HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Subject: Re: Limbaugh's Falseness Revealed
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:44:07 GMT

jvogel@math.rutgers.edu (jeff vogel) writes:

>Fascinating article in the New York Times today. It seems that our dear,
>dear idol, Rush Limbaugh, not long before his radio show went on the
>air, hosted a New York radio talk show with a highly liberal slant.

Actually, Reagan was once a liberal democrat.  But then, of course, he 
grew out of it.

 ===========================================================================|
 |                                      | 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,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu ( BOB HOOKER)
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Organization: ILS
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:51:17 GMT

In article <nate.772@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>,
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

> 
>     And on the basis of that you call Rush a bad loser? I guess that 
> language revisionism has gotten farther than I thought.

Okay Okay,  who was the intellectual out there that taught some
conservative the word "revisionism"?  Somebody must have done it. It is
about time they come forward and be punished for the evil that they have
caused.


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:38:33 GMT

larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
>   What do you expect?  Liberals and free speech go together like oil and
>   water (respectively).

>Shall I look up the ACLU's phone number for you guys? Or would you prefer
>the number for the Moral Majority?

Would that be the ACLU that's always referenced when liberal stifling
attempts to stifle free speech are brought up, or the ACLU that
liberals have spent hundreds of Usenet messages on proving that it's not
really a "liberal" organization?  Their defense of free speech is
excellent, even if their selectivity in which freedoms are worthy of
defending isn't, but they are pre-"noveau liberal".  Give 'em time to
see the light.


>[Lighten up, Dittos! Join us Evil Liberals in laughing, or watch us
>laughing at you!]

Dittohead who?  This was crossposted.  I was laughing, actually, at
John Palmer, the one who started this, the very model of the new liberal.
-- 
Many a wife thinks her husband is the world's greatest lover.
But she can never catch him at it.
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:41:14 GMT
Subject: Re: Rush grasps at straws
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, archer@elysium.esd.sgi.com (Archer Sully) writes:

> In <1992Nov4.173115.12977@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
> *
> *God, Rush is funny today.
> *
> 
> I thought the "Taxula" bit was a real side-splitter.

Really?

You're easily amused.

doug
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: seitzler@sscvx1.ssc.gov (JOHN SEITZLER)
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:36:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.171300.11448@netcom.com>, jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)           writes...
>Man, I can't believe the complaints I'm getting with my sig - isn't it amazing
>that for 12 years, Democrats have been ridiculing Reagan, Bush, Quayle, and 
>anything conservative, yet when they are finally victorious they allow no 
>dissent whatever? I was going to change this sig after about a week or so, 
>but since it's irritating so many whiny liberals, I'm going to keep it around
>for a while. 
>-- 
>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>                           | Support the coup!
>CompuServe: 74076,1250     |
>Internet: jrs@netcom.com   |

_________________________________________________

Personally, I think your sig is great!  I am continually amazed  how
'out of control' the liberals get when we don't 'see the light'.  
All I can say is these same raving Libs (or RL's) will be talking out of
the other side of their mouths when Slick Willie really messes things up
(and rest assured he will!!!).  The last laugh will be ours.  It'll take
12 years after Clinton's 1 term to straighten out the mess he will make.
Don't tell me to 'give him a chance', just listen to what he promised!!! 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jbuckner@lonestar.utsa.edu (James A. Buckner)
Subject: Re: GIF pictures from Rush's TV Show
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:50:14 GMT

I remember a GIF file of Rush on Compuserve in the Rush LImbaugh Section
of ISSUESFORUM. It was a huge file (around 500K) and I'm wondering if anyone
has the file. Maybe Jason at CatHouse can put it on his site.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8603 alt.rush-limbaugh:9715 alt.politics.bush:13889
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Date: 13 Nov 92 21:35:54 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA

In article <1dr3l6INNmot@spool.mu.edu> marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.171300.11448@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>>                           | Support the coup!
>
>John,
>
>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.

Better watch out John, the liberals are for freedom except where that
freedom slays their sacred cows.  Instead of philosophically arguing
against limited government and individual rights they are only able 
to call you little names and insult your "alternative lifestyle" of
following Rush Limbaugh.

"you have no life" is like calling you a fetus and their going to 
try to abort you!

Mike Best
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: tom@uts.cc.wayne.edu (Thomas Richard Stevenson)
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
Organization: Wayne State Univ.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:02:21 GMT

tz10956@meibm3.cen.uiuc.edu (Thomas Zych) writes:

>Maybe this election will
>convince people that the Electoral College is an antiquated system that needs
>to be put out of our misery.  Unlike 200 years ago, knowing who the next
>president will be by popular vote can be done overnight.  The entire purpose
>behind the Electoral College was that the average American citizen was too
>stupid to be trusted to select a president themselves.  Do we still believe
>this?  Back to the point, Clinton _does_ have an "Electoral Mandate",        
>technically speaking.  He certainly _does_not_ have a "Popular Mandate".  But
>then neither did Bush in 1988, IMO.  My point is that what counts, the Electoral
>College, being an all-or-nothing deal, doesn't accurately reflect the true
>statistics behind the election.

>Tom...

All very very true! The electoral College is very misleading. Also, if we
go with a "Popular Vote", it will make it harded for the network news to
predict the winner. And anything to give the network news a hard time is
a plus in and of it's self.
-- 
     ____  __   __       Tom@UTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
      /   /_/  /_        Thomas_Richard_Stevenson@MTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
     /.  /\ . __/.       Tom@CMS.CC.Wayne.Edu
                         UserTom@WayneMTS.Bitnet
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: A TRUE LANDSLIDE
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:59:39 GMT
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University

m_lehoul@oz.plymouth.edu (Michael L. Le Houllier) writes:
>I love this conversation about Clinton's supposed landslide.  The best
>comedy I've seen in wuite some time.  Perhaps if you say it enough
>times, people will believe that winning by 5% of the popular vote is a
>landslide.

>On the other hand, here in New Hampshire, we had a true LANDSLIDE.
>Govenor-elect Merrill (R) won by a whoping SIXTEEN points over Arnie
>(Broad Base) Arnesen.

    Or how about the conservative state of Indiana in which Govenor Evan 
Bayh (D) won over Lin Pearson (R) by 24 points?

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend)
Subject: The Bill Clinton Survival Kit
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:59:43 GMT

Well folks, the election of '92 is now history and the American people have
convincingly demonstrated their gullibility to the likes of Clinton and Perot.
Here in Ohio, we have the dubious distinction of giving William Jefferson
Blythe Clinton (to be henceforth referred to as WJBC) the final electoral
votes to win, but we proved our sheer stupidity by overwhelmingly voting for
term limits at the same time that we sent all our incumbent congresscritters
back for the umpteenth time.  But as I said, this is all history, so let's all
just sit back and enjoy the show.  Of course, we need to take proper
precautions, so I'm proposing that we assemble a "Bill Clinton Survival Kit."
My initial contributions are:

 1. "Don't blame me, I voted for Bush" bumper stickers (for your bike).
 2. "Hell no, we won't go!" signs for the next war.
 3. Rush Limbaugh's No. 1 best-seller, "See, I Told You So!"
 4. Madonna's No. 2 best-seller, "The Lincoln Bedroom Scrapbook" (featuring
    "Slick" himself in a dog collar).
 5. Jay Leno's No. 3 best-seller, "The Chelsea Clinton Jokebook" (e.g. "Why is
    Bill Clinton pro-abortion?"  "You'd be too, if you'd had Chelsea").
 6. "Taxula: The Movie" on VHS.
 7. A 51-star flag (with one black star in the middle for the People's Republic
    of New Columbia).
 8. The Official Clintonski Blackmailski Guide to KGB Files on War Protesters.
 9. "Mace for Men," Gloria Steinem's new line of cologne.
10. Spotted owl repellant.
11. Inflatible money, with wheelbarrow.
12. Environmental impact statements for mowing your lawn (push mowers only).
13. Special issue of American Lawyer: "How Hillary won the East Wing, Rose
    Garden, and Air Force One in divorce court."
14. A carton of "Billy Boy's Smokeless Joints," so you don't inhale.
15. A bottle of "Just For Liars" hair color, for a new look every 24 hours in
    "Just Five Minutes."
16. "Super Mario on the Supreme Court" for your Nintendo.
17. "Abortion Reconsidered," by George Bush (number one reason:  It'll keep
    guys from single-parent homes like Clinton from becoming President).
18. "1,001 Arkansas Chicken Recipes," by Pat Crocker (Betty's new neutral-
    gender name, P.C. for short).
19. Box of "Slick's Stealth Condoms," "They'll never see you coming!" (TM),
    available in schools everywhere.
20. Sign for the homeless: "Why work for food?  We've got Bill Clinton!"

Got any more?

-- 
// John Townsend                                   Legal Conversion Engineering
// Mead Data Central          "Don't blame me,        johnt@skibum.meaddata.com
// 8891 Gander Creek Dr.     I voted for Bush."        ...!uunet!meaddata!johnt
// Miamisburg, OH  45342                                         (513) 865-7250 
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 05:01:11 GMT
Subject: Re: The Election '92
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, andersmc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU writes:

> To the American People,
> 	What do you have in mind? Are all of us crazy?  
> 
> 	We just elected Billary Clinton.... I mean Hill Clinton... whoops
> 	I mean Bill Clinton and Mr. Ozone.    Hmmmmm....
> 
> Does Bill have a mandate?  NO!!!!  He did not take a majority of the American
> people. 
> 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?
> 

Don't worry.
Calm down.

George Bush actually won the election.  However, the evil, liberal
press is refusing to report it.  They stumbled upon the idea
that, since everyone in the nation is their dupe and patsy, if
they simply continue to report that Clinton won, the nation
will never know.

Of course, there is the round and rubicund rush limbaugh to
reveal the evil conspiracy.

doug
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: rob@zorro.cecer.army.mil (Rob Knauerhase)
Subject: Re: Network projections
Organization: US Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Labs
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:12:38 GMT

In <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

>Excuse me but Al Gore's home state funds their schools entirely or almost
>entirely from property tax.  And the property tax is extremely high compared
>to the wage range.

I was under the impression that TN's taxes were high to make up for the lack
of sales tax?

At any rate, an appropriate factoid is that Illinois is not known for being
fantastic in education spending.  However, the amount spent by the county
that spends least per-student on education in Illinois is still *four times*
that spent by the highest per-student spending county in Tennessee.

(I'd conjecture that Arkansas is perhaps as far behind TN, but I have no
hard data for that.  Me, I'm happy to have gone to school in Ohio.)

Rob
--
[by day]                                [by day, by night, by weekend...]
rob@amber.cecer.army.mil                knauer@cs.uiuc.edu
Office of Grass Integration             Gigabit Study Group
Construction Engineering Research Labs  Department of Computer Science
US Army Corps of Engineers (USA-CERL)   U. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
 "Eat, drink, and be merry; for tomorrow, ye will be taxed."  America, I
  hope 'change' was worth it...

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8053 alt.rush-limbaugh:9157
From: johna@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (john.a.welsh)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Proposal for a Summary newsgroup
Summary: Proposal for new group alt.rush-limbaugh.summary
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh new newsgroup
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:27:46 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T



I would like to propose a group just for the Summaries.

As long as John Switzer does not mind, a moderated newsgroup
with him a moderator should be created for the Unofficial
Summaries of Rush's show.  This would also include the monthly
compilations.  All follow-ups would be directed to the other
2 rush-limbaugh groups.  

My site receives alt.rush-limbaugh and I do not know what the
propagation numbers are, but is it totally necessary for both
alt.rush-limbaugh and alt.fan.rush-limbaugh to exist?  If fan
is more popular, I would not mind dropping alt.rush for the
other one.  I am not a site coordinator, only a reader, so
take the significance of this statement for what it is worth.

My proposal: create alt.rush-limbaugh.summary (or alt.fan.rush-
limbaugh.summary) as a moderated newsgroup moderated by John Switzer
with followups to alt.rush and alt.fan.rush.  If deemed necessary by
the responses from the net, 2 moderated newsgroups could be
created (a.f.r-l.summary and a.r-l.summary).  The Summaries
are posted to 2 groups now as it is, so the only problem would
seem to be in administrating 2 instead of 1 group.

                      John Welsh
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu ()
Subject: List of Clinton's (to be) broken promises.
Originator: rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu
Organization: UCLA Dept of Astronomy
Date: 10 Nov 92 14:09:14 PST

Can someone post the list of Clinton's campaign
promises from the Limbaugh Letter?

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8065 alt.rush-limbaugh:9167
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush vs. facts
Date: 6 Nov 92 18:47:48 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

>In <1992Nov2.022055.7768@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@red-dragon.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
->>	I've been really wondering about the GOP tactic of trying to
->>convice the public that they are not really miserable. Assuming that
->>things are really better then they seem, it strikes me as poor
->>political judgement to tell the general public that they are wrong.

 Get ready for "happy time" stories in the media. They are now going to tell
us that maybe our attitude is making us think that life in the USA is worse 
than it actually is. Nightline ran a "happy time" story last night and will
run another on friday.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:44:19 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Hell revisited
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, Gary James Patalsky <gp2f+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> --
> >
> >
> >I second that.
>  
> >>>   I third it.
>  
> I fourth it.
> 
> What's wrong with America. Jimmy Carter all over again.  Say it ain't so !!

It ain't so.  Bill Clinton is not Jimmy Carter.  It is POSSIBLE that
his presidency will suffer from the same things as Carter's, but
it is not a foregone conclusion.

doug
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8137 alt.politics.clinton:16324 alt.politics.bush:13465 alt.rush-limbaugh:9213
From: galsci!cmckeithan
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 16:28:52 EST
Reply-To: iccdev!galsci!cmckeithan
Organization: Galaxy Scientific Corp.

Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:

> You do realise how counterproductive, pointless, and devicive
> this discussion is, don't you? We have work to do dammit!
> Help us get it done.

I guess the only question I have to those who insist that everyone who
voted for Bush and/or Perot should quit 'whining' and help Clinton do
whatever it is he plans on doing is this:  Did all those who voted against
Bush and/or Reagan drop all their complaints, quit criticising, and help
Bush/Reagan get their plans implemented?

If they did, I missed it. 

Clifford M. Mckeithan Jr              emory!iccdev!galsci!cmckeithan
Galaxy Scientific Corp.               High Quality Engineering
Opinions expressed do not neccesarily reflect those of my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: enor@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: <None>
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:12:45 GMT


>> Can someone post the list of Clinton's campaign
>> promises from the Limbaugh Letter?
> 
> How 'bout a list of Bush's broken promises as a standard of comparison?
> 
> -- 
> 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!)

	Excuse me but Bush broke one but only one campaign promise.  His
promise not to raise taxes.  However he only did this because he thought it
would help the country he said that this was wrong.  All his other promises
were stymied by a vindictive Democratic Congress who threw nothing but stupid
pork-laced bills at him that he had no  choice but to VETO!!!  George Bush will
go down in history as a man of honor  truth, and compassion.  

	Bill CLINTON will go down as a man who thought he could please  all of
the people all of the time while pleasingsome of teh people all of the time.  

People will be so pissed at him that when the Republican's get elected in 1996
to a majority in the house and senate he'll problably be impeached, for general
stupidity.

Robert R. Eno
a.k.a. as I Hate the pot smoking, adultring, abortionist,,,,  from Arkansas who
unfortunately will be our next president.

These views are my own and do not necessarily reflect the beuarocrats at Umass
Lowell.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton,misc.legal
From: yeomans@archangel.ced.berkeley.edu (Gary Todd Yeomans)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: SOUL of the GOP
Date: 12 Nov 1992 03:43:07 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: archangel.ced.berkeley.edu

Ladies and Gentlemen of the nation,

Rush and the media have been talking about our "struggle for the soul of the Grand Old Party",
witness the ongoing discussion about article 8384 Re: What is a Conservative?[27] Lee A. Jorgensen
I think that's a very good question because from my point of view, the way we define conservative
for ourselves is not what the dictionary says we are.  Somehow WE have been labeled the close-
mindes ones and the liberals the open-minded and enlightened ones, when in most cases, it is the
exact opposite.  If our party is to survive and grow (and it will), we have to turn the tables on
these perceived definitions.  The conservatives I know are among the most respectful and open-
minded individuals I have ever met.  True conservatives will listen to a viewpoint and then give
you a reason as to why they disagree.  Most left-wingers I know are simply close-minded
and militant about the positions they hold.  How did this reversal happen?  At one time in the 
1950's I suppose the conservatives were the slow-to-change types, but things are different now.  
Conservatives are the ones today with the most innovative solutions to society's problems.
At the heart of our party is the issue of self-reliance and the encouragement of independence in 
many areas of one's life.

We are not libertarians.  We do agree on the need for some sort of government, but the nature of 
it's involvement is the issue about which we disagree with the left.  So shall we begin a 
referendum on the future of our platform and the quality of life we seek for our country? I'm
really sick of liberals trying to make me feel guilty for being conservative when I'm the one
who actually gives a damn about the future of our society and our nation and is willing to 
sacrifice some of my personal freedom for the good of the whole.  The Nation is ready for a
clarification of our stance and they deserve to get it.  After the next four years of idealistic
let-downs, they will be especially hungry for some sensible talk and some realistic action.

SOUND OFF "YOU PEOPLE"--Where do you stand on (insert issue here)?  WE HAVE TO GET STARTED NOW, 
BECAUSE WE ARE THE ONES WHO LOST THE ELECTION, NOT GEORGE.

Yours in Rush, 

Todd "I'm gonna git you sucka" Yeomans
yeomans@ced.berkeley,edu 
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8337 alt.rush-limbaugh:9407