HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why alt.fan.rush-limbaugh????
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:58:35 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Distribution: usa
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
'jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
'>sjthomas@cup.portal.com (Stephen J Thomas) writes:
'>>I have been lurking in this group since I found it about a week ago.  Since
'>>I was not here at its creation, I wonder if somebody could tell me what is
'>>the purpose of alt.fan.rush-limbaugh??  Is it to discuss Rush and his shows,
'
'The limbots felt it would be a place where FAN topics could be discussed.
'Much crossposting occurs, so the group is a reflection of a.r-l.

I sure wasn't here during its creation; I don't even know which came
first.

'>>of postings seem to be from people who hate Rush -- and are certainly not
'>>his fans.  It appears that only about 5% of postings are appropriate based
'>>on the name of this group.
'>Well, your figures are a bit skewed - it's 95% of the postings that come from
'>people who hate Rush, leading me to perpetually wonder why some people seem
'
'Could it be the posters feel:
'1) Rush's show is unfair
'2) They cannot express thier viewpoints on his show.

I can't get through to the show, and I generally am pretty sympathetic
with his points.

'3) They thusly move to a forum where they can be heard
'and end up here.   Or is such a concept beyond your grasp, you 
''just don't get it'.

Hey, gives me something to kill time with rather than do homework.

=>incapable of being happy unless they're ragging on somebody. Must be some 
=
=Now, what is the difference between people in this forum 'ragging' on
=viewpoints of Rush and Rush 'ragging' on the viewpoints of others?
=
=>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
=>                           | Support the coup!
=
=Look!  This man HATES Clinton!  See!  Look!  Wants to lynch Clinton 
=before he can even do anything!  Hate-monger!

Well, then let's do it right:
"I am Liberal from Clinton/Gore. The world as you once knew it no longer
exists. Resistance is futile. Conservatism is irrelevant. You will become
assimilated or you will be destroyed. You will all become one with
Clinton/Gore. From this day forward, you will service US."

More humor-mongering? :-)
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
	THANK GOD IT'S BASKETBALL SEASON!!!!!
I don't have to have a 4.0 GPA to succeed in life because I'm 
good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: mbur@nyx.cs.du.edu (MAC)
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,misc.test,alt.newbie,alt.politics.bush
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.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 92 01:43:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.095650.11154@news.DKRZ-Hamburg.DE> k206027@smog.DKRZ-Hamburg.DE (Bakayaroo Banzai) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.094559.9702@news.DKRZ-Hamburg.DE> k206027@smog.DKRZ-Hamburg.DE (Bakayaroo Banzai) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov10.215124.7030@samba.oit.unc.edu> Norman.Miller@launchpad.unc.edu (Norman Miller) writes:
>>>
>>>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.
>>>
>>As opposed to the last 12 years of resentful, dyspeptic, and equally
>>empty prose from resentful Democrats. Sauce for the goose. What short
>>memories the victors have. Almost as short as the winners.
>                                                   ^^^^^^^
>Of course I *meant* to say _losers_ here...


Yes, of course you did, you nitwit.

Sheesh.  Some people.


>
>>Carry on...
>>
>>Matt Marchese
>>
>Carry on...again
>
>Matt Marchese
>
>

TTFN,
M
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: birmingh@fnalo.fnal.gov (Phillip J. Birmingham)
Subject: Re: Pray for America
Organization: Blackriver Recorporations, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 08:17:20 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalo.fnal.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <dlhanson.25.720904577@nap.amoco.com>, dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson ) writes:
> The American people have been blinded by Satan and have left their
> Christian beginnings to become a pagan people led by corrupt rulers.
> 
> They have left morality for immorality,
> they have left family for self,
> they have left their children to be raised by strangers, 
> they have left their God for demons and idols, 
> they have left purity for pornography,
> they have declared themselves to be rich when in reality they 
> are naked and poor,
> they have declared sin to be good,
> they have declared righteousness to be bad,
> they have created false Christian organizations that deny God's Word
> and deny the blood of Jesus Christ, AND
> they have blasphemed the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

         And a hell of a lot of them are about to make fun of you...

-- 
 Phillip J. Birmingham   birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov  
 I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...
From: gorney@picard.med.ge.com (Felix Gorney Mfg 4-6983)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush's Future...
Date: 12 Nov 92 08:46:55 GMT
Organization: GE Medical Systems, Magnetic Resonance
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

: >"Slick Willie" promised everything to everybody. Welfare, healthcare, airfare,
: >cabfare, you name it, he promised it. 
: 
: He did?  I missed the airfare and cabfare part, unless that was only for
: congress-critters.  I bet you got that from Rush, and we ALL know if
: Rush said it MUST be true.
:
Actually, this is a paraphrase from Outland, by Berkley Breathed. I thought the
humor might be appropriate, but liberals tend to hate people like Rush, and this
hate destroys their funny bone.
 
: 
: Hey, any job that makes ya 6 digits must be tough, right?  Think how
: your salary pales in comparison and how hard YOU work each day.  Hard
: work is ahead for Rush.
:
I don't care if Rush makes as much as Ross Perot. He done more for his country.

The election was't about ideology. This may come as a suprise to people who 
take all information from the media at face value. The fact that the Dems. in thehouse lost seats to Reps. while the Dems won the Whitehouse, should be an 
indication of the publics' lack of concern for ideology. The fact is Clinton 
hid his ideology. That is how he won. All of his liberal freinds are now coming
out of the woodwork. He is planning to aappoint many of the same people in his
administration, that were in Carters. Don't worry, Slick will show his true
liberal colors. The American people will realize that they have been had, and
Slick will be a one term president.

Felix Gorney
gorney@picard.med.ge.com

"The man who reads only newspapers, is less informed than the man who reads
nothing at all."
                       Ben Franklin

To, which I add: The man who gets his news from telivision, is less informed
than the man who reads only newspapers.
From: mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman])
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:25:52 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York


Hold on a minute here.  Maybe its just me but where does someone who
probably spent election night kissing a picture of Ted Kennedy mistake the
point that Rush is making.  The point of there being a victory for
conservaitves is true.

Let's look at those surveys taken by ABC television network for starters,
and for the the idea of term limits, and finish up with a quick look at the
next four years.

For starters Rush on TV last nught brought up a very good point about how
the American people were not necessarily voting for a change in the policies
of government but for a change in the man doing the governing.  The liberal
elites have misjudged their token electoral victory by claiming that there
is a mandate for change.  Well if there is keep in mind that Americans vote
their pockets.  If taxes go up we shall see if Mr.  CLinton is also a one
term wonder.

The future of the conservative movment is in good hands. There are several
new Quarterbacks on the horizon (hint, hint) Men like JACK KEMP, BOB DOLE
and WILLIAM WELD are leaders capable of bringing the Regan Revolution to its
rightful conclusion.  Rush can only aid in their endeavors by speaking the
truth.




Remember it is not the size of the victory that has been won, but the level
of expectations its creates.  

Remember I promise to keep a kosher kitchen in the white house if elected.

Bill Clinton speaking in NYC during the April 7, primary.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7992 alt.rush-limbaugh:9104
From: vsg001@acad.drake.edu
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 08:36:47 GMT

In article <1dr3l6INNmot@spool.mu.edu>, 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.

Hmm. Pretty bold statement here. Rush has about 12 MILLION listeners; and I'm
sure some of them are fans besides John and myself. "Single minded devotion"?
How do you know? Are we dealing with Mr. PsychoAnalysisOverTheNet here? And
considering that we are all sitting in front of computers for a period of time,
trying to shake this Net addiction, I would be careful in pointing fingers at
who has no life. I'm sure that you have better things to do than sit in front
of a computer, debating with people you will never know, and whose minds you
will never change. Gee, that sounds kinda trivial doesn't it? At leastJohn
makes it exciting, as Rush will always be FAR more interesting than your
postings.

Disclaimers. Disclaimers.
---------
Do you hear the people sing?
 Singing the song of Angry men?
It is the Music of a people who will not be slaves again!
----------
		Possible Republican Creed.
		Vince Goddard
		Jack Kemp in '96

WAIT! Disclaimer time: I happen to like my LackOfLifeInFrontOfTheComputer. I am
in no way insulting the Net.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: tom@uts.cc.wayne.edu (Thomas Richard Stevenson)
Subject: Re: A step too far... NOT!!!
Organization: Wayne State Univ.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:57:33 GMT

barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:

>In article <1992Nov13.053850.1507@news.ysu.edu> ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller) writes:
>>But Limbaugh's antics over the past few days have gone beyond political
>>commentary or even satire...they have become cruel and obnoxious, and show
>>no sign of stopping.
>>
>>I refer to Limbaugh's treatment and commentary on the Clinton's 12 year old
>>daughter.
>>
>>Has he nothing better to do then insult a child who has no political clout,
>>who has done nothing controversial, whose only "offense" has been to be the
>>daughter of Limbaugh's political nemesis?  

>   Hey, he apologized for the little mix-up on last Friday's TV show, didn't
>he?  And as for the picture he showed on Tuesday night's show, is it his fault
>that Chelsea decided to make a strange face right at the moment that the 
>camera snapped?  Cut him a break!  

My comments are based solely on what I'm reading here. I did not watch
(have never watched) his show. To apologize after the fact does not fix
the harm caused. Also, you said 

"...is it his fault that Chelsea decided to make a strange face right at the 
moment that the camera snapped?". 

No, but it is his fault for showing that picture. If these things are true,
and haven't been biased just to make Rush look bad, than he should be 
ashamed of himself, and anyone that defends him (for this action) should
be ashamed of themselves.
-- 
     ____  __   __       Tom@UTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
      /   /_/  /_        Thomas_Richard_Stevenson@MTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
     /.  /\ . __/.       Tom@CMS.CC.Wayne.Edu
                         UserTom@WayneMTS.Bitnet
From: FisKer@cup.portal.com (Scott M Martin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Sending E-mail to Rush
Date: Fri,  6 Nov 92 02:09:41 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: usa


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

Since I listen to Rush during my morning commute and can't write down
his Compuserve address when he gives it, I'd appreciate it if someone
could post the address for all to see.  

Of course, if he thought he got a lot of mail through Compuserve, just
wait until he learns that the entire Usenet is waiting to fill his 
mailbox!!
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Liberals DO oppose First Amendment rights
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 21:52:54 GMT

barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes:
>Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>In my experience
>>liberals have been quite forthright in defense of the First Amendment.

[Marc's story about his signs being torn down mostly cut]

>   My experiences with my anti-ERA signs were by no means unique.  I
>was told by a friend who is involved with the local Campus Crusade
>for Christ that they have a terrible time keeping signs up.  The signs
>they post are threatening to absolutely nobody, yet they often have to
>repost the same sign several times because it will get repeatedly
>torn down.  

    This is reprehensible, but it can hardly be considered to be 
representative of what all liberals believe. What you're describing is 
the act of an immature, almost juvenile, mentality (which regretably 
is an accurate description of some liberals). Please rest assured, 
however, that I'm a liberal and I've never torn down any signs. In fact 
there was a petition circulated in this department a couple months ago 
which opposed efforts to censor all references to religion in public 
schools. I was more than happy to sign the petition.

>   All of this leads me to the solid conclusion that conservatives
>are the real guarantors of First Amendment Rights in the U.S.

    Solid conclusion, but shaky evidence.

>   Liberals are no more the guarantors of the First Amendment than
>totalitarians are the guarantors of personal freedoms.

    Whatever.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is the man, Clinton is a homosexual
Keywords: Clinton
Date: 11 Nov 92 18:59:43 GMT
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

kreece@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Kevin Reece) writes:

>Although Clinton maybe elected President, he still belongs in that
>pathetic state called Arkansas.  Instead of Bush debating Clinton, Rush
>should have debated Clinton.

If I remember right, Rush Limbaugh is from Cape Girardeau, Missouri,
which is smack dab on the Arkansas border.

Cape Girardeau probably has more in common with Little Rock than it does
with Missouri cities.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page)
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
Organization: Texas Instruments
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:41:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.175740.11229@anasazi.com>, best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
|> In article <mrsmart.720887073@cs1.bradley.edu> mrsmart@cs1.bradley.edu (Robert Knautz) writes:
|> >I heard (I think) Peter Jennings use the term "Electoral Mandate" in
|> >describing Clinton's win.  Can somebody please tell me what the hell
|> >that is supposed to mean?  A true mandate can only come from the
|> >popular vote.
|> 
|> It pains me to say this but I would point out that the Electoral College 
|> is designed to magnify victories to give the victor the momentum of a 
|> mandate.  It is _very_ important to have an energetic Executive, as the
|> Founders wisely forsaw, because the Legislature has a tendency to 
|> seize all powers from the other two branches of government.  Jefferson
|> warned us specifically about this. 

Please give your specific reference(s) for what Jefferson's warning.
 
|> A weak Executive is a threat to liberty, that is what Nixon's crime REALLY is.
|> 
|> >If they are going to call this a mandate, then Bush
|> >certainly had one in 1988, and he at least got a popular majority.  If
|> >the popular press think they are going to pass someone who received
|> >only a plurality(sp?) of the votes as having a mandate, they are
|> >sorely mistaken. 
|> 
|> I could not agree with you more.  The Imperial Congress is the real problem
|> and I suspect that even Clinton will have his difficulties with them.
|> 
|> Mike Best
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Subject: Re: You probably missed this
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:37:11 GMT

lanier@acpub.duke.edu (Dustin Lanier) writes:


>>Limbaugh also reported "Wow, Spanish is easy!"

>That commercial is wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>oh god it drives me nuts.
>Eso si, que es does *NOT* mean "that's what it is"
>it means "Yes that, what is it?"
>It drives me absolutely nutty!  And it is amazing they
>would do that advertising with incorrect spanish!

...or incorrect English.

 ===========================================================================|
 |                                      | Success is getting what you want. |
 |Don Wiggins                           | Happiness is wanting what you get.|
 |Internet: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu |     -- Brother Dave Gardner       |
 ===========================================================================|
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:07:42 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
 <1992Nov4.150110.16771@klaava.Helsinki.FI> <40551@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>

In article <40551@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs)
says:

>Rush is such a bad loser. He now claims victory for conservatism
>since the democrats had to shift to the center to be elected. Well,
>I think conservatism has lost since people didn't support Bush and
>the ultra right wing, wacko religious right present at the

"Bush and the ... right wing?"  What you call the 'ultra right wing' does
not include Bush.  Many (including Rush, of course) would say that Bush
lost because he -deserted- the 'wacko religious right,' as you call it.

Look for a true conservative, like Kemp or Bill Bennett (or, dare I say
it... Dan Quayle?!?) to be nominated, and win, in '96.

>California is sending to female senators to Washington, one of them
>was running against a true conservative, Hershenson. And she carried
>the State.

Hmm, I forget.  Was it 51-49 or 52-48 that Boxer won by?...

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

>Bill and Al have won 350+ electoral votes, a clear indicator that
>were it note for Perot a similar landslide popular vote would have
>resulted.

That's not clear at all.  No one will ever know what would've happened.

>Bright days are ahead of us, we have a liberal president. Cuomo will
>soon be appointed as supreme court justice, abortion will become
>more pro-choice.

Oh boy.  And prisoners all across the country will have to have cable TV.

>The people have spoken and have spoken very clearly. It is time for
>a change....

Yes, and that's -all- they said which liberals should be too happy about.

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
From: nau@ssesco.com (William Nau)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Gloat
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:16:50 GMT
Organization: SSESCO

In article <1992Nov5.231806.24696@asuvax.eas.asu.edu>, ra@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Starcap'n Ra) writes:
|> nau@ssesco.com (William Nau) writes:
|> > This was one of my problems with this election.  You shouldn't vote
|> > for someone because you hate Bush.  You should vote for someone because
|> > you want them in office.
|> 
|>      Says who?  You?  Rush Limbaugh?
|> What utter nonsense.

[sarcasm on]
Good point.
[sarcasm off]

|> 
|> > many of the Clinton votes I saw (not necessarly
|> > you) were actually anti-Bush votes.  I don't consider that right.
|> 
|>      So what.

[sarcasm on]
Yet another intelligent rebutle.
[sarcasm off]

|> 
|>      Oh, and have I invited you to fuck off
|> from talk.bizarre yet?  Although I must admit,
|> your notion that people should only vote for
|> reasons you deem appropriate is quite bizarre.
|> 

I really hope that you're not serious (I saw no similies).
You're attitude and arguments are at a level of immaturity
that makes me wonder how you even managed to post.  If you
don't agree then explain why.  I don't expect everyone to
share my opinions.  It's their right, but I assure you, I 
respect their opinions as long as they show reason for them.
You fail to do that.

|> --Starcap'n Ra       {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
|>                         {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
|>                                           ^---------------The Wrong Choice
|>                              internet: kennedy@asuvax.asu.edu

-- 
William R. Nau
Supercomputer Systems Engineering and Services Company (SSESCO)
511 11th Avenue South, Suite 216
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1536
(612) 342-0003

nau@SSESCO.com
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush