HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 04:48:56 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed
Followup-To: talk.abortion

In <C01u1B.7H9@news.cso.uiuc.edu> vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes:
>
>Those poor, homeless and hungry children should have had parents responsible
>enough to realize they couldn't afford to feed children.  If they could
>have controlled their hormones there wouldn't be a problem.  You tell me which
>is the worse crime, society refusing to pay deadbeats or deadbeats knowingly
>bringing children into the world whom they cannot feed.  Would any decent
>person bring children into this world to watch them starve?  I think not.

Sounds like you're suggesting that if the couple wanted a child, but their
financial situation changed after conception so that they could no longer
afford to have a child, the responsible action would be to get an abortion.

>Abortion is murder.  It's not a question of just the mother's life, but also
>the baby's.  The laws of this country already state that murder is wrong so
>in fact the state already has control over this issue.

But murder is illegal, and abortion is legal.  I guess abortion is *not*
murder after all.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: the rabid Bob Dornan
Date: 25 Dec 92 04:13:18 GMT
Organization: Spaceley Sprockets, Inc.

larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:

> Dornan resorted to the major New Right tactic - simply project your target
> subject to the wildest possible extreme, even far beyond any reachable
> connection or relevance, generalize again, and continue by ranting on
> about the developed extreme. Then stand back and hope some of your manure
> stuck.

Hate to let you down, but that's hardly a new trick; the left side of
the aisle has been doing it for years. Remember People For the American
Way screaming that Bork would "Force mandatory sterilization of female
workers!!!"? It's a standard attack technique of any group or person
that's short on actual reason and logic.


--
Socialized medicine: Health care with the compassion of an IRS auditor, the
intelligence of a DMV employee, and the cost control of the Pentagon.
From: shapiro@cfsctc.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush on Donahue
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:09:03 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Organisation: SKS Computer Consulting, Inc.


In article <nate.978@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>, nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu
(Nathan Engle) writes...

>    I didn't see that show but I saw some clips on last night's RL the TV 
>show. I'm not sure it's the same Donahue show, though. Is this the one in 
>which they took a call from a girl who said repeatedly that she thought 
>Rush was a pig and got a rousing ovation from Phil's audience?

OK, let's talk about the one which you reference.

>I know 
>that she's entitled to her opinion and she doesn't have to love Rush, but 
>the fact that the audience gave such a positive response to such a weak, 
>non-substantive personal attack makes me really question the intelligence 
>of the people Phil had in his audience. 

I see a lot of references to the relative intelligence of people in this news 
group. 

I don't believe that intelligence itself has anything to do with the ability to
be any less bigoted, argumentative, hateful, sweet, kind, polite, etc. I
believe that these are traits which are learned and can be applied by anyone.
The degree to which they are applied is that which may be affected by the
intelligence of the individual. 

I know quite a few people who are documented to be highly intelligent, yet are
very abusive and seemingly illogical in their actions. 

Inherrent intelligence is meaningless. It is the APPLICATION of that
intelligence which has substance.

As Rush indicated with his response to the call, it took less than a single
sentence for that caller to express her substantive comment, and then she just
resorted to name calling, an act which in my opinion, totally diluted if not
obliterated anything of substance which she may have said.

I have noticed that in this the 3rd of his Donahue appearances (well, 2nd if
you count the first 2 as one since they were actually done at the same time)
that Phil sets Rush up with assertions or accusations and then as Rush attempts
to respond, he is caught in a voice-over for the ending credits, commercials,
etc. 

Well, it's Phil's show, and Rush is a big boy (no pun intended) and capable of
taking care of himself. 

If Phil actually thinks that he is fooling anyone about putting something over
on us with these tactics, he is sorely mistaken.

Regards,
Steve.

/*******************************************************************
* Steve Shapiro                 * All views and opinions expressed *
* SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and are offered as-is *
********************************************************************
* Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org  BBS: (508) 664-6354 N81  *
*******************************************************************/
From: harp@netcom.com (Gregory O. Harp)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices and Secular Reasoning
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 04:43:23 GMT

kgowen@cie.uoregon.edu (Kevin Gowen) writes:

>She also said that some decisions "should not be made unilaterally by
>parents" regarding areas "where the decision or lack of one will significantly
>affect the child's future."

She's right.  Denying children some control over their own futures is
denying them innate rights given to evey human being.

>In this 1979 essay, Hillary Clinton does *not* say outright, "I think that
>children should be allowed to sue and divorce their parents".  But in my
>opinion it can be easily derived from the ideas she presents in this essay.

Without reading the entire essay, I can't confirm or deny that
statement.  However, denying children a legal way to escape
overbearing parents will just result in them running away, committing
suicide, or killing their parents.  These three "solutions" to
child-parent relational problems happen all too often.
-- 
-----------------Greg-Harp----------------harp@netcom.com------------------
  "I think I've reached that point / Where every word that you write /
  Of every blood dark sea / And every soul black night / And every dream
  you dream me in / And every perfect free from sin / And burning eyes /
  And hearts on fire / Are just the same old song" -- The Cure
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 19:51:23 GMT

In article <PATRICK.93Jan1095848@blanco.is.rice.edu> 
patrick@blanco.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:

> "USENET Warlord", I can understand -- you *did* make a show of threatening
> people in e-mail, and on other networks, no less.  

This is pretty funny coming from someone who's said 
"march your fat black ass down here".   Who are you 
going to threaten next with your racist remarks? 

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11278 talk.abortion:53915
From: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Date: 3 Jan 93 03:12:48 GMT
Reply-To: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Distribution: na
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1993Jan1.195123.11272@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
>In article <PATRICK.93Jan1095848@blanco.is.rice.edu> 
>patrick@blanco.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
>
>> "USENET Warlord", I can understand -- you *did* make a show of threatening
>> people in e-mail, and on other networks, no less.  
>
>This is pretty funny coming from someone who's said 
>"march your fat black ass down here".   Who are you 
>going to threaten next with your racist remarks? 
>

Doug Holtsinger, we can only hope.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Subject: A scary thought
Reply-To: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 06:29:52 GMT

The thought that alt.fan.rush-limbaugh = alt.human-sexuality is truly 
a scary thought

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University Cyclotron Facility, Bloomington, Indiana
Distribution:  world
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 04:31:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.154215.13989@rchland.ibm.com>, jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes...
>In article <1992Dec28.075957.19167@wetware.com>, drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>|> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>|> 
>|> ] 
>|> ] I read this and was sickened by it.  All I've got to say is that's what
>|> ] the death penalty is for.  I honestly hope those three killers get the
>|> ] gas chamber, no appeals.
>|> ] 
>|> ] Call me crude, but something must be done.
>|> ] 
>|> ] Simon
>|> ] 
>|> 
>|> 
>|> thanks simon, I was often confused about
>|> your commitment to the sanctity of all human life....
> 
>This is the same attitude I have seen from pro-lifers
>all along.  They'll get arrested to save a life, but
>once the baby is born they could care less.  Try to get
>some of these folks to support social programs like
>WIC or foodstamps.  It's a hoot!

Without admitting to whether I'm pro-life or pro-abortion, I
have to say that whenever these jokes we call "social programs"
become truly fair, I'll consider this a valid argument.

I personally know at least four families who are more interested in
sucking blood from these programs than getting jobs and becoming
responsible.

One of them actually sells their foodstamps to others.

This all makes me sick, and when my tax dollars are spent on those
who truly need them, rather than the welfare society that our know-it-all
liberals have created, I'll be the first to use the above argument.

> 
> 
>Jared Dahl
>Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
>Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.

Jim Graham 

        -> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
                          Neither do they speak for me.
 ______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu                              |
|           dolmen!jgraham@moose.cs.indiana.edu                        |
| BBS:      The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
|            (812) 334-0418, 24hrs.                                    |
|______________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl)
Subject: Re: Twists on gays in military
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 19:08:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester
Keywords: practicality

In article <C00xG4.3oA@rice.edu>, byrd@lucerne.rice.edu (Marc J Byrd) writes:
[beaten to death stuff deleted]
|> 
|> Q:  How about those who like to have sex with dead people
|> (necro-sexuals?)?  Don't they have a right to serve in the
|> military?  Where would they be housed? 

Once again we come back to the "Gays are criminals" viewpoint.
I've heard this argument a hundred times in this group.  This
is just like comparing a homosexual to a pedophile or a serial
rapist.  ONCE AND FOR ALL:

    How does homosexual activity between two consenting adults
    constitute a crime?  Who's rights does it violate?


Jared Dahl
Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.
From: thatcher@vcd.hp.com (Garen Thatcher)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Rush on Donahue
Date: 23 Dec 92 05:38:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Has everyone seen todays Donahue show yet? Phil tried to lay it on
thick but I think that Rush really held up under a really tired and
mundane attempt to dicredit Rush's viewpoint.

Didn't make me like Rush less but made me hate Phil more.....
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Der Limbaugh-bund
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:00:58 GMT

Dr. Megabyte (megabyte@chinet.chi.il.us) wrote:
: gus3@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
: >Hey dittoheads, since Rush has been on the air for several years now, 
: >does anyone know anything about the demographic content of his audience,
: 
: My local station just picked up Rush and has been running ads promoting
: Rush's selling power.  In the ads they claim, "National Survey reveal that
: the largest section of Rush's audience is Male, 35-43, educated beyond high
: school, and, of course, conservative."
: 
: Can't say anything about the TV show.
:

Rush is seen at 2:00AM here on the CBS affiliate.  Recently, the TV station
started showing reruns of the past week's show at midnight Saturday and
Sunday.  On the Radio, Rush is heard on KNBR, which is 90% a sports station.
Rush used to be heard live from 9:00AM to 12:00 noon, and then rerun after
midnight.  After the election, which is likely a coincidence, KNBR stopped
doing the after midnight reruns so they could move another synidcated show
from the afternoon to that spot.  At the same time, KNBR dropped a cooking
show and a liberal talk show ("for another point of view, listen to ..." 
commercials during Rush) to add two new sports talk shows.  And all this
in Sillycon valley, which is 99% liberals.
 
: -- 
: "It is a pity that even a single drop of this noble 
:  gift of God should be spilled" - J.S. Bach on wine
: Mark E. Sunderlin: Technocrat in Winchester, Virginia  KD4HRI
:  aka Dr. Megabyte: megabyte@chinet.chi.il.us  (703) 722-9330
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson)
Subject: Re: New group proposal: alt.conservative.forum
Organization: These are my opinions.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:28:49 GMT

In article <LARRY.92Dec22112619@peak.psl.nmsu.edu> larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
>>>>>> On 17 Dec 92 15:25:15 GMT, KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu (Kurt Ludwick) said:
>Kurt> In article <BzDnnu.L9K@news.udel.edu>, roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) says:
>
>>I vote for democracy in action -- no moderation.
>
>Kurt> And I agree.
>
>Then why do you folks want a new group?
>
>With democracy in action, it'll be *infested* with evil net liberals in no
>time, who'll spoil your alt.praise.rush-limbaugh posts with all their
>non-right-thinking posts.
>
>Well, maybe you do need a moderator after all.
>
There absolutely has to be a moderator.  Instead of conservative topics
being discussed intelligently by conservatives, liberals would be constantly
promoting their socialist agenda and trying to harass the conservatives
(as is demonstrated everyday right here).

How about another new group, alt.conservative.fundamental-christian?  

Signature follows:
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship
hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with
darkness?"


 
=========================================================================
David L. Hanson       Internet --> dlhanson@nap.amoco.com
Amoco Corporation     X.400    --> A=attmail,P=amoco,S=Hanson,G=David,I=L
Any opinions expressed are my own!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 00:06:22 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.154215.13989@rchland.ibm.com> 
jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:

> This is the same attitude I have seen from pro-lifers
> all along.  They'll get arrested to save a life, but
> once the baby is born they could care less.  Try to get
> some of these folks to support social programs like
> WIC or foodstamps.  

Actually, most pro-lifers that I know support social
programs like WIC and foodstamps.  And the poor tend 
to be the strongest opponents of abortion.  
 
But I don't follow your reasoning.  If someone supports 
the criminalization of an immoral act, then why must they 
support those who wish to commit that act?  Does my support 
of rape laws imply that I must satisfy the desires of  
potential rapists?  If not, then what's the difference
between that and abortion? 


>Jared Dahl


Doug Holtsinger
From: johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend)
Newsgroups: mdc.talk,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: "In Bed" Returns
Date: 30 Dec 1992 16:28:53 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: skibum.meaddata.com

My wife and in-laws dragged me, kicking and screaming, into a Chinese restaurant
last night, and once again, to make the best of a bad situation, I applied the
Limbaugh Test to the fortune cookies (adding the words "in bed" to each one):

   "You have a keen sense of humor and love a good time in bed."

   "Beautiful things await you in bed."

   "A wise man knows everything, a shrewd man knows everybody in bed."

   "This is a good time to finish old tasks in bed."

   "Prepare yourself for a big change of events in your personal life in bed."

It never fails.

-- 
// John Townsend             "I thought I was      Legal Conversion Engineering
// Mead Data Central          wrong once, but         johnt@skibum.meaddata.com
// 8891 Gander Creek Dr.      I was mistaken."         ...!uunet!meaddata!johnt
// Miamisburg, OH  45342            8-}                          (513) 865-7250
From: Lyn.Perez@f157.n363.z1.fidonet.org (Lyn Perez)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 00:37:56 PDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:363/157 - Compu-Link II, Orlando FL

In a forum which is addressing christian values, I am taken back abit by the venomous accusations and uncharitable manner in which you are addressing each other.  I don't recall ever seeing the cuss words you are using in the bible.   Perhaps I am interpreting the greek and hebrew inappropriately, but your language is not reminiscience of biblical euphamisms.  Please respond.

--  
        Lyn Perez  -  via FidoNet Node: 1:363/42
             UUCP:  -  ...tarpit!tous!business!157!Lyn.Perez
             ARPA:  -  Lyn.Perez@f157.n363.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Organization: Not until January 11, it ain't.
	<1993Jan1.195123.11272@ncsu.edu>
	<1993Jan3.031248.29133@news.columbia.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 05:23:45 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.031248.29133@news.columbia.edu> rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston) writes:

   In article <1993Jan1.195123.11272@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
  >In article <PATRICK.93Jan1095848@blanco.is.rice.edu> 
  >patrick@blanco.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
  >
  >> "USENET Warlord", I can understand -- you *did* make a show of threatening
  >> people in e-mail, and on other networks, no less.  
  >
  >This is pretty funny coming from someone who's said 
  >"march your fat black ass down here".   Who are you 
  >going to threaten next with your racist remarks? 
  
   Doug Holtsinger, we can only hope.

Nah.  I haven't had to threaten anyone yet, and I'm not about to start.
Just brandishing a Roget's Thesaurus at him ought to do the trick equally as
well...:-) 

--PLH, sesquipedalians R us
--

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Organization: Beats me.  I just work here.
	<1993Jan3.071835.832@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
	<PATRICK.93Jan3104220@rio-grande.is.rice.edu>
	<1993Jan3.225152.8416@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 00:41:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.225152.8416@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:

   In article <PATRICK.93Jan3104220@rio-grande.is.rice.edu> patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
   >In article <1993Jan3.071835.832@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
   >
   >   In article <PATRICK.93Jan2232345@rio-grande.is.rice.edu> patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
   >   >In article <1993Jan3.031248.29133@news.columbia.edu> rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston) writes:
   >   >
   >   >   In article <1993Jan1.195123.11272@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
   >   >  >In article <PATRICK.93Jan1095848@blanco.is.rice.edu>
   >   >  >patrick@blanco.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
   >   >  >
   >   >  >> "USENET Warlord", I can understand -- you *did* make a show of threatening
   >   >  >> people in e-mail, and on other networks, no less.
   >   >  >
   >   >  >This is pretty funny coming from someone who's said
   >   >  >"march your fat black ass down here".   Who are you
   >   >  >going to threaten next with your racist remarks?
   >   >
   >   >   Doug Holtsinger, we can only hope.
   >   >
   >  >Nah.  I haven't had to threaten anyone yet, and I'm not about to start.
   >  >Just brandishing a Roget's Thesaurus at him ought to do the trick equally as
   >  >
   > Better be careful, or someone might confront and ask if you have permit to
   > carry that thesaurus......
   >
   > Never take out your thesaurus unless you intend to use it!
   >
   >  :-)
   >
  >Of course not -- I also have my 1971 AHD as a back-up.  Just remember:  when
  >thesauruses are outlawed, only outlaws will have thesau

  Then support RKBT, the Right To Keep And Bear Thesaurases!

  Join NTA today!

By all means.  Where do I sign up?  :-)

--PLH, oh, well, it *was* fun while it lasted...
 

--
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh