HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nathan engle <nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: RESULTS of the Clinton vs. Bush Poll
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 11:15:24 -0500

In article <9204131523.AA11173@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> 
AIESEC - Ohio State <aiesecrs@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> writes:
>In article <51@milestn.UUCP> Marc Rassbach writes:
>>So?  What is your point?  You asked ONLY for votes for Clinton OR Bush.
>>Some people didn't follow 'directions.'
>
>I asked for comments.  This network actually followed directions very well.  I 
>thank them for making this rather easy actually.

    That may be true, but I would still like to see a replay of this
poll with more true-to-life directions. I have no problem with the
assumption that Bush will stand for the Republicans and Clinton for the
Democrats, but I think that Perot supporters and the libertarians should 
be allowed to cast their votes this time, and also that anybody who 
wants to file a write-in for Buchanan or Cuomo should be accomodated 
as well.

>>Are you trying to say something siginificant here?
>
>What the hell could possibly make you want to this statement in such a venomous
>manner.  If you ask me Marc, you have WAY to much free time.

    I think that Marc wanted to have other choices besides Bush and
Clinton. For that matter, so do I. Would you be willing to stage a
rematch with some slight modifications to the directions?

>>What kind of results did you expect?  I would have been surprised if you
>>didn't get the result you were looking for.
>
>Oh really, what if about half the conservatives who reponded said they liked 
>Perot?

    In that case I would say that the conservatives weren't very good at
following directions. The only choices were Bush and Clinton.

>I don't know about you, but before this poll I would have thought this 
>was possible.

    This poll has not tested or disproved the theory that conservative
voters might be tempted to vote for Perot. As a conservative Democrat
I'm looking really hard at the Perot candidacy, but Perot wasn't on the
ballot in your poll. How many names do we have to get on a petition to
get Perot on your ballot?

-- 
Nathan Engle             Software Juggler
Indiana University       Dept of Psychology
nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: SCHLEGEL@Zeus.unomaha.edu (Mark)
Subject: What the joke about Rio Linda
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 22:28:52 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11


What is the background of the comments Rush keeps making about Rio Linda,

like,	"That's __________ for those of you in Rio Linda, California"

Is this a town in CA from which he got a really stupid call?

Mark 		schlegel@zeus.unomaha.edu    (internet)


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: pprior@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Paul A Prior)
Subject: Re: No murder of babies!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 20:58:14 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.175423.29320@nynexst.com> em@nynexst.com (Edward Man) writes:
>I do believe most Doctors believe life starts at conception (does
>anyone have numbers?). Doctors are certainly the most qualified to
>make this judgment.

Keep me -out- this argument, but I don't think the facts agree with
your statement that most docs believe life begins at conception.
I know my classmates and professors certainly don't seem to hold
that belief to a large extent.

But I'm not citing studies, and you may well be correct, FWIW.


-- 
--------pprior@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu----(614) 297-8474----------------
Paul A. Prior    Ban anchors, not reef tanks   "With friends like this,   
2nd year medical student		          who needs anemones?"
The Ohio State U. College of Medicine   Tobacco Kills- Please don't smoke!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: nathan engle <nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: POLL: Bush versus Clinton
Keywords: Four more years
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 11:18:35 -0500

In article <VLoViB2w164w@gatecom.UUCP> mindbend@gatecom.UUCP 
(William Moyer) writes:
>Just a Thought that poped into my head... what if Rush was to run (not that 
>it would be possable...but for sake of argument...) Would you Vote for him?

    Nope, sorry. As a humorist and a political commentator Rush does a
pretty good job. As a leader and spokesman for everyone in America, I
think he would have trouble.
 
-- 
Nathan Engle             Software Juggler
Indiana University       Dept of Psychology
nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: No murder of babies!
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:40:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: CERIS.1992Apr13.184017.14415
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

From article <50@milestn.UUCP>, by marc@milestn.UUCP (Marc Rassbach):
> In article <1992Apr12.000641.7869@news.unomaha.edu> KKRUEGER@Zeus.unomaha.edu (Kurt R. Krueger) writes:
>>   I find this sort of response typical of those in the pro-choice camp.  They
>>can't seem to face up to the fact that killing unborn children even up until
>>the time of birth is murder, so they attempt to make fun of those people
>>who do stand for life.  I, for one, fail to see any humor in killing the un-
>>born.  I suppose killing is easy to reconcile when you have no concept what-
>

Are you then, in favor of capital punishment for women who have
abortions?  Will you make that law retroactive?  Have you already
planned how to execute several million women who have had
abortions?  What are your intentions?  You want a law, what will
be the sanctions?

> To be morally consistant on this you need to also not only support the
> anti-abortion position, but also the anti-capitol punishment AND the
> anti-war position BECAUSE killing IS killing.
>

All murder is killing, but not all killing is murder.  I presume,
Marc, that you would not kill someone who was trying to kill you.
Are you then taking a stand against self-defense?  If you are, I
respect your right to so choose, but I object to making that
choice for me and mine!
 
> Throwing 'God' into the equation is intresting.  In the 1400's the 
> church allowed 'death by exposure' aka the baby was born and left 
> outside to die.  And in 1967, the catholic church had no official 
> position on abortion.  If the 'Word of God' is so written in stone
> and the church is the offical interperter, then why the change?
>

I read somewhere that the church took a stand against abortion in
the 1880's because it endangered the life of the mother.
 
> And the final thing is there are a number of people who do not 
> consider a first or even second trimester fetus human.  If something
> is not human and life is stopped on that something, how can it 
> be murder of a human?
>

Well, if the pregnancy is not terminated, will the result be a
carrot?  A rat?  Can you say "A human baby"?  I knew you could. 
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas More)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson)
Subject: Re: No murder of babies!
Organization: Process Control and Instrumention, Amoco Corporation
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 16:34:12 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.100847.28881@doug.cae.wisc.edu> suo@cae.wisc.edu (Franklin Suo) writes:

>Well, thanks for your inspired input, but you missed the abortion flamewar by
>about a month or so. Too bad - your insightful and original comments really
>would've livened up the debate.

>Rush is correct in saying that AIDS is a health issue that has been turned
>into a political issue by a bunch of activists. Unfortunately, abortion also
>falls into this category. Of course Rush would never admit this, because he
>happens to agree with the anti-choice crowd, inasmuch as they both oppose Roe
>v. Wade.

There are plenty of people saying more or less the same thing so it is
not original.  It may be unusual considering the attitudes of many in
USENET.

Not anti-choice,  it is called anti-baby killing!  Tearing little babies
to bits or burning them to death in abortuary is not choice!  It is
an awful blot on this nation and its people.
   



=========================================================================
David L. Hanson       Internet --> zdlh19@sc.msc.edu
Naperville, IL        Ham Call Sign -->  N5HPO
Any opinions expressed are my own!
==========================================================================
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:1542 alt.rush-limbaugh:1202
From: aiesec@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (AIESEC - Ohio State)
Subject: RE: Poll  BUSH vs. CLINTON
Followup-To: Re: POLL Bush vs. Clinton
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:16:21 GMT



This is in response to those who found my poll question confusing.  Sorry about 
any confusion, this poll asks the question "Who would you vote for
in the next election: Bush or Clinton."  No other candidates please.  If 
anybody missunderstood, reply back and change your responses as needed.  Let me 
know if you are correcting any past confusion.

Also, if you called between 11:00pm and 7:30am (Sunday night/Monday morning)
please recast your vote.  I did not recieve them properly.  If possible, try an
stay away from casting between these times, but it isn't mandatory or anything.
I simply don't know why the were undeliverable.

My apologies,

Ryan C. Scharfy
Buckeystate dittohead
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: suo@cae.wisc.edu (Franklin Suo)
Subject: Re: No murder of babies!
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison
Date: 10 Apr 92 10:08:46 CDT
Originator: suo@sun-25.cae.wisc.edu


In article <dlhanson.12@nap.amoco.com>, dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson) writes:
|> There should be severe laws, primarily aimed at the murdering doctors,	
|> against any and all abortions.  No exceptions for rape or incest,
|> possibly for the mother's health but only if the mother's life itself 
|> is endangered and even it that case the baby's life should be 
|> considered equal to the mother's.
|> 
|> The baby is a human life from the moment of conception.  Any taking of
|> that life is murder and is wrong.  God will judge the nation for this
|> grievous sin.  It may be too late for the nation as a whole to repent
|> and turn to God, but individuals still may do so before it is too late.
|> 
|> "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through
|> Jesus Christ our Lord"  Romans 6:23
|> 
|> YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
|> 
|> =========================================================================
|> David L. Hanson       Internet --> dlhanson@nap.amoco.com
|> Amoco Corporation     X.400    --> A=attmail,P=amoco,S=Hanson,G=David,I=L
|> PO Box 3011, MC B-1   Phone    --> (708)420-4391
|> Naperville, IL 60566
|> Any opinions expressed are my own!   "More security = less security"
|> ==========================================================================

Well, thanks for your inspired input, but you missed the abortion flamewar by
about a month or so. Too bad - your insightful and original comments really
would've livened up the debate.

Rush is correct in saying that AIDS is a health issue that has been turned
into a political issue by a bunch of activists. Unfortunately, abortion also
falls into this category. Of course Rush would never admit this, because he
happens to agree with the anti-choice crowd, inasmuch as they both oppose Roe
v. Wade.


"America the Beautiful, land of the free,
Don't change the words to Land of Hypocricy"		Frank Suo
--Anthrax--						suo@cae.wisc.edu

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: sschudt@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Susan E Schudt)
Subject: test - ignore
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 17:11:55 GMT


Is this working?
From: mad5c@dogwood.cs.Virginia.EDU (Michael DeLong)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Perot's Town Hall and Security
Date: 14 Apr 92 04:27:58 GMT
Reply-To: mad5c@dogwood.cs.Virginia.EDU (Michael DeLong)
Organization: University of Virginia

One thing about this Electronic Town Hall thingy that I have 
never heard discussed is how secure it would be.  It would seem
to me that this would be very important if "the fate of the free
world" were resting on it.  
My current impression is that the basic mechanism would be a lot
like a Nielsen box.  

Just picked up the Vanity Fair.  What a horrible magazine.

Mike.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: sschudt@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Susan E Schudt)
Subject: Re: I tried not to get into this......
Organization: The Ohio State University
 <1992Apr15.222230.20547@rice.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 00:29:29 GMT





In article <1992Apr15.222230.20547@rice.edu> patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Hum
phrey) writes:
>>human-ness begins at birth then they must consider the fact that a child has
>>been born after only 22 weeks of pregnancy and survived.  Thus, their "line"
>>must move from 9 months to 5, which will reduce the number of abortions by
>>almost half.  This idea of abortion on demand at any time during pregnancy is

>>wrong.  A woman has no "right" to this.
>>I have had enough of this discussion so 'nuff said.
>
>Moving your alleged "line" back to 22 weeks will cut the number of abortions
>almost in half?  You need to replace those batteries in your calculator,
>then -- two-thirds of all abortions are done *before 12 weeks*.  The figures
>I remember indicate that disallowing abortion at 22 weeks would eliminate a
>whopping two percent of abortions done in this country...so much for
>pro-life "math".
>
That's the only thing you can argue with huh?  I read my figure in the 
University of Notre Dame newspaper (The Observer) last
Friday which said that 770,000 abortions are done during the first trimester.
Based on 1.6 million abortions per year that is less than half in the first
three months. How many are done in the other two months?  I'm not sure but most
abortion places advertize that they do them up to 24 weeks.  ( At least in my
phone-book they do.)  I would question your statistic considering that many
women don't even find out that they are pregnant until they are already two
months pregnant.  I agree, statistics are misleading sometimes.  Considering 
how many children are killed by abortion each year, saving only 2% of them 
would be still be nice. :)
-- 
Susan E. Schudt
Dept. of Chemical Engineering - Ohio State
"When you're right, you're right!"
"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate!"
From: IO20371@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (John 1:42)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: The Rev-ur-und Jackson
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:16:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: MAINE.92100.131641IO20371
Organization: University of Maine System

Is it just me, or is Jerry Brown trying to win the black vote in a way that's
very obvious.  Jerry Brown seems to do just what the popular opinion wants him
to do, depending on where he is...and in New York, announcing that Jesse
Jackson was going to be his running mate was a pretty blatant way to win votes.
Good thing it didn't work.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 21:16:58 GMT
Organization: Computer Nerd (is that redundant?), WINCO, INEL, Idaho
Subject: Re: Voting in the City That Leaks
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: Computer Nerd (is that redundant?), WINCO, INEL, Idaho
Keywords: 

em@nynexst.com (Edward Man) writes:
>Sorry, Bill, "Quick, easy, efficient" is not the American way. 8-)
>Slow, difficult, and inefficient is the American way. Just stop by
>any government office. DMV is a good start.

Ahh, yes.  Thank you for reminding me of the benefits of living in a
state with no DMV!

For a driver's license, you go to the sherriff's office and take an eye
test and pay your money.  For car registration you go to the county
assesor's office (or, generally, do it all through the mail).

No lines.  No muss.  No fuss. (And I live in one of the more populated
counties in Idaho, too.  I mean, we probably have 70,000 people in
Bannock county!)

Long live Idaho!!!!!

-- 
Geoff Allen          \  What's the difference between a garden slug and
uunet!pmafire!geoff   \   a two-inch long, living booger?
geoff@pmafire.inel.gov \                    -- Calvin
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: KKRUEGER@Zeus.unomaha.edu (Kurt R. Krueger)
Subject: Re: Perot's Town Hall and Security
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 15:20:27 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11

In <1992Apr14.002758@dogwood.cs.Virginia.EDU> mad5c@dogwood.cs.Virginia.EDU writes:

> One thing about this Electronic Town Hall thingy that I have 
> never heard discussed is how secure it would be.  It would seem
> to me that this would be very important if "the fate of the free
> world" were resting on it.  
> My current impression is that the basic mechanism would be a lot
> like a Nielsen box.  

I might be tempted to say that Mr. Perot has not thought of the security
details either, but this project is right in his field of expertise.  I
still wonder whether this screwy idea would result in America becoming one,
giant Cook County, Illinois.
 
> Just picked up the Vanity Fair.  What a horrible magazine.

It's best to clip _Vanity Fair_ to a clothesline for a couple of days to
let it air out.  The whole magazine is a scratch 'n' sniff.


--
/*   Do not write in this space, for office use only:                      */
/*        Kurt Krueger | kkrueger@zeus.unomaha.edu | kkrueger@unoma1       */
From: marc@milestn.UUCP (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: RESULTS of the Clinton vs. Bush Poll
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:09:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: milestn.51
Reply-To: marc@milestn.UUCP (Marc Rassbach)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Milestone R/D Labs, Milw. WI

In article <1992Apr12.221727.10992@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> aiesec@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (AIESEC - Ohio State) writes:
>Here are the results of the Bush vs. Clinton poll.
>
>Forty people responded, and gave Bush the victory, which is expected.
>
>   Candidate         # of voters   percentage
>
>   BUSH                35             87.5%
>   CLINTON              5             12.5%
>
>It is interesting to note that I did recieve a significant, albeit small, 
>number of people who refused to vote for Clinton or Bush and would have liked a
>third party candidate.  The majority of them being more liberal.

So?  What is your point?  You asked ONLY for votes for Clinton OR Bush.
Some people didn't follow 'directions.'

>Also, I think we all realize that this newsgroup is hardly a cross section of 
>society, so liberals can take heart. 

Considering the readership of the net tends to be college degreed and is 
(according to some) 1,600,000 people that's only 3 times the size of a 
radical fringe group.

> Also, the good news for conservatives is 
>that they have proven that they like Bush one hell of alot more then they like 
>Clinton.  

Are you trying to say something siginificant here?

>I will leave the rest of the analysis to the reader.

A poll was taken asking "Bush or Clinton - choose one".  What is a person
suppose to do?   Get excited?  Neither canidate makes me want to leap
out of bed at 3:00 AM and say "I'm gonna vote for this guy."
And the poll was taken in a newsgroup called alt.FAN.RUSH-LIMBAUGH
after a radio show that bills itself conservative.  

What kind of results did you expect?  I would have been surprised if you 
didn't get the result you were looking for.
-- 
Marc Rassbach       marcr@studsys.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.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mrsmart@cs1.bradley.edu (Robert Knautz)
Subject: Entitlements
Organization: Bradley University
Date:  9 Apr 92 01:41:23 GMT

I just got done reading the article from the 4/6/92 WeakNews about
Senator Rudman which Rush was talking about today.  I highly recommend
it if you want a good view of what is going on in Congress today with
entitlements and why Rudman wants out.  There is also a good piece in
the 4/13/92 National Review about what Bush has to deal with in
regards to enititlements and Congress.

Mega-dittos from Peoria-Union Hell!!!!
Rob
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:1476 alt.rush-limbaugh:1171
From: sking@wattres.San-Jose.CA.US (Steve King)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Unofficial Summary for Tuesday, April 7, 1992
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Date: 14 Apr 92 04:14:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: wattres.1992Apr14.041421.27210
Organization: Nancy Kerrigan Fan Club

In article <1992Apr9.045615.28609@zia.aoc.nrao.edu> gmartin@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (George Martin) writes:
>
>
>>Constitution does not provide any "right to an abortion," and in
>>fact the founding fathers made a point about all citizens having
>>the "right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Rush
>
>Could you cite the article or amendment which compels a woman to
>carry a fetus to term.
>


What about the Declaration of Independence, albeit not the
Constitution:

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of
Happiness...."  (p 454 of "The World Almanac", 1992)

I guess you are right...I guess as long as the fetus is a Woman, it
has no right to "Life".  And since a Woman carries the baby, and the
Man doesn't, she is not bound by the Declaration of Independance or
the Constitution.  Sorry.  I thought I had something there about
everyone being guaranteed the right to "Life", but that is only
extended to "Men" and not "Babies".  I'm sorry for wasting your time.


>-- 
>George Martin
>Systems Analyst                     NRAO/VLA                  Socorro NM
>Internet: gmartin@zia.aoc.nrao.edu
>"Skating away on the thin ice of the new day."  (Ian Anderson)


S. James Stevenson-King


-- 
Steve King       Domain:  SKing@Wattres.SJ.CA.US
                 Packet:  KC6WCH @ N6LDL.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
KC6WCH          "Dammit, Jim!  I'm a meteorologist, not a forecaster!"
               "Climate is what you expect.  Weather is what you get."
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh