HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Stuff about Clinton
Date: 16 Oct 92 03:58:28 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <LARRY.92Oct15091104@peak.psl.nmsu.edu> larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.050240.29059@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>   Some interesting things about Clinton:
>   I wanted to see whatit was like to vote for Clinton, so I went into the
>   bathroom and flushed the toliet.
>
>   I had this dream that he was President, they played the Internationale at his
>   inaguration.
>
>   I was walking down the street and saw a house decorated for Halloween and I
>   wondered why they had a likeness of Hillary Clinton riding a broom.
>
>   Bill Clinton wears a toupee--it's to hide the 3 sixes on his head.
>
>   Perhaps their daughter, if she was smart, would divorce herself from them!!!
>
>And there you have it! More compelling logic from the New Right Nursery. I
>know all the Dittoherd is glad to have you along, Simon.
>
>(So what happened to San Antonio, anyway?)
>
Thanks!!  Glad I'm not the only one here!

We still have Rush here, 11am-2pm local time on the radio, but at 1:05am for
his tv show.  And the local TV stations put Donahue and Geraldo on during the
day.  Pretty strange if you ask me.

Simon
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:59:57 EDT
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is bad for our country
 <1992Oct12.201733.15506@news.ysu.edu> <1992Oct13.123115.16005@news.ysu.edu>

In article <1992Oct13.123115.16005@news.ysu.edu>, ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley
Miller) says:

>>Just a couple of notes here.  One is once and for all, Fans of Rush Limbaugh
>>can and do think for themselves.

>I'm sorry, I can't buy that.  the very term "DittoHead" is very suggestive
>that the person who calls himself that is letting Rush do his thinking for
>him.

How on earth can one make that conclusion?  It's like saying "I'm an all-out
supporter of Bill Clinton" means "I let Bill Clinton do my thinking for me,
I believe everything he says."  Completely unsubstantiated, not to mention
paranoid.

A side note:  someone trying to believe everything Clinton says would neces-
sarily have to be schizophrenic.

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: CROSSPOSTING!!!
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:58:55 GMT

mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako) writes:
>After private discussion with a few prominent participants in this newsgroup
>I have been trying to privately moderate the number of crossposts to this
>group in particular and to a.r-l not in particular since it gets about 50%
>more posts per day than a.f.r-l.

    Bravo! Thanks very much for the effort. I get the impression that at 
least 50% of all crossposts appearing in this group are originated by people 
who have no idea that it's being posted here (i.e. just from hitting the 
followup key and ignoring the Newsgroups line).

>If the true fans here would unite and help to rid this group of the 
>crossposting I think it could get back to what it used to be before 
>alt.politics.bush and alt.politics.clinton which seem to be the principal 
>groups that the crossposts eminate from.

    Ok, I'm for it. I'll download your form letter and start sending 
similar mail myself.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Stuff about Clinton
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 05:02:40 GMT


Some interesting things about Clinton:
I wanted to see whatit was like to vote for Clinton, so I went into the
bathroom and flushed the toliet.

I had this dream that he was President, they played the Internationale at his
inaguration.

I was walking down the street and saw a house decorated for Halloween and I
wondered why they had a likeness of Hillary Clinton riding a broom.

Bill Clinton wears a toupee--it's to hide the 3 sixes on his head.

Perhaps their daughter, if she was smart, would divorce herself from them!!!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: GEORGE BUSH, STOP THE RED-BAITING
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:57:57 GMT

lape@cs.utk.edu (Bryon S. Lape) writes:
>bowler@athena.mit.edu (Bert Smith) writes:
>> *    The American people don't want to hear about Bill Clinton's 1969
>> itinerary, they want to hear about the course America is going to
>> take.  Bill Clinton has a plan to create millions of new jobs,
>> provide every American with affordable health care, and improve our
>> schools.  George Bush can only offer more of the same.

>       I am an American, and I want to know about his past.  Quit thinking
>and speaking for me.  Clinton's plan will raise taxes on everyone and
>create a social/welfare state.  No thanks.  Besides, according to the SSA,
>anyone who goes to college and gets a degree, then works for the same
>company for 40 years has a 98% chance of being dead or broke by the age of
>65.  95% of the 2% who make it own their own business.  So, where is the
>value in a job?

    I would say that there's a lot of value in a job. I suppose I should 
try some sort of Rush Limbaugh joke here and note that of the many Americans 
who worked at jobs in 1860, all of them are now dead. Basically it's a 
silly, irrelevant statistic, just about like yours. Just out of curiosity, 
how large is the statistical sample of people who have earned college 
degrees and then worked for a single company for 40 years? What relevance 
do your SSA statistics have to the millions of Americans who will hold an 
average of 10 jobs in their lives? Are *they* 98% likely to be dead or broke 
by age 65?

>> *    Consider the source: these scurrilous charges were started by
>> Bob Dornan ranting on the House floor, who admits he has no evidence
>> and was "speculating."  They were picked up by the Washington Times,
>> and fanned by Bush deputy campaign director Mary Matalin and press
>> secretary Torie Clarke.  And we all know who gives them directions:
>> James Baker, the former Secretary of State.

>       And Clinton has yet to come clean on anything.

    Do you ever wonder whether there's anything to "come clean" on, or have 
you already made up your mind that he's the scum of the earth?

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is bad for our country
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:24:56 GMT
Distribution: usa, na
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <1992Oct13.190408.19387@wdl.loral.com> eric@wdl35.wdl.loral.com (Eric Kuhnen) writes:

>Furthermore, I testify that the only way lasting Peace may be achieved is
>by knowing the true character of God.

And then you burn at the stake anybody who doesn't beleive in what you think
is the true character of God.   If you manage to burn enough of em,  there
will be lasting peace.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: kkrueger@cwis.unomaha.edu (Kurt Krueger)
Subject: Re: Quayle Smashes Gore...
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 21:11:15 GMT

<AUTSW@ASUACAD.BITNET> writes:
> 
> Yeah, I loved how Gore had all the pre-prepped answers... He sure was
> "original"... Give me a break, it was like Gore was reading from a
> teleprompter!

He was incredibly dull, and I am used to watching C-SPAN.  That debate
showed why he's called Sen. Bore.  I don't think we've had any good Dem-
ocratic speakers since Kennedy.  Carter was a little better than lifeless,
but other than that, dull, dull, dull.  Whatever happened to the Trumans
of the Democratic Party?


Kurt R. Krueger
University of Nebraska at Omaha
kkrueger@unomaha.edu
From: lanier@acpub.duke.edu (Dustin Lanier)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Kemp
Date: 10 Oct 92 21:01:04 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <mykes.0e5d@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>
>So WHO would I like to be voting for for president?  Believe it or not,
>I'd rather vote for Quayle as president than Bush or Clinton.  I'd rather
>vote for Bush than Clinton, too.  But I'd much rather have the chance to
>vote for Jack Kemp, first and foremost.  If not Kemp, I'd want to vote
>for Phil Gramm.  Then James Baker would be a good vote, too.  Kemp and
>Gramm are the top two economic minds in government today.  Kemp is the
>best problem solver we have, also.  It is no coincidence that Kemp was
>named secy. of education, initially, to fulfill Bush's promise to be
>the education president, but he was put in the position where his problem
>solving abilities were best used (to put out a real fire) - HUD.


I agreed with your points but be careful when you label Kemp and Gramm as the top
economic minds when they contridict each other economically.  Kemp is pretty
hard core supply side, while Gramm is not ... he voted for the tax increase
I think they could become compatible, and I think a Kemp/Gramm or Gramm/Kemp
ticket could blow the democrats out of the water in 96 if they don't attack
eachother too vitrolically during the primaries.

Also don't delude yourself into thinking that putting Kemp into HUD was a
benevolent move by Bush ... In fact cynics (which of course I am not one :) )
would say that it was almost a slap at Kemp, a hard core small government
consrvative, into the largest beuracracy this side of the Kremlin, HUD, during
a presidency that would basically ignore domestic issues.  It was only due to
things like the LA riots that issues like entrprise zones and home ownership
plans got any attention.  One of the quotes I keep on my wall is when a boy
at boys state asked bush an uncomfortable question in front of reporters.  He
asked why Kemps policies had been ignored, and Bush replied Let me set something
straight; *I* am the president and these are my policies.  I can almost see
Bush stamping up and down :)  There is no love lost between the two and I think
that is pretty well documented.

Dustin Lanier

lanier@acpub.duke.edu
From: madkins@lonestar.utsa.edu (Martin L. Adkins)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush is bad for our country
Date: 10 Oct 92 20:51:05 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

>
Much mindless anti-conservative drivel deleted.
>>>You are hereby certified for rank of MegaDitto..
>>>
>>Thank you very much. I AM a Mega DittoHead!
>>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Translate: "I am a mindless idiot who has no clue WRT how to think for one's
>self, therefore, I just agree with the drivel Limbaugh puts out, because
>so many other people do."
>
>Thank the fates that when Bush falls, Rush will fall...
>>
Umm just a couple of points.  I am a cconservative along the lines of several
rather famous conservatives. Among these are Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan,
Margaret Thatcher and Aristotle.  Although I am prepared for the inane comments
concerning Ronald Reagan that I am quite sure I will be blasted with, I'm quite
sure none of the liberal camp is quite willing to call Aristotle mindless.  I'm
quite an avid listener to Rush Limbaugh as well.  Being a listener does not
make any one of us incapable of "thinking for one's self".  As a matter of fact
as a college student it would be far more conformist to adopt the liberal line.
But I digress, I do not agree with everything that Rush says.  I do however
agree with the majority of what he agrees with.  Also, as a conservative, I
do not believe that the world will end at 3:30 tommorow afternoon.  This
enables me to have some fun and laugh at the inconsistencies in the never
ending search for a liberal utopia.  I don't believe that utopias are possible
therefore I am a conservative and I find modern socialism laughable on
virtually all fronts.
Secondly, if you beleive that if the President, God forbid, is defeated that
that would be the end of Rush you expose your naivete.  If Slick Willy were to
(shudder) win, the antics in Washington would just provide infinately more
material for Rush.  The American people like Rush.  That little fact annoys you
no end thus your perpetual frustration.


>--
>*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist  //  Newsflash from the Vatican: *
>*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller  //  "Easter has been cancelled...*
>*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu  //  Someone found the body...."   *
>****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.***************
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: The Rush Blimp?
Date: 16 Oct 92 23:45:57 GMT
Distribution: world, na, usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Oct16.174809.15705@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
>
>Last night I was listening to Tom Snyder - while discussing the weight 
>problem of his guest, Tom Snyder said;
>
>Look at Uncle Rush!  They should just paint "FUJI" on his side and roll
>him out at football games.
>
You know what's sadder than people making fun of the way others look? People
making fun of the way people no longer look. Granted Rush is still on the 
fat side, but he has lost at least 40 or 50 pounds - all you have to do 
is compare how he looks now on his TV show with his Rush III video. 

I'm sure Rush doesn't care about these jokes because he makes them about 
himself all the time. Yet, as he says, you can always tell when liberals
start running out of substance, because they start making personal attacks 
instead. Sure Rush makes fun of how people like Kennedy have red eyes, or 
Perot's bad haircuts, but at least he is always make some sort of 
substantive criticism along with it. This seems more than people like
Uncle Tom can do. 
-- 
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)
From: lanier@acpub.duke.edu (Dustin Lanier)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush in the National Review
Date: 10 Oct 92 20:20:36 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <1992Sep25.105923.5420@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>
>1) Clinton/Gore are moderates (even George Will admits that).
>2) The way Bush has discredited Conservatism, many people are looking
>   for an alternative.
>

where exactly has George Will admitted that? I'm not being accusative, its just
that I read him fairly regularly and I haven't seen this reference and I would
be curious to read it for myself ... 

Dustin Lanier
lanier@acpub.duke.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Summary Fri 10/9/92
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:16:48 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.171726.2815@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>Unofficial Summary of the Rush Limbaugh Show

>The 1991 curriculum featured one course that included an anti-
>Christian diatribe that compared Christ's crucifixion to
>necrophilia.

	A conclusion that non-Christians would probably find
self-evident about Christianity.

	I wonder how many of those who profess to believe in
Christianity may agree.

	And let us not forget about the non-Hindus who find the Hindu
belief in the sacredness of cows absurd.

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: madkins@lonestar.utsa.edu (Martin L. Adkins)
Subject: Re: Re: Rush is bad for our country, NOT!
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:34:39 GMT

In article <122460028@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom) writes:
>> >Thank you very much. I AM a Mega DittoHead!
>
>It is completely amazing to me that even fans of Rush would
>say this about themselves.  This sort of sheeplike crowd behavior
>has always disturbed me.  Oh well.
>
>doug
Sheeplike behavior?  I repeat the term Ditto is used to avoid needless
repetition of superlatives.  If you are a fan of Rush Limbaugh and you call
to speak to a point rather than waste time with "I agree Rush", I like your
show Rush or even yours is the best show on the planet you say ditto.  It does
not imply that you agree with everything and you follow mindlessly.  It is an
error in logic.  Your first premise is implied "people that say ditto are
agreeing mindlessly with whatever Rush Limbaugh says and follow him mindlessly.
Your second premise is that people that agree mindlessly are sheep like.
Your conclusion is that it is amazing that people admit to being sheeplike.
Your conclusion does not follow from the premises.



From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 05:29:46 GMT
Subject: Re: RE: The End of Rush? - NOT!
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, snyder3338@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:

> What's the matter???  Are you afraid someone might agree with him???

Hmm.  Now there's a frightening possibility that had not occurred to me.

> Maybe it's because he's RIGHT!!!

Maybe.  Anything is possible.

>   Think about that.. and maybe you should
> listen some more so you can straighten yourself out....

Yes, it all seems so simple now...

doug
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6853 alt.rush-limbaugh:7389
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh on Madonna (was Re: Summary Mon 10/5/92)
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:47:47 GMT
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Oct12.014753.15173@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.153833.12030@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct8.005556.29945@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>
>@ 	And how was the
>@ movie decadent? What is self-evident to you may not be self-evident to
>@ others.
>
>>How about masturbation through her clothes on stage?  She said, on one 
>>of those Entertainment Tonight clones, that she had an orgasm on stage.
>
>	How is that supposed to be so _terrible_? It sounds like she
>was enjoying what she was doing :-)
>
>	I saw it myself when she performed in the Bay Area and also on
>HBO, and I enjoyed it.
>
>	What's wrong with a woman liking sex? Are women supposed to
>simply lie back and think of their homelands? Is the enjoyment of sex
>supposed to be a male monopoly?

What type of people am I beset with???  Why must you continually put 
words in my mouth???

I never said that there was anything wrong with women enjoying sex.  As 
a matter of fact, I do my best to ensure that my wife enjoys sex (with 
me).  It's the `in front of millions of people' part that implies 
looseness.  I don't know how much time you spend with teenage boys, but 
let me give you a clue.  If they find a girl that emulates Madonna, they 
know that they have got an easy lay.  That's not how I want my daughter 
treated, so I find myself forced to discourage her from listening to 
artists like Madonna (fortunately my daughter has better musical taste 
than that, but I will be in trouble if someone who is actually good 
begins to act like Madogga).

Ted


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

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6672 alt.rush-limbaugh:7144
From: ecpzp@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr V A Noronha)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE #1
Date: 12 Oct 1992 11:49:24 +0100
Organization: Computing Services, University of Warwick, UK
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
NNTP-Posting-Host: clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk
Summary: PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE #1


Marks out of 10 for the combatants:


Bush      7
Clinton   7
Perot     8.5


###  RESULT:  Perot takes votes from Clinton but not enough to save Bush's bacon ####


If George Bush wants to avoid looking for a new home soon, he'd better take off his gloves.  Let's face it.  Clinton is a draft-dodging, dope-smoking, lie-telling adulterer.  Is this the man Americans are going to entrust with the leadership of the Free World?

Who's going to win the Quayle-Gore contest?  With Gore having everything to lose, my money's on V-President Quayle.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6801 talk.bizarre:34008
From: jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Obviously not fans of Rush
Date: 13 Oct 92 21:04:35 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Originator: jcarroll@ferris


In article <1992Oct13.074514.289@news.Hawaii.Edu>, rigler@galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu (80 Hours) writes:
> 
> I mean, how can you listen to "2112", say, and hear Geddy Lee's platinum voice 
> ringing out pure and clean as he soars up and down the octaves, tugging at
> your heartstrings with such soulful tunes as "Priests of Syrinx," and fail
> to be touched.  "Weee-eee are the Priests...of the Temples...of Sy-rinx!"

well, not hell maybe, but at least a volcano. I hear that St. Helen's is
still simmering (on the other hand, for all I know, you've located in Hawaii
so as to be within commuting distance of Kilauea).

rigler, you dweeb, no doubt you are chortling to yourself, basking in the
cleverness and sheer chutzpah of your festering sore of a post, apparently
completely clueless that in addition to crossposting painfully trite drivel
into the lives of innocent people seeking refuge from concepts, you have
unwittingly done so after that particular horse was flogged to death,
disemboweled, carved up, roasted, served as kung pao "chicken", and left
to rot (metaphorically speaking).

if you still feel like posting in real-time threads after your lava bath,
go buy a real life and a finite interrupt response time (hint: look for
the blue light at K-mart). otherwise go back to your psychotic babbling.

may you be reincarnated as finerty.

zen master frog-legs

it takes a tough man to raise a tender chicken  
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh