpad.unc.edu (Norman Miller)
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:51:24 GMT


Great subject.  It sums up perfectly the bizarre mentality of the Fat
Party that George Bush's (George Bush, for God's sake!) admirers 
see nothing wrong in calling the Democrats whiners.

No complaint, mind you, quite the contrary.  I look forward to four
years of resentful, dyspeptic, and of course empty prose from the
Bush leaguers.  Carry on.

Norman Miller
nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7942 misc.test:12706 talk.bizarre:36880 misc.jobs.offered:13225
From: mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman])
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.test,talk.bizarre,misc.jobs.offered
Subject: Re: Rush's Email Address
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:31:23 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Nov5.055310.9279@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mbur@nyx.cs.du.edu (MAC) writes:

>In article <1992Nov5.033245.16742@tamsun.tamu.edu> n352cb@tamuts.tamu.edu (James Johnson) writes:
>>
>>
>>Could anyone please send me Rush's Email address at CompuServe?!?!?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Wayne
>>
>>Please mail it to: n352cb@tamuts.tamu.edu
>>


>Uh...lets see, that would be wanker@shithead.dick.nose.org.
If you want it to get a response try 70277.2502@compuserve.com

>Hope this helps

>Ta-ta for now,
>M
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal)
Subject: Re: Network projections
Organization: University of Tennessee Division of Continuing Education
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:49:17 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.225542.20358@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:

>In article <1992Nov9.125548.20468@osf.org>, Terri Buchman <buchman@osf.org> writes:
>> >
>> That's right!  Two of my brothers live in NH and the fact that they
>> face the highest property taxes in the nation makes them proud to be
>> New Hampshirites.   The Republicans would never allow a state sale
>> tax or any other broad-based tax to be used for the improvement of
>> schools in the Granite State.  After all, if the people want better
>
>Excuse me but Al Gore's home state funds their schools entirely or almost
>entirely from property tax.  

       Not entirely correct.  Much of Tennessee school money comes from the
sales tax.  In fact, there is currently a "temporary" sales tax hike of 
half a cent to add money to the schools when the most recent income tax 
proposal was defeated.  
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Veal               University of Tennessee Div. of Cont. Education
                         Information Services Group
PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (Mail to VEAL@utkvm1.utk.edu will bounce.)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Mo Clinton
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:43:58 GMT

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.

    Unfortunately this would conflict with the "Three Stooges" method of 
presidential analysis (in which all presidents are categorized based on 
which of the three stooges personalities they most resemble). For example,
Gerald Ford was a Shemp (Oo! Oo!). Carter was a Curly Joe. Nixon was a 
Larry who wanted to be a Moe.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mark Gansle)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Why is Slick still panicking on the economy?
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:32:15 GMT
Reply-To: zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mark Gansle)


Rush has analysed Slick's continuing panic on the economy as a ploy to
prep the country for massive government programs.  While I grant the
validity of this argument, I think another explanation might be closer
to the truth.

Billary wants to lower expectations so that if he choofs up, he can say
"See? I told you it was going to be hard.  Gimme another four years so I
can finish what I started."  And if Boy Clinton does in fact reign over
a recovering economy?  Well, then he can say, "You know, we came up
against insurmountable odds and triumphed.  Re-elect me so we can do it
again."  

I think the man is just covering all his bases.

+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|Cloud-gathering Zeus     |Think globally.          |
|                         |Act locally.             |
|zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  |Eat my shorts totally.   |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+
From: c_caddy@oz.plymouth.edu (Cc)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: November 3, the day Rush dies!
Date: 5 Nov 92 03:53:19 GMT
Reply-To: c_caddy@oz.plymouth.edu (Cc)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.

>>	If you don't like it here, you can always move to some other
>>country.
>
>Oh, believe me, there will be a lot of people moving to Canada in the
>next four years....
>

I've already bought my ticket to Russia. It'll be a lot better there
than it will be here.

--
	"Cc"
	Dittohead #10,184,225
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: aaiken@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Andrew C. Aiken)
Subject: Re: Those Wacky Conservatives! (Analysis)
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:09:45 GMT

In <crb2.721586008@Ra.MsState.Edu> crb2@Ra.MsState.Edu (Chad R. Berthelson) writes:

>[is so, is not, is so....deleted]

>>|>Oh, and by the way, if any of you out there can explain something to
>>|>me, I'll be happy.  Rush has said many times (most recently in a USA
>>|>Today interview) that the popularity of his show increases by 430+ 
>>|>listeners a second.  How is that possible?  That's 13.5 billion people
>>|>per year.  Even if Rush picked up every single person in the United
>>|>States, it would only amount to 8 people per second.  I sure hope
>>|>that Rush isn't lying in order to make people think that he is more
>>|>popular than he actually is...

>I would bet he is using 'air-time' (3 hours/day) and you are using
>global time (24 hours/day) and then he is only looking at the last
>poll.  Here is what I think he is using:


[...]

>maybe I am wrong, why not write him and ask.



	Both of you are missing the point.  When he says that his show
gains 430 listeners per second, he is concocting a figure to ridicule the
gullibility of the major media in accepting statistics promulgated by
political advocacy groups.  Mitch Snyder, late activist, once remarked
in testimony before a Congressional committee that 43 homeless people
die every minute (or something to this effect).  Of course, if this is
true, then tens of millions of homeless people die every year.  Yet even the
exaggerated figures of the advocacy groups contend that there are only
three million homeless.  The remarkable thing is not that Mr. Snyder would
fabricate statistics to aid his cause (what the Left calls "lying for 
justice") but that the media did not question him.
	When Rush mentions these figures, he is only ridiculing the media,
and the gullibility of those who take a special interest group's press
release as journalism.

	Must we forbid our commentators from being ironic?
 

Andrew Aiken 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: jfr@RedBrick.COM ()
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 08:47:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.191041.971@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com writes:
>In article 40551@sdcc12.ucsd.edu, pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs) writes:
>>Do you think Bush will write his memoirs from prison ?
>
>I think as a gesture of class, President Clinton should pardon Bush.

  I have predicted around here that Bush will be indicted.  If that
  happens, I expect we just might see a Presidential pardon (there
  is clear precedent for that act :-)  Personally, I hope that sooner
  or later someone goes to jail for the stunts/crimes that both
  Reagan and Bush permitted (and possibly ordered).  Interestingly,
  almost nothing Nixon did during Watergate (at least insofar as 
  has been proven) would be remotely close the level of crime that
  Bush and Reagan might be charged with.  Nixon's biggest indiscretion
  was obstruction of justice in the investigation of the Watergate
  burglars and in considering payment of hush money.  I expect that
  it is going to come out that both Reagan and Bush are culpable in
  delaying the release of American hostages from Iran in 1980.  This
  is such an incredible criminal act that it defies description.
  It makes Nixon's stuff look like small potatoes (hmmm, is that right? :-)

  And the BCCI scandal in Atlanta is starting to bubble over, thanks to
  60 Minutes.  With an incoming administration that they don't have to
  fear, the Justice Dept. career boys may be more inclined to sing in
  front of a grand jury.

  Maybe Bush will pardon Reagan before he leaves office.

  Say, Mr. President, can you say "I hereby grant myself a full and
  unconditional pardon"?  (Do you think...  hmmmm... stranger things
  have probably happened :-)

  Jon Rosen
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre,misc.test,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.job.gooley
From: jinxiong@cs.ucf.edu (Chen Jinxiong)
Subject: Re: WANKERS
Organization: University of Central Florida, Orlando
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:15:46 GMT

What is a wanker?

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao)
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:30:16 GMT

In article <6771@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU writes:
>->====	===========	=============	====	===	========
>->Year	Candidate	Popular Votes	%	E.V.	Turnout
>->====	===========	=============	====	===	========
>->1992	Clinton		39,788,218	43 		55%
>->	Bush		35,151,640	38 
>->	Perot		17,332,813	19 
>-
>-exactly what was the electoral vote total, anyway?  i'm curious...
>
>BC	370
>GB	168
>HRP	  0
>
>At least until we see how the electors really vote in December...
>can Ross pay off 270 electors to become the 42d President? Hmm...
 
       Ross has about 4 billion, right ?  He can afford $10 mil each while 
still leave himself enough for a good life.  $10 million should be good
enough to change one's mind, I guess. 
  
       
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8166 misc.test:12854 talk.bizarre:37267 misc.jobs.offered:13309
From: jstaffe@uswnvg.com (Jarrod Staffen)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.test,talk.bizarre,misc.jobs.offered
Subject: Re: Rush's Email Address
Date: 8 Nov 92 06:27:29 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: some terminal I found in Bill Gates' office while dusting.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

[Matt Kaufman] (mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu) wrote:
: >>Could anyone please send me Rush's Email address at CompuServe?!?!?
: >>Please mail it to: n352cb@tamuts.tamu.edu
: 
: >Uh...lets see, that would be wanker@shithead.dick.nose.org.
: If you want it to get a response try 70277.2502@compuserve.com
:
I tried but it just came back as undeliverable (for both addresses). 
 
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jarrod Staffen                                     Spontaneity has
    US WEST Cellular                 blah              its time and place.
    Bellevue, Washington                               Subvert the
    jstaffe@uswnvg.com                                 dominant paradigm.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*     The opinions expressed here are not claimed or supported by anyone.     *

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:49:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.002649.12610@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.162812.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
: In article <1992Nov10.190227.25938@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
: > 
: > 	Look, buster, this is America, and Clinton's our new president.
: > 
: > 	If you don't like it here, then you can always move to some
: > other country. It's that simple.
: > 
: > 	That's right. America: love it or leave it.
: > 
: > 	[Note: all this is a satire of right-wing "patriotic" rhetoric.]
: 
: Uh, no, YOU listen here. First of all, Clinton IS NOT the president yet, so why
: don't you cool off on this 'respect' bullshit that you preach. I seriously doubt
: that you showed ANY respect for President Bush. Secondly, John has the right to
: voice whatever opinions he wants because, as you have so ingeniously pointed
: out, this is America. Remember? Liberals and free speech? It's funny how when a
: Republican is president, contempt and disrespect is fashionable. But now that
: the Dems are "up to bat" they want a little respect. Well, practice what you
: preach bud.
>
>Heh, heh.  How 'bout you folks following Bush and, dare I say,
>Quayle's example of a conciliatory, gracious tone?

	I was only trying to have some fun at the expense of all the
net.right-wingers.

	I feel that I have succeeded in demonstrating that they have
no sense of humor when someone eats _their_ sacred cows.