HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: George Will on the GOP
Date: 1 Sep 92 18:10:26 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

In article mvp@netcom.com, mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.180737.15129@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com writes:
>>I've found recently that his show has become a three hour campaign commercial
>>for Bush.  Equal time, anyone?
>Well, as The Politically Incorrect One often states, he doesn't have to
>give equal time, because he *is* equal time.  Since Perot dropped out,
>the news media has done nothing but roll over on their backs and wave
>their legs in the air whenever reporting anything about Clinton or
>Gore.  But they slam Bush and Quayle every chance they get.  Especially
>Quayle.  Anyone catch the Emmy Awards?

The equal time was tongue-in-cheek.  Limbaugh has stated that he doesn't
have to provide it because he doesn't have a financial interest in it.
The same reason he can't have Dornan as a guest host, too.  As I recall,
Clinton took more bashing from the media than has ever been unleashed on
a public figure regarding, inhalation, Gennifer, draft-dodging, taxes,
etc., etc.  What about that?
>
>>I just find it a bit distasteful and distressing that his show has become
>>one big campaign commercial.
>I don't think his show has become "one big campaign commercial".  If it
>had, I'd probably quit listening too, because I despise Bush.  I despise
>Clinton more, though, and Gore is downright scary.

I have to disagree with this assessment.  The difference is that he doesn't
have to answer to anyone except the FCC.  He can say whatever he chooses
and his lackeys will believe it, most others will not.  He seems to be
neglecting issues not related to the election, such as, bashing foreign
governments and foreign activist groups.  Two years ago his show had a
greater amount of diversity.  He went after anything that he viewed as
anti-republican.  Now, he's spending so much time either pitching his
book/show/newsletter OR campaigning for bush/bashing clinton.


---
===============================================================================
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,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: Phil_Warburton@grace.UUCP (Phil Warburton)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: The old Republicans..
Distribution: world
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:05:57 EST
Organization: Graceful Boot BBS (send replies to moscom.com!grace!User_Name)

What happened to the old, dynamic Republican Party? It has become a bunch
of religious fanatics and stubborn old men!


Just four years, we have a recession...
...Four more years, we have a depression!


-- Via DLG Pro v0.992

Phil / BIM

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: rfa@Turing.ORG (Robert F. Alexander)
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 05:32:06 GMT

 {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 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Keywords: 'Y'
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 07:17:34 GMT

In article <1862@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:

> Reality ? Why are the people having to force congress to accept term limits ?

	Maybe because not everybody thinks that term limits are a good idea?
I know that I don't, and I wouldn't mind seeing them repealed for the president
as well. I figure that if people want to vote for a clown 10 times, they get
what the voted for.

>Why do we have term limits for the president but not the congress or senate ?

	I don't know. I suspect that it's because term limits are really a 
political ploy, and congress enacted them to eject a popular president. I
didn't hear Reagan calling for term limits when he had a republican senate.

>Why are congress members granted free mailing rights?

	So that they can communicate with their constituants. 

Why has one party controlled congrees for over 30 years ?

	Because they're popular.

> The current grand total for turnover rate for the US House of Representatives
>is 20 percent. 86 members wont be back. Most have retired because they are
>disgusted with the political corruption. We havent even finished all the pri-
>maries yet.

	This is true, but I suspect that the old bums will be replaced with
surprisingly similar new bums. It's very trendy to get a new congress 
critter this year, but no one has (yet) called for the abolition of congress,
and until that happens, things won't be much different. Congress is behaving
much the same as it has always behaved, and a few new members won't change
that much.


-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
The feminist agenda is a socialist, anti-family political movement that 
encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice 
witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians. - Pat Robertson 1992
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5002 alt.rush-limbaugh:4187
From: toma@romulus.cray.com (Thomas Arneberg)
Subject: Rush's TV Show starts Sept. 14
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:19:36 CDT

Just heard this on my headphones -- Rush announced that his new TV show
will start Monday, September 14. Unfortunately, he could not give any times
or networks, since it is not produced by a network. But there are currently
190 stations signed up, covering 97% of the USA. There's only one major
city where it won't be aired: Washington, DC. (They wanted to broadcast it
at 5:30 a.m.; EIB said "thanks, but no thanks.").

It'll be interesting to see how successful it is. My gut feeling is that
his type of humor won't transfer easily to television, but then Larry King
and Sally Jesse Rafael made the transition successfully, so who knows...

---------------------------------------------+------------------------------
;-) I'd rather be ____  Thomas R. Arneberg   | Inet: toma@cray.com
:-) singing in a |____| Senior IC Design Eng.| UUCP: ...!uunet!cray!toma
:-) Barbershop  _|   _| Cray Research, Inc.  | CLAIM TO FAME: Loni Anderson 
:-) Quartet!   (_)  (_) Chippewa Falls, Wisc.|   went to my high school 
---------------------------------------------+------------------------------
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh Newsletter Information
Date: 29 Aug 92 00:20:15 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

In article 12545@walter.cray.com, toma@romulus.cray.com (Thomas Arneberg) writes:
>I like listening to Rush, but I am uncertain whether his appeal can be
>translated to the printed word. Also, there are other print resources
>already out there (_American Spectator_, _Conservative Chronicle_, etc.). 
>I wonder how Rush's newsletter will compare to them?

I would also be interested in a review of this letter.  I believe that
part of his appeal is his obnoxious sounding voice, his arrogance and
conceit and his extreme self-confidence.  I don't see how he could convey
this in a newsletter.

I am not one of his fans but I listen for better than 10 hours per week
and I do think that his fans are more impressed by his charisma (JFK,
Mario Cuomo, and Hitler all had or have charisma) than by what he has
to say.

He's obviously making a ton of money with his radio show gimmick.  I guess
he didn't learn the lesson of the '80s about corporate diversification in
the quest for more money.  Oil companies buying into high-tech is probably
the best example of throwing good money after bad.

Why bother with a TV show, book, and newsletter when he can make a very
comfortable living and perhaps setting himself up financially for life if
he concentrates solely on the radio show and on personal appearances?

---
===============================================================================
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
From: nyh@wpi.WPI.EDU (Nevo Y Hed)
Subject: Re: Buchanan's speech
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:07:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.150522.4244@athena.cs.uga.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>
>You are right, women in battle should not be rediculed.  If it is necessary
>that they fight, then they should be honored.  But we have the privelage of
>allowing them not to fight because there are plenty of men to shoot. 
>Women flying figthers is a good idea though and should be granted.
>

	"Because there are plenty of men to shoot"???  Is that bigotry
or what?   Why are men more dispensible then women?  Is thae price tag
on their(women) forheads differers then ours(men)???


	Especially in the U.S. army/navy, where the service is
voluntary, your argument is absolutly ridiculus.


	Yesterday I have watched parts of the hearings of the
presedential comittee on women in the service [on CSPAN2].  I have
watched a highly intelegent testimony from one Dr. Sonya Friedman
[host of CNN's Sonya Live] - I urge anyone who can watch it to do so -
apart from her definition of 'Family Values(tm)' she presented very
good arguments as tyo why should women in the service be reated
equally.


		-Nevo

-- 
Nevo Y. Hed ............. nyh@wpi.wpi.edu .....................................
++1-508-754-2491 ........ CS student, Worcester Polytechnic Institute .........
"I like my cigar too, but I take it out of my mouth from time to time" G.Marx .
From: chrisda@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (David Christensen)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Info on Dan Quayle's camera coverage during Buchanan's speech
Date: 27 Aug 92 00:51:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University

In article <1992Aug26.203214.27790@athena.cs.uga.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>
>The dealer is a known liar.  The whole Doonesberry cartoon  deal was
>pathetic.  There was no substantiation for such charges.  Let the other
>witnesses come out and speak for themselves.  It hard to take a convicts
>word for such a thing.  
>

Catch any of the Noriega trial?
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Leadership & GHWB
Date: 25 Aug 92 20:47:41 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug25.125828.18911@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:

>Telling the truth that the economy was getting worse is no vice...

 I agree. But when they made is sound worse than it actually was, didnt they
consider the possibility that they could be slowing the economy down even more 
than it was slowing. Right after the UM consumer confidence survey was re-
leased they stopped the scare. At least they arent totally suicidal. Must have
wanted at least a few tax revenues.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: George Will on the GOP
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:56:06 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Sep2.100722.13289@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>Doesn't mater.  The economy has sucked under Bush, so the public will 
>not give Bush a second chance.  Running a campaign where the major selling
>point is that he will not do in his second term what he promised not to 
>do in his first term but did anyway is no way to get re-elected.

 You are forgetting that the bad economy, congressional log jam are all
currently being used to clean the house. You didnt think we could clean 
the house with a good house track record did you ? Even if Bush loses the
political gain from the voters revolt in the US House will be worth it
when we crown kemp in 96. The conservatives are using the house track
record which wasnt vetoed by Bush to run conservative representatives 
against.
 If bush resigned and kemp replaced him, the anti-house sentiment would
be invalidated by Bush's admittal that he was responsable. 
 Where was George ?

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
From: tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton & Taxes: 7% f
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:45:10 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Aug24.140155.28182@dbsun.uucp> hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey) writes:
>
>I do not want doctors to be goverment employees.  Yikes!  In fact, I believe
>many doctors deserve those high salaries.  What I would like is a single
>payer form of health insurance, providing a minimum level of medical care
>for everyone.  Individuals and companies would then purchase higher levels of
>of care.  The reason I have is that health insurance can tie you to a company.
>I had a co-worker who had a very bad back.  This company was having problems
>and people were getting laid off, the kind where you want to get out as soon
>as possible.  However, even though she had opportunities to move, she couldn't
>because the new insurance would not pay for her pre-existing condition for
>at least a year.
>
>To go along with this, we need a system like the one proposed in Oregon,
>where we only pay for procedures that are cost effective in terms of money
>spent vs. health added.  We pay for as many as we can.  It's too bad Bush
>wouldn't even give it a chance.  Talk about statism.
>
Jim, as I understand the Oregon plan, you are right.  This would have been a
gold mine for Bush.  Just imagine, each state taking care of its own
citizens.  The only problem is that Oregon wanted the Feds to fork over the
Federal Medical funds gauranteed to them.  I can understand Bush's
apprehension, but at least they could have taken the intitiative:

	Oregon's plan is a giant step in the right direction.

	Figure out a way to transfer the fed tax money to the states without
the feds eternally subsidizing national health care.  There could be an
exchange in tax code such as 10% lower federally so the states could raise
taxes to pay for their minimum coverage, but I don't think that would be
politically feasible.

	Bush's worry is that even if the feds write into law that only a
certain % of each state's minimum coverage will be provided by the feds
(25%?), congress is likely to raise the % and slowly regulate the states.


I need to do more reasearch on all of this.  Maybe there is someone out
there who can enlighten us?
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Date: 31 Aug 92 22:19:43 GMT
Distribution: usa, na
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

[A whole bunch pro-christian quotes deleted]

All of these quotes seem to come from mid 1600's to mid 1700's.
During that time they believed in bleeding, the four humours,
tomatoes were thought to be poisonous, flies spontaneously
generated from dead meat, transmutation of metals, and 
that black people were inferior to white people.

They also beleived in ghosts, ghouls, goblins, God, and Jesus.

Well,  we haven't gotten rid of all of the old fashioned
baggage yet,   but we are working on it. Maybe by 2200 Jesus 
and Jehovah will finally be properly relegated to the same 
scrap heaps as Set, Quezicoatl, and Odin.

It's time to bring mankind out of the superstitious
reliance on witch doctors and priests.

Booga booga - amen.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: linda@tellabs.com (Linda Jensen)
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:04:20 GMT




 [discussion of Quayle and Clinton draft hijinks omitted]

> I am not going to argue the merits of either of these people's "war
> record", but I would like to discuss this double standard the Democrats
> have on these two.  It was OK for Clinton to do anything legal to 
> avoid being drafted, yet Quayle is not afforded that right?

> Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
> jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 


	Clinton is on record as opposing the Vietnam war.  True, 
	it was probably 10% 'I oppose the Vietnam Policy' and 90%
	'I don't want to die'.

	Whereas Quayle was always been a pro-military hawk.  Have
	you ever heard the phase "Having the courage of your 
	convictions" ??

	Guess it's o.k. to 'fight the good fight' as long as others
	do the dirty work.  And please don't try to equate the
	Indiana National Guard with the jungles of Vietnam.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:47:06 GMT
Distribution: world, usa, na
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Sep2.155250.22145@csc.ti.com> dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page) writes:
>In article <1992Sep2.010532.23161@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:

>True science is not a religion, however, there are many things called
>"science" today which have little to do with the scientific method.  I
>remember a NOVA that was first broadcast a couple of years ago that provided
>~30 minutes each to "creation scientists and evolutionists". 


Interestingly, my friend Ed Larson was the major scholar who moderated that
NOVA episode.  He teaches Law and History of science here at the University
of Georgia.  I still can't manage to win a game of tennis against him.

======================================================
 Teddy Kalivoda  ------------> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu 
   University of GA Computing & Network Services       
     Inst.of Higher Education               
=====================================================                                                                          
	"The sleep of reason gives rise to monsters"
				        (Goya, Caprichos)
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Hillary Clinton (was: Re: Buchanan's speech)
Date: 27 Aug 92 00:31:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug26.133127.11870@athena.cs.uga.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>In article <j==na6a.mvp@netcom.com> mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>>I used to like Mz Shafly, but her attacks on Dr. Koop have caused me
>>to lose all respect for her.
>I think she is fairly dweeby, but be reminded that Michael Fumento (The Myth
>of Heterosexual AIDS) criticized Dr. Koop as well, and this time I think
>Fumento was right.

Criticism is one thing.  Maybe some of it is even deserved.  Condoms
are certainly no kind of panacea for prevention of STDs, including
AIDS.  (In all fairness, Koop's statements on this have been distorted
beyond recognition by the media.) The kind of personal attacks that Mz.
Shafly made against Dr. Koop are another thing entirely.

-- 
Mike Van Pelt          | What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
mvp@netcom.com         | Judging from realistic simulations involving a
                       | sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
                       | can assume it will be pretty bad. -- Dave Barry
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas)
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Organization: SPS
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:41:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.170420.9007@tellab5.tellabs.com>, linda@tellabs.com (Linda Jensen) writes:
|>  [discussion of Quayle and Clinton draft hijinks omitted]
|> > I am not going to argue the merits of either of these people's "war
|> > record", but I would like to discuss this double standard the Democrats
|> > have on these two.  It was OK for Clinton to do anything legal to 
|> > avoid being drafted, yet Quayle is not afforded that right?
|> 
|> > Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
|> > jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
|> 
|> 
|> 	Clinton is on record as opposing the Vietnam war.  True, 
|> 	it was probably 10% 'I oppose the Vietnam Policy' and 90%
|> 	'I don't want to die'.
|> 
|> 	Whereas Quayle was always been a pro-military hawk.  Have
|> 	you ever heard the phase "Having the courage of your 
|> 	convictions" ??
|> 
|> 	Guess it's o.k. to 'fight the good fight' as long as others
|> 	do the dirty work.  And please don't try to equate the
|> 	Indiana National Guard with the jungles of Vietnam.
|> 
|> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

This is the standard liberal justification for their double standard regarding Quayle
and Clinton service records.

It's never made sense to me.  To be in favor of an action does *NOT* mean that you have 
to do it.  For example,  I want all murderers put in prison but I don't want to be a policeman.

-- 
Eric Titmas      Motorola ASIC       titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com               

It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowell
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh