From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:31:36 GMT

pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs) writes:
>Rush is such a bad loser. He now claims victory for conservatism
>since the democrats had to shift to the center to be elected. 

    And on the basis of that you call Rush a bad loser? I guess that 
language revisionism has gotten farther than I thought. If Rush had gone 
around saying things like "Those Democrats cheated" or "Those people must 
be really stupid" then I might agree that he was being a bad loser, but 
that's not what he did. 

    I thought that Rush did a very good job at making the best of what (for 
him) must seem like a very bad situation. He's trying to pick out those rays 
of hope which would console and hearten conservatives. He told several 
callers that they needn't feel bad, and that this is still America and 
they're still free to reach for opportunities. I believe that he agreed
with a couple of callers that it would be harder now, but I thought that 
he did a great job of being supportive and offering comfort to what 
(according to the returns) is apparently a very large percentage of 
Americans.

>Well, I think conservatism has lost since people didn't support Bush and
>the ultra right wing, wacko religious right present at the
>republican convention. 

    I would have said that the group that actually lost was not 
conservatives but extremists (i.e.- the "ultra-right wing" is what lost, 
not the moderates).

>It's clear to me, they have rejected the
>ideas of the most conservative platform since ages. People are tired
>of the bigotry and hate which has become so inherent to the
>republican party.

    I wouldn't say that bigotry and hate are *inherent* to the Republican 
party. Something that is inherent is by definition inseparable from the 
whole. There are certainly factions in both the the Republican and 
Democratic parties which are bigoted and hateful, but I don't believe that 
those factions are inseparable from the overall goals of those parties. 
Look at the way Republicans backpeddled away from David Duke, and the way 
that the Democrats have backpeddled away from radical feminism.

>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. 

    Don't get carried away there. There's really no way of telling which way 
the Perot people would have gone if Ross hadn't gotten back in the race. On 
Tuesday night I was ready to curse them properly for taking votes from 
Clinton, but in retrospect I've come to the opinion that they probably took 
more away from Bush.

>Bright days are ahead of us, we have a liberal president. Cuomo will
>soon be appointed as supreme court justice

    Please excuse me if I don't share in your enthusiasm.

>And what about Rush Limbaugh ? He is such a bad loser and is hoping
>that Bill won't be able to help the country. 

    That's not the impression I get. I think that Rush is very patriotic, 
and I believe that he hopes that Clinton will do Ok (though perhaps not so 
well that it would hurt Republican chances in '96).

>Who is Rush trying to fool ? 

    You, mostly. I don't find him that mysterious.

>Congratulations Bill, Hillary, Al and Tipper. You are the greatest,
>finally some real people in the white house, finally some women who
>are more than just obedient housewives, finally some people who
>stand close the the majority of the US people.
>Huraah, Huraah Huraah

    "Yeah for the Sun God,
     He sure is a Fun God,
     Ra,
     Ra,
     Ra"

    Honestly, all you need now is a pair of pom poms.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu