HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:54:58 GMT

In article <ld92qnINNmcq@spim.mti.sgi.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen) writes:
>Simon E. Booth) writes:
>|>
>|> Perhaps I am the challenger here, but there must be others that feel the same
>|> way I do.   I cannot accept that I am the only person who belives that the
>|> unborn have a right to live.
>|>
>You are not the only one.  But that doesn't support you're right to
>enforce your "beliefs" on me.

But I am not enforcing my beliefs on anyone . I do not have the authority to do
that, 2005 though..................>
>--
>These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
>occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.


Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: young@ssdd475a.erim.org (Peter Young)
Subject: Re: Bob Dornan on Bill Clinton - IMPORTANT
In-reply-to: mvp@netcom.com's message of Tue, 6 Oct 1992 08:54:20 GMT
Organization: Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
	<1992Oct05.131339.28295@stiatl.salestech.com>
	<1992Oct6.085420.23591@netcom.com>
Date: 16 Oct 92 12:08:36

In article <1992Oct6.085420.23591@netcom.com> mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:

>   Re: These  rumors about Clinton having tried to switch his citizenship
>   -- Just the other day, Rush said this was a rumor being circulated by
>   Clinton's campaign.  The motive is presumably to let the Republicans
>   pick it up and run with it, and then show the proof that the rumor is
>   not true, making the Republicans look like they're making up dirt.

So now there's a rumour going around that the Clinton campaign started
the rumour about changing citizenship, right?  Who cares?  He didn't
do it.  Period.

I just realized what I like about this:  When I holler at Rush on the
radio, nobody hears it, but when I holler here, sombody will probably
notice.  Thanks,
>   -- 
>   Mike Van Pelt                                When guns are outlawed,
>   mvp@netcom.com                               only Carl Rowan will have guns.
--
Peter Young
young@erim.org
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: long@next3.acme.ucf.edu (Richard Long)
Subject: Re: And Hence Abortion is NOT Murder
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 00:14:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.171540.1763@galileo.physics.arizona.edu>  
krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
> Why is it so hard for some people to realize that you are extremely 
> stupid if you jam a coathanger inside your body to abort a baby?  In 
> order to make abortions safe for those stupid people, we get a  
professional 
> to jam a coathanger inside your body?  Something here does not make  
sense.
> 
> Ted
> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu


Drugs like RU486 make coathangers unnecessary, sterilized stainless steel  
or otherwise.  Why don't you write your congressman to help make it legal.
--
Richard Long
Institute for Simulation and Training
University of Central Florida
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5026, FAX: (407)658-5059
long@acme.ucf.edu
From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: SPRINGTIME FOR THE BUSHMAN
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:15:05 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <60.X666X@ramona.com>, doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:
> Atlanta, TN (AP) - The strenuous 1992 campaign for President appears to
> be taking a toll on some of its participants. Challenger Bill Clinton is
> struggling to keep his overworked voice intact; President George Bush
> suffers from occasional mild hallucinations that his doctors report as a
> side-effect of the self-administered heart medicine, Righteouscil (tm).

Ah so this explains why Bush believes in his policies - but why would some
of the people in this group buy them? PErhaps all conservatives take
this drug? Might explain some of the ridiculous claims people have made
here in recent weeks (like Bush won the debate??!!!??) only hallucinations
could explain it...

				gln
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Rush gets nailed on Columbus
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:32:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.205327.23041@novell.com> bboerner@novdpd.uucp (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>Rush got nailed this afternoon.

I agree to some extent.  He was also obviously trying not to be nasty
to her while he searched for a way to converse - she was pretty nervous.
I honestly don't believe that he had ever heard this quote from the
diary but I do not (personally) doubt it's authenticity.

>He had been railing on for a while about the Columbus issue when he
>took a call after a break from a young woman who read from what she
>claimed what Columbus' diary, completely demolishing Rush's argument.

Colombus lived in an age quite different than today, the attempts to
judge him should be done based upon the circumstances and the environment
he lived in (isn't this the liberal approach toward why poor americans 
are breaking the law today?). Not only did they consider Colombus to
be godlike but Colombus probably thought that slaves would appeal to
his sponsor thus allowing Colombus favorable 

You are judging the situation in a myopic sense because the claim is that
Colombus is the beginning of all evil to befall the indiginous peoples of
the Americas.  This presupposes that these natives were the most harmonious
race of humans since the Garden of Eden.  I suspect that these people were
on the islands because they were displaced by the Aztecs.

In the book, "History of Knowledge", by Charles Van Doren, it is pointed
out that the Aztecs and Incas, for all their successes, were quite 
dispicable regimes when one considers human rights.  They practiced
slavery and human sacrifice (sometimes in numbers of ~1000 per week).
I myself have seen a sacrificial table used by the Mayans where 
the living heart of the sacrificial victim was removed.

Consider that the Incas had an empire with a population of 12 million.
How is it, you may ask, that Pizzaro with his 168 men were able to 
conquer the Incas?  The answer is simple:  They Had Help...
I submit that the so called atrocities of the Europeans were not 
so much different than those practiced by the indigenous empires and
that there was sizable support for the overthrow of these regimes.


Mike Best
From: root@june.cmp.rpi.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: RUSH: OUT OF A JOB?
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:09:49 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY

In article <2566.339.uupcb@eabbs.uucp> neil.black@eabbs.uucp (Neil Black)  writes:
>What will happen in four weeks when Clinton is elected?  Will Rush admit
>that he's wrong and that Reagonomics were wrong?  Boy, wouldn't it be
>great to see Rush go away and someone intelligent like Ray Taliaferro
>take his place?  I'd like that....
>        

Gee, I didn't know Rush is on the air because George Bush is President!

I thought the reason might be the 12 million listeners, the fact his show is 
the number #1 talk show in the country.
I don't think 12 million people will vanish when Clinton gets elected next 
month.

Rush is a single fish in the sea of liberalisim.
What scares you about Rush? The fact that a viewpoint differing from yours
has some popularity?

It makes me laugh that liberals scream about freedom of speech, it seems they
only want to protect it when they agree with its content.

Enjoy the next 4 years, I know I will, the Dems won't have anybody else
to blame!!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

J.R. Ordon

The views expressed here are not my employers.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jccompto@eos.ncsu.edu (JAMES C COMPTON)
Subject: Re: Quayle won the debate.
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:23:05 GMT

In article <23645@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM>, msheldon@luna.dpl.scg.hac.com (Marti Sheldon) writes:
|> >Most people have trouble believing Clinton (indeed, it's the cover story 
|> >of this week's Time Magazine) and Dan kept hammering the issue.  "Do you really
|> >trust Clinton to be President?"  I think most would answer "no".  And he and
|> 
|> MOST PEOPLE keep saying "Yes." Every day. Haven't you been listening to
|> the public opinion.  Polls, the man on the street, the voter's registration
|> numbers.  
|> 
|> Most people are saying "No more Bush" "No more trickle down economics"
|> "No more Republican lies."  You just aren't listening.
  
No one that I know is saying that.  If you poll in regions throughout
the country that are know to be demo or repub you'll get skewed polls
every time.  I disagree with many of the things that Bush has done, 
but, he is still the best of the three for one major reason: I intend 
to get ahead in life.  Clinton's plan will take from the producers in
the country, I honestly believe that I can get ahead because I'm willing
to work.  And I honestly believe that if you decide to succeed in this
country all it takes is the decision to do whatever it takes to get 
ahead (as long as you aren't cheating, stomping on people, or destroying
the environment). 

Look carefully into Clinton's past. Do the research yourself, don't rely
on the media or any other one source for all of your facts. You won't 
vote for him usless you really hate Bush and/or you underestimate the
damage that can be done.
 
I am not republican.
My gross income last year was less than $12,000.

	-Chris 

PS  Clinton in the white house would be a menace, so would her husband.
From: rovero@oahu.oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Quayle won the debate.
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:37:47 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School,Monterey CA

In article <1992Oct15.063203.19851@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>
>Do you mean the $100 million Marshall plan?  Quayle lied about that.
>You mean the 
>

Gore was demolished on his book.  It states clearly that "we" need a
$100 BILLION (not million) PER YEAR (not total) "environmental Marshall
plan".  Yeah, he says other countries will have to contribute, but still
says the US will be responsible for the lion's share of the cost.

Add Gore's wildest spending dreams to Clinton's hallucinatory spending
dreams.  Taxes are going up for every American who works if C/G get
elected.

-- 
Josh Rovero   (rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil) | or Internet 5346p@cc.nps.navy.mil 
Department of Oceanography, Code OC/Rv |      Bitnet 5346p@NAVPGS 
Naval Postgraduate School              |              
Monterey, CA  93943   (408) 646-2084   |
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Subject: Re: Thank you for answering my question! Maybe
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 01:43:03 GMT


In article <BvIr9I.E61@eis.calstate.edu>, 
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell) said:

> Finally, those stealth-liberal idiots on Bush's staff, Darman and
> Brady, persuaded Bush to accept a tax hike in return for guaranteed
> cuts in Federal spending.

Ah, but who gets the credit for those two idiots being on Bush's staff
in the first place?  Bush may be able to legitimately lay off some of
the blame for the nation's problems on the Congress, but he's got no
one to blame but himself for the composition of his own staff.

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Subject: Re: STOCKDALE ?!?!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:21:13 GMT

In article <1bgqgsINN1ec@clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk> ecpzp@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr V A Noronha) writes:
>
>Get this guy Stockdale!
>
>He's inarticlate, confused, purely bewildered.
>
>Did he turn on his hearing aid at all?
>
>And to think he might be one heart beat from the Presidency.
>
>Or this Ross Perot's secret weapon to make sure he doesn't do well enough to help Bush by ousting Clinton?

Yeah, but he did pretty well for a guy that Perot picked back in May only so 
that he could fulfill the states' ballot requirements. Remember, Perot 
was looking for VP candidates after he originally chose Stockdale, so 
nobody was expecting him to be Perot's number one candidate. Stockdale 
is not a fool, and 
he's had a prestigious military career. I, for one, was impressed with his
comments on the military, especially as to what he learned while a POW.
This guy's just not a politician, and I have to admire his guts for getting
on stage with two professionals. 
-- 
John Switzer               | Why am I voting for Clinton? Because... 
                           | Bill Gates: 36, CEO Microsoft, $6 billion
74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | Me: 36, Tech Writer, 1978 Diesel Rabbit
jrs@netcom.com             | Screw the nerdy rich! (at least 'til I get there)
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7464 talk.politics.misc:51922 alt.politics.elections:16931 alt.politics.bush:9256 alt.politics.clinton:10553
From: kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Quayle won the debate.
Date: 15 Oct 92 04:02:56 GMT
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services

niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
> In article <98654@bu.edu> tesco@bumetb.bu.edu (Dances With Babes) writes:
> 
> >Any unbiased observer would conclude that Quayle won the debate last night.
> 
> 
> >the Admiral had Gore running away from his book on the environment (supposedly
> >his strong point), making him look like an extremist.  yeah, he exaggerated
> 
> He did not look like an extremist.  And he didn't run away from his
> book.  He corrected misstatements by both Stockdale and Quayle.


Like the man said, you must have watched a different debate. Gore lied
about his book, lied about his Senate voting record, and God only knows
WHAT else he lied about. Gore was as stiff as a wooden statue; he was
clearly reciting "canned" speeches. 

> 
> >with the facts, but so did Gore.  Gore looked so stiff.  How many times did
> >you hear "Bill Clinton and I think ...." at the beginning of a sentence?
> 
> Why is this bad?  And when did Gore exaggerate?
> 
> >This is NOT to say that Quayle is a good VP or that Bush is a good president.
> >But reading the papers today, you have to believe that either 1) they watched
> >a different debate, or 2) they are biased.  I mean, it wasn't even close.
> 
> You're right.  While Dan didn't make himself look as stupid as he usually
> does, he came off as immature and foolish.  He didn't say one
> substantive thing in defense of Bush/Quayle.  He spent his entire time
> lying about Clinton and Gore's records.
> 

Depends on your point of view; many of us see it as telling the TRUTH
about the Sex & Gore economic proposals. Bill and Al attack Bush for
raising taxes, and plan to raise taxes even more. They attack Bush for
embracing the Liberal agenda, and say they'll do more of the same. For
God's sake, everything they bitch at Bush about, they plan to do even MORE
of!  

> It was obvious that Gore was the only candidate prepared to be up there.
> It was obvious that Gore was the only one of the three prepared to
> assume the presidency if necessary.  That's what the vice presidency is
> about, and by that standard, Gore won big.

Whew! And how many six-packs had YOU had before the debate?

Ken Mitchell
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7262 alt.politics.bush:8928 alt.politics.clinton:10114 alt.politics.elections:16489 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6765 talk.politics.misc:51418
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Thank you for answering my question! Maybe
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:47:47 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

In <BvzwA8.3sL@eis.calstate.edu> kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell) writes:

>No dispute whatsoever. In fact, Darman is hinting that he'd be the new
>Treasury secretary in a second Bush term, as if we needed any other
>reasons not to vote for Bush! And Bush himself doesn't see that Darman and
>Brady are responsible for much of the trouble he's in. 

I saw in this morning's paper that Bush says that Brady and Darman will
not be on his staff if he is re-elected.  If true, this is the best news
that I have heard in weeks.

-- 
Mark
My opinions are mine, all mine.  Unless someone else claims them first.
Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
From: rovero@attu.oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bob Dornan on Bill Clinton - IMPORTANT
Date: 10 Oct 92 06:46:13 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School,Monterey CA

It *is* rather curious that Clinton would "tour" the Soviet Union AND
Czechoslovakia so soon after the '68 repression.

Clinton impresses me more and more as a man of principle.   NOT!

-- 
Josh Rovero   (rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil) | or Internet 5346p@cc.nps.navy.mil 
Department of Oceanography, Code OC/Rv |      Bitnet 5346p@NAVPGS 
Naval Postgraduate School              |              
Monterey, CA  93943   (408) 646-2084   |
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7332 alt.activism.d:3862 alt.politics.elections:16605 alt.politics.bush:9034 alt.politics.clinton:10246 talk.politics.misc:51542 talk.abortion:42499
From: carey@server.uwindsor.ca (CAFEY PAUL               )
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: need some sites?
Date: 13 Oct 1992 23:54:22 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada


     
     I was wondering if anyone out there had site addresses to thunder bay
     Canada. Please include bbs or Universities as well. 
     Much appreciated. 
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7374 alt.activism.d:3870 alt.politics.elections:16691 alt.politics.bush:9091 alt.politics.clinton:10334 talk.politics.misc:51650 talk.abortion:42586
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:37:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <77xzn0@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>->keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
>->>krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>->>->87% of americans have comprehensive health 
>->>->care plans. 
>->>
>->>can you support this statement?
>
>->Of course not.  
>
>i didn't think so. thank you.
>
>->I only heard it on Rush's show about 11 times in the 
>->last three weeks.  
>
>that's what i thought.
>
>->But of course Rush always lies, so I guess I must 
>->be lying.
>
>if you say so.

I know that I already posted this on another group, but I wanted to repeat 
it since it is sooo good.

NEW SOURCE FOR 87% - BILL CLINTON DURING THE OCT 11 DEBATE

He said that 35 million do not have health care.  Run the numbers.  
87.333% have health care (give or take a percent)!

Now do you believe me?  Probably not, because, you know that I listen 
to Rush, (and agree with him) so everything that spews forth from my 
mouth must be lies???

Ted

-- 
"How dare you call us [people] `you people'!"
	-Benjamin Hooks

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:6883 alt.activism.d:3654 alt.politics.elections:15678 alt.politics.bush:8227 alt.politics.clinton:9125 talk.politics.misc:50355 talk.abortion:41421
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Date: 8 Oct 1992 19:26:15 GMT
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Simon E. Booth) writes:
|> 
|> Perhaps I am the challenger here, but there must be others that feel the same
|> way I do.   I cannot accept that I am the only person who belives that the
|> unborn have a right to live.
|> 
You are not the only one.  But that doesn't support you're right to
enforce your "beliefs" on me.

-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,talk.abortion
From: jbrindle@halcyon.com (Jennifer Brindle)
Subject: Re: Walking down to the student center last night
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:50:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct11.005152.18738@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
><1992Oct2.042310.4735@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>>Someone here has said that rights only apply if a fetus is aware.
>>
>>Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but can't a pregnant woman feel the child
>>moving about??  Does that not constitute awareness??
>

No.  It constitutes awareness for the WOMAN.  The woman is physically aware
of the fetus' presence...even if she missed other signs previously.
It does not indicate that teh fetus is aware of its movements.

>Trees move in the wind.  Bacon moves when it sizzles.  Fires moves as its
>fuel is consumed.

But do the trees KNOW that they move?  Does Bacon KNOW that it sizzles?
Do fires KNOW they are even burning?

How do you tell?

Jennifer
From: kgirodias@azcc.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: RUSH: OUT OF A JOB?
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:35:05 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

> People who comment that Rush's ego is bigger than his belt have not taken the
> time to LISTEN to what he is saying, so they resort to infantile slanderous 
> remarks about his person.


I think it can be said that Rush is a little full of himself, some of his
comments do show his great ego, but what the hell I still watch the TV show
and read the radio summaries. I enjoy the humor and the research done to
counter liberal stands.

I also enjoyed watching Mohammad Ali fight, he also had a big ego.

Ken
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:7146 alt.politics.bush:8706 alt.politics.clinton:9827 alt.politics.elections:16198 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6675 talk.politics.misc:51048