HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lyford@dagny.webo.dg.com (Lyford Beverage)
Subject: Re: A TRUE LANDSLIDE
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:52:25 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC

In article <92315.011135MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>, Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

|> People, it's President Clinton now. Gag or applaud as is your wont, but
|> whining about the percentages won't change one single thing.

Actually, it's President-Elect Clinton now.  Won't be President Clinton
until January 21, 1993.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: November 3, the day Rush dies!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 01:13:12 GMT

In article <92308.165203MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>Naw. You have to admit one thing, Republican Presidents are much *funnier*
>than Democratic Presidents.
...
>Carter on the other hand was no fun to satirize.

Hmm... Remember "The Pepsi Syndrome"?  Dan Ackroyd?

I've got a copy of Jeff McNelly's "Directions"... Hm... *snicker*
-chuckle- **SNORT*** GUFFAW!!!!***

(Yuch, now I've snarfed Mountain Dew all over my CRT.)

Sample:  From the 1980 primaries, I think.  Teddy the K driving
his big limo, and Jimmy in the back seat.

In SCUBA gear.

'Nother one:  Jimmy's garage, a car with "LIBERALS" license plate
up on the lift.  Jimmy looking at it with a befuddled experession,
wrench in hand.  Walter Mondale at the pay phone, saying "...Now I'm
stuck out here in the middle of nowhere, the Volvo is in pieces, and
I've got this red clay all over my Guccis."

Speaking of Mondale, there's the one with him
dancing around singing --

  Now if you go for Democrats
  Who court the poor in tails and spats
  <I forget>
  Puttin' on the Fritz.

  Wish that he was more like Gary Cooper.
  His speaking syle's exciting as a grouper
  In a stupor.
  
  If you long for good ol' days
  When Jimmy had us in malaise
  Just pass the grits.
  Puttin' on the Fritz.
-- 
Reader, suppose you were an idiot.  And suppose you  |  Mike Van Pelt
were a member of Congress.  But I repeat myself.     |  mvp@netcom.com
                -- Mark Twain                        |  mvp@hsv3.lsil.com
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Why is the media apologizing for Clinton?
Originator: rja@mahogany126
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 9 Nov 92 13:55:47 CST


In article <1992Nov6.113124.2840@mr.med.ge.com>, gorney@picard.med.ge.com (Felix Gorney Mfg 4-6983) writes:
> It certainly does seem that the media have been apoligising for Clinton. It seems
> they are even covering international affairs. The question has even been posited:"Will 
> Bill Clinton be up to the task?" The world is still a dangerous place. I 
> wonder why they weren't asking these questions BEFORE the election. 
> 
> Paul Tsongas was on the Good Morning America Show yesterday. He said something  
> that really blew my mind. When asked how Clinton could possibly keep all the
> promises he made before the election, Tsongas replied that it wasn't necessary.
> He said that no one should expect Clinton to keep his promises. He said that this
> is the way the system works, all the way down to city hall.

It's no different that Reagan's promise to balance the budget by 1984.

> Tsongas was asked who Clinton should consider his real constituency now. He 
> replied that the only constituency Clinton should concern himself with now, is  
> the people in the boardrooms, i.e. the people who run business. This is quite 
> bizarre coming from a liberal like Tsongas.

Have you ever heard Tsongas before?  He was saying thin throught the primaries.

>                                             This may have been an attempt to 
> calm the fears some people may have,

Actually, it's something that Tsongas really believes.

>                                       and to appear pro business, but it is the 
> same kind of talk that liberals have lambasted conservatives for from the       
> beginning. 
> 
> As far as a pro business approach, Clinton has promised legislation to force
> businesses to provide services to employees, that all total, will cut profits
> by 2/3.

Where did you get this number?

>          He also plans to increase investment in business by increaseing taxes
> on certain individuals, and foreign corporations. If these people are offered 
> incentives to invest their money, it will probably be in the form of tax shelters.

Well, one persons incentive is another persons tax shelter.

> On the other hand, he says he will raise money from these same groups, to cover
> additional spending, and a tax break for the middle class. Will Clinton's plans 
> actually be beneficial to the US? I'm not going to hold my breath.


-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: htuttle@nyx.cs.du.edu (Harry Tuttle)
Subject: The Decline of America
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 02:13:52 GMT



I guess one of my biggest problems with some (not all) of Rush's l
fans is that they are mindless followers.  I mean, it has to be a sure
sign of the decline of America when somebody will pay money to buy

Rush's book.  The man is laughing all the way to the bank and I don't
blame him.

His book is comic-book conservatism for the common man.  It's for 
people who don't want to think too hard, and wish that America would
turn back to the halcyon days of the 1950's when white men reigned
supreme and others cowered in fear and awe.

Oh well, there's no accounting for taste, I guess.  All the same, I
really hate pseudo-intellectuals.  Especially when they don't realize
that they are being had.
From: edcrwfrd@unlv.edu (Edward Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:25:18 GMT
Organization: UNLV


You said the people have spoken clearly? Hmm I hope you are
right.... since 60% of them voted against Clinton.
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 09:31:47 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. It is Rush's solemn duty to inform the
: : voting public, when Slick doesn't uphold his promises. Also, sinse Slick ran
: : as a moderate, it is also Rush's duty to keep an eye out for situations that
: : prove that Slick is not the person he said he was. As I'm sure these 2 issues
: : alone could take up hundreds of hours of air time, I'm sure Rush has his work
: : cut out for him.
: 
: Gee, that's funny Rush did such a good job on reporting when Bush didn't
: uphold his campaign promises.  I hope he does just as good a job with Clinton

Actually, Rush DID criticize Bush for breaking campaign promises. Maybee you 
criticize Rush without listenieng to his show. If you've only listened a few
times, you may not have heard some of the things he disagreed on with Bush.

Maybee the dominant media culture did not tell you this, but the only promises
broken by Bush, were when he decided to compromise with the liberal congress.
The press, i.e. the Clinton campaign constantly lambasted Bush for raising taxes.
He did this in an effort to work with congress. Congress wanted higher taxes, and
so does Clinton. The liberals criticise Bush for doing exactly what they them-
selves do best i.e. raise taxes, and spend money. Make no mistake about it, the
next Republican president will have learned from all of this. He will not so 
easily be swayed into a "compromise" with the liberals. Congress never followed
up with the promised spending cuts, as part of the deal. The liberals have now
shown that they can`t be trusted. You make a deal with them, and they criticise
you for doing it, then don`t hold up their end of the bargain. Because of this,
the next Republican president will be closer to Reagan than Bush. You liberals
have made your bed, and in 4 years, you will have to lie in it.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wdechent@usenet.umr.edu (William L. Dechent)
Subject: Re: The Decline of America
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:14:28 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Missouri -- Rolla

This is in response to the post from a reader who couldn't understand why
Rush Limbaugh has fans, and he couldn't understand why anyone believed
all of Limbaugh's opinion.

I hope nobody thinks Limbaugh is completely right; nobody should think he's
completely wrong.  John Locke, the author of the ideas upon which this
country was founded wrote that no idea was ever completely correct, and that
no idea was completely wrong--for America to be America we must all realize
that this applies to Limbaugh too.

Every American should be encouraged to deal one on one with groups who they 
think are "the enemy."  Ask yourself which interest groups you are afraid
of--do you have any friends who are in those groups who you respect?  If
not, can you change that?  It's the quickest way to shift from being an
extreme to being a moderate.    

America needs Progressives ("we need to change" types) and Conservatives
("change must be slow" types) on every issue.  

By the way, where does Limbaugh's show air? (time, network, day, etc.) 

--
wdechent@clciris.chem.umr.edu   


From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 15:39:09 GMT
Subject: Re: Rush grasps at straws
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

> (about a half-dozen irrelevant cross-post groups deleted)
> 
> archer@elysium.esd.sgi.com (Archer Sully) writes:
> >tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
> >*God, Rush is funny today.
> 
> >I thought the "Taxula" bit was a real side-splitter.
> 
>     Agreed. Whoever hit on the idea of calling Taxula's henchman "Algor" is 
> a comedic genius.

Right.

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.president.clinton
From: heath@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath)
Subject: Re: Al Gore -VP Curse strkes again?
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:45:43 GMT

In article <1e0vn9INNq5t@transfer.stratus.com> dennist@sw.stratus.com (Dennis Tetreault) writes:
>
>   After 4 years of listening to everyone trash Dan Quayle, everyone seemed
>to think that we would have a new VP with stature, ability, and stateliness.
>Al Gore.
>   Something happened though. After the election results came in, and 
>the Clinton's stood up on stage, and were joined by the Gore family, Al
>pulled a Quayle. While leaning off the stage to shake hands with the supporters,
>Al fell head first into the crowd. There was a photo of a Secret Service
>agent trying to keep him from falling off by holding his belt. I can't say
>for certain that he *did* fall in, but I think he did. 

	I saw a picture of that, but the caption said something about
Gore taking a dive into the crowd.  For a second I thought "Hey, cool!
Our Vice President Elect stage-dives for fun!"

-- 
"Black men loving black men is THE revolutionary act!"
			-Joseph Beam_
Terrance Heath 
heath@athena.cs.uga.edu
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8146 misc.test:12840 talk.bizarre:37205 misc.jobs.offered:13297
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.test,talk.bizarre,misc.jobs.offered
Subject: Re: Rush's Email Address
Date: 7 Nov 92 15:11:44 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH

mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman]) writes:

>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

Two times out of three you'll get your message back with a
"mailbox full" error message.

The other times he might get your mail, but don't hold your
breath waiting for a reply - he doesn't respond to the
majority of his mail (he's said this repeatedly on the
show).
-- 
   Brice Dowaliby, Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH  03766
                         bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu        
             I don't speak for them, they don't speak for me
                              DoD # 0698
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: btenison@eng.auburn.edu (Bruce Tenison)
Subject: Re: List of Clinton's (to be) broken promises.
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:52:36 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.140915.12840@mic.ucla.edu> rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu () writes:
>Can someone post the list of Clinton's campaign
>promises from the Limbaugh Letter?
>

Yes, Please!!!  Or, maybe we could some sort of dynamic list!


Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7932 alt.rush-limbaugh:9043 alt.politics.bush:13183 misc.test:12686 talk.bizarre:36833 alt.politics.clinton:15840
From: stamber@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Kevin L. Stamber)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,misc.test,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Summary: amen to that
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:36:27 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Nov5.153402.22809@netcom.com>, jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
> -- 
> John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>                            | Support the coup!
>                            |
> jrs@netcom.com             | 

     Maybe we can get Stockdale to be in charge of the coup
   attempt...Ross could always finance it...

     Listen, we're going to have to give Clinton(e) a chance.
   He's said that he's going to pass a great deal of legislation
   in the first hundred days (Which last week, on MacNeal/Lehrer,
   changed to four months, then to six months, then to a year or
   two, all in the span of ten minutes).  By the time he's inaugurated,
   the Congress will be attempting to repeal the 22nd amendment
   so that Billy boy can serve long enough to clean up the mess;
   say, until the next ice age or so...

 _______________________________________________________________

                    Kevin L. Stamber

                   stamber@purdue.edu


                  may God help America...

_____________________________________________Kemp in '96________
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: can@mitre.org (Chris)
Subject: Re: Network projections
Organization: The MITRE Corp
Distribution: usa 
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 12:29:55 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.031824.16473@oz.plymouth.edu>,
m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier) writes:
> 
> One thing that's been bugging me since election night is the networks
> projecting the winners from state to state.
> 
> Using New Hampshire as an example, ABC declared Clinton the winner
> just after 8 PM I believe.  Initially, Clinton DID have the lead, but
> thats because our cities (Manchester, Nashua, Derry and Portsmouth,
> etc.) tend to report first and tend to be moderate.  However, as the
> North Country returns came in, Bush actually took the lead at about 11
> PM.  It turns out that Clinton won NH by less than one percent, but
> how can ABC or any other network project the winner in a state whose
> vote was THAT close and wasn't sure until early in the morning.
> 
> Thankfully, the Democrats didn't make the gains in NH as the Democrats
> were hoping for.  Every two years they say it's our turn and the NH
> people will realise it.  What we DO realise is that we don't want
> Democrats running the ship here.  We have seen what's happened in
> Maine, Massachusetts and New York.  We DON'T want it in New Hampshire.
> 


Yet another example of the media bias that was so obvious this election.

At 5:00 am on November 3, ABC news began their broadcasts with the title:

"First Returns in for New Hampshire:  Clinton Winning by Landslide"

Funny, the only polls that were open then was Dixville Notch (in which
Clinton came in 4th behind the Liberitarian) and the absentee ballots, yet
ABC
dosn't bother telling us that!

Whether you're for Clinton or not, it should bother EVERYONE when the media
puts the spin on the news!  How can we trust anything else that they tell
us??
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8031 alt.politics.clinton:16041 alt.politics.bush:13326
From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Rush grasps at straws
Date: 6 Nov 92 07:41:18 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Distribution: usa, world
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Nov4.173115.12977@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
>
>"Conservativism triumphed in California!  It triumphed. It triumphed."
>
>Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer elected to the Senate is a triumph for
>conservativism?  Yah, sure.

Not to mention the fact that Clinton got 47% of the popular vote,
while Bush only got 32%.  Truly a conservative victory!  In fact,
San Diego County gave more votes to the Democratic candidate than
the Republican candidate for the first time since FDR in 1944.

>God, Rush is funny today.

At least his ever twisted logic is.

-- 
Steve Linke
Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab)
La Jolla, CA
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8161 alt.rush-limbaugh:9234
From: marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Percentages and such like
Date: 8 Nov 1992 02:50:38 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <nate.782@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>young@ssdd475a.erim.org (Peter Young) writes:
>>The problem in this election is that no one was passionately FOR
>>anyone.
>claiming that being a passionate supporter of *any* politician is a wise 

Oh my.  And I was passonatly supporting Andre Marrou.  Strike one.

>trust in politicians, lawyers, insurance salesmen, or talk radio hosts.

Egads!  Say it's not so!  Say I shouldn't stop listening to Rush 
Limbaugh III, lest my passion get away from me!

>>So let's talk about Rush: is he gonna keep on losing weight do you
>>think?
>    I'd say so. From the dietary info he was describing a few months back 
>I'd say that if he sticks to his better eating habits then he's bound to 
>lose weight.

On that topic (Rush), what ever happened to Ginger?



-- 
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.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8242 alt.rush-limbaugh:9316
From: marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why alt.fan.rush-limbaugh????
Date: 9 Nov 1992 21:16:48 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <1992Nov9.194406.6224@uts.cc.wayne.edu> tom@uts.cc.wayne.edu (Thomas Richard Stevenson) writes:
>marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov9.153906.28199@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>>>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!
>First you say he's a hate-monger for speaking against Clinton, and then
>you say he should grow up enough to understand the difference between
>speaking against something and hating it. He didn't say hate once in
>the part you pointed out. It seems as if you should grow up first before
>telling someone else to.

ERRRP!  Thank you for playing.

The post started questioning why 90-95% of the posts were anti-rush.
John said these people HATE rush.  Thus anti-rush was equated to Rush
haterd.  Thus I applied his conclusion (statements not favoring
a person = hatred for that person) to his own post.  And
got the response I expected. 

I do what Rush has done....showing thru example.  

Now...where is YOUR response to the original 90-95% post?  


-- 
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.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.bruce-becker:9 alt.config:6896
From: news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bruce-becker,alt.config
Subject: Becker Scat = Re: newgroup alt.bbs.waffle
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:34:10 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.bruce-becker
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
X-Md4-Signature: ca5ea73a0f6f38ece15486f48ac241a4

|Path: wolves!duke!concert!rock!stanford.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!
	magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uunet.ca!
	canrem!telly!problem!torag!hybrid!feline!halt!
	horses!wandering!acmebbs!dogbox!test
|From: test@dogbox.acme.gen.nz (Kennelmeister)
|Newsgroups: alt.bbs.waffle.ctl
|Subject: newgroup alt.bbs.waffle
|Message-ID: <DPNiTB4w165we@dogbox.acme.gen.nz>
|Date: 3 Nov 92 15:01:36 GMT
|Control: newgroup alt.bbs.waffle
|Sender: noone@dogbox.acme.gen.nz
|Lines: 10
|Approved: root@dogbox.acme.gen.nz
|
|alt.bbs.waffle was replaced more than 6 months ago with comp.bbs.waffle.
|This replacement was discussed and voted on by users of alt.bbs.waffle.
|
|The continued existance of this group causes many new waffle sites to
|make 'help me' postings which tend to go unanswered.
|
|The group continues to linger due to the efforts of Mr Becker.
|
|There are at least 30 postings/day in comp.bbs.waffle, vs 1 or 2/week
|in alt.bbs.waffle.
-- 
Usenet Net News Administrator @ The Wolves Den  (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
news@wolves.durham.nc.us  news%wolves@cs.duke.edu  ...duke!wolves!news
"The flame war is a specific Usenet art form." --me
[This site is not affiliated with Duke University. (Idiots!) ]
Xref: sparky alt.fan.bruce-becker:7 alt.config:6894
From: news@wolves.uucp (The Wolfe of the Den)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.bruce-becker,alt.config
Subject: Becker Scat = Re: newgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:38:41 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.bruce-becker
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
X-Md4-Signature: d2e83fa089f00c3a5d98da2c8eb2356e

|Path: wolves!duke!concert!rutgers!utcsri!utgpu!attcan!ncrcan!
	becker!feline!halt!holdyour!horses!destroyer!tygra!geek
|From: news@tygra.Michigan.COM (USENET News Manager)
|Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.ctl
|Subject: newgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
|Message-ID: <1992Nov11.181316.23035@tygra.Michigan.COM>
|Date: 11 Nov 92 18:13:16 GMT
|Control: newgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
|Organization: Perot for Plamer
|Lines: 7
|Approved: news@tygra.Michigan.COM
|
|This has-been will now be relegated to the dustbin of history. He is
|a right wing maniac that we can't do without. Ciao asshole. Alias it
|to alt.rush-limbaugh if you must.
|
|MUCK YOU PLAMER - I SAID DON'T GET RID OF IT. I *CAN* COME TO MICHIGAN AND
|HEAT YOUR SUCKING LASS IF YOU DON'T STOP IT. POST IT ONE MORE TIME
|AND I WILL. 
-- 
Usenet Net News Administrator @ The Wolves Den  (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
news@wolves.durham.nc.us  news%wolves@cs.duke.edu  ...duke!wolves!news
"The flame war is a specific Usenet art form." --me
[This site is not affiliated with Duke University. (Idiots!) ]
Xref: sparky alt.fan.bruce-becker:8 alt.config:6895