From: tom@uts.cc.wayne.edu (Thomas Richard Stevenson)
Subject: Re: Why alt.fan.rush-limbaugh????
Organization: Wayne State Univ.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:29:36 GMT

marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:

>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. 

What John said may or not be correct. Only each person knows why they
fall on one side or the other. In many cases what started out as only
a disagreement with someone could turn into hate, so it might be true 
that many fall into this category. Another point, just because I don't
hate someone, doesn't mean that I can't recognize hate when I see it.
In other words, pointing out hate in someone else doesn't mean I hate.

One other thing, you said "Thus anti-rush was equated to Rush haterd.".
I think it is the other way around. Rush haterd is equated to anti-Rush.

One other thing you are over looking is the very phrase "anti-Rush".
This is not a phrase that implies you like the man. On the other hand
"Impeach Clinton" means you don't want him running the Government.
It doesn't mean he hates him. It also doesn't mean he doesn't hate him
either. Only John knows that. Not you, and not me.
 
>I do what Rush has done....showing thru example.  

Showing thru examples is logical only when all the parts that make up
the examples are logical. If you want to say Rush doesn't do a good
job of this, that's fine. I've never heard the man, so I don't know.
But just because you feel he isn't logical, that doesn't mean that 
you should go out of your way not to be. Two wrongs don't make a right.
If you want to prove us wrong, and can do so, fine, but try to be logical
about it.

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

My comments were solely on your illogical remarks to John's statements.
If you want to prove John wrong, or me wrong, go right ahead. If John
or I (or anyone else) makes a logic error, please point it out. But
don't use a logic error made by someone else as grounds for making your
own logic errors. That is just being childish. 

As to your "where is YOUR response...". As I've said, 1) I don't know what
is in the minds of the anti-Rush people. 2) I've never heard the man. 
Between the two, it makes it very hard for me to guess (and that's all it
would be) why the 90-95% (if those are valid numbers). If you want to 
know, why not just ask the anti-Rush/Pro-Rush people why they feel the
way they do.

>-- 
>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.
-- 
     ____  __   __       Tom@UTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
      /   /_/  /_        Thomas_Richard_Stevenson@MTS.CC.Wayne.Edu
     /.  /\ . __/.       Tom@CMS.CC.Wayne.Edu
                         UserTom@WayneMTS.Bitnet
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:11:11 GMT
Subject: Re: The Election '92
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA