HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:19:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

While Johnny Hart's comic strips haven't been relegated to the editorial
page YET, as has Doonesbury, there may be a reason for it.

Doonesbury (G Trudeau) had the temerity to criticize the Governor of 
Arkansas, now democratic nominee for president, and the PRESS for their
fawning over him, during the primaries.  Makes me wonder about those
who claim there is no bias in the press, when Gary Trudeau (flaming lib)
saw it.

When Hart crosses *that* line he'll probably get canned totally or put 
on the editorial page.

-- 
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.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: Re: Clinton Appeals to Hate
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:35:20 GMT

In article <1942@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:
>
> To me it sounds like, Governor Clinton is trying to BUY the poor vote by
>promising them he will STEAL money from all those RICH people.
> I will admit that he has promised to overall the welfare dependency system.
>I just wonder how sincere he is.

I swear I heard some 'analyst' type on the news commenting on 
Clinton Welfare reforms that 'and it still is unknownjsut how much it will
cost'.  How canyou overhaul Welfare will pumping more of MY tax dollars
into it?

Heh heh, I bet if people got 1 vote per $1000/year income you wouldn't
have a problem deciding how to 'overhaul' Welfare - CUT IT!.

> Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
-- 
*Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu  
*
* "To conquer death, you only have to die,..."                   
*                             -Jesus , from _Jesus Christ Superstar_
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.news-media,alt.fan.dan-quayle
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Clinton Screws Up! Press Reports It!
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:01:33 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.222655.9769@u.washington.edu> sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>In article <1992Sep14.193756.29264@anasazi.com> best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
>>There is certainly a difference between oration and statesmanship.  The
>>Quayle bashers have equated the two but I do not.  Great orators of 
>>history have include such people as Hitler and Churchill but the underlying
>>value system of the two was vastly different.  
>
>Huh?  I don't remember any Quayl-basher equating "oration" and
>"statesmanship".  In fact, most of us are strongly OPPOSED to
>any such equation:  witness our constant ridicule of
>Ronald Reagan, the greatest proponent of style over substance
>in recent American politics.  Most of us see Dan-o as
>the anti-intellectual heir to RR:  the same vacuousness,
>none of the charm.

Interesting, I interpret the barrage of attacks which refer to his
incorrect grammer or awkward phraseology as exactly as I have described.
The attacks are on a superficial level and do not debate the political
philosophy of the man.  You understand something of his form but nothing
of his substance as if all your knowledge were derived via TV.

I am still amazed that RR critics speak of the man as a complete idiot
that couldn't wipe his nose and yet the successes during his tenure
regarding foreign relations and the economy cannot be denied except by
the most closed minded among us.

Mike Best
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4630 alt.fan.dan-quayle:3609
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Clinton Screws Up! Press Reports It!
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 21:11:24 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

michael@adriaan.bu.edu (Michael Chaplin) writes:

>   =All 13 million of us in the 520 stations around the country.
>
> And remember, 13 million lemmings *can't* be wrong!
>

Here in New Orleans, on WWL radio, Limbaugh runs from 1-4.  I had WWL on at
about 3:55 to catch the WSJ report, and heard Uncle Rush close the show.  He
was telling his audience of highly literate and intelligent listeners not to
worry about anything important over the weekend because he was going to tell
them how to think on Monday.  Yup, we're dealing with a serious education
problem in the US if Limbaugh is telling 13 million folks how to think.



>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:57:51 EDT
From: John E. Rodway <JER4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: No taxes

As I have complete faith in the American people, I would like to make the
following suggestion.  If any of you have any influence on Mr. Limbaugh, I
urge you to suggest the following.  For Mr. Limbaugh to become the ultimate
conservative, he should advocate the abolishment of all manditory taxes and
make paying taxes voluntary.  Churches and charities do very well this way
so why not the government?  Maybe we could install boxes in 'Stop and Go',
'McDonald's', etc.  We could label them Education, Welfare, Police, Fire,
Congress, Military, etc.,that way we would have control over how our money
is spent.  Twice a year, we could have a telethon ala Jerry Lewis.  Of
course, if the American people are not as generous as I expect, then we
would have to stop some of the services that we now enjoy.  Perhaps we could
have something similar to the United Way, where we would have voluntary
payroll deductions and do away with the IRS.  Constructive critism welcome
here, send flames to Mr. Limbaugh.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4743 alt.fan.dan-quayle:3681
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.news-media,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Replying to New Zealand  was Re: Clinton Screws Up! Press Reports It!
Date: 14 Sep 92 13:06:24 GMT
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University

In article <18vj0iINNgp9@news.aero.org>, foy@aero.org (Richard Foy) writes:
> In article <1992Sep14.121218.19645@anomaly.sbs.risc.net>
kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
> 
>>
>>
>>I don't actually know why I'm responding to a posting from New Zealand...
>>As if people there actually KNOW anything about American politics, or,
>>for that matter, should be sticking their noses into our countries
>>political scene...
> 
> I pay attention to posts from people in New Zealand and other non US
> countries because:
> 
> 1) They tend to be highly knowledgeable about the US poltical system etc
> 2) I have observed this both by reading the net, and by meeting them in
> their own country.

   Hell, the best newsweekly coverage of the American political scene is in
_The Economist_ published in England.

> 3) They are not indoctrinated with the progaganda in the US.
> 
> They should be entitled to stick their noses into our business because or
> ur government sticks our nose into their business in a big way. For
> example:
> 
> 1) Look at the history of nculear ships and New Zealand ports.
> 2) Look at the history of self government of Palua.
> 3) Look at the history of our relationship to almost any country in the
> world.

   Oh please, spare me the idiotic, irrelevant guilt trips.  We should have
mutual interest in one another's governmental processes because were all doing
buisiness together and because it will help us coordinate efforts to avoid war,
famine, pestelence, and Republican politics.

> Richard Foy
> Redondo Beach CA       Standard Disclaimer

   I don't mean the suffering the US has caused is idiotic or irrelevant, but
rather that those are minor, trivial reasons for interest in one another's
governments.

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.politics.clinton
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: Transportation
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 02:08:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.200958.22144@news.media.mit.edu> elwin@uxbridge.media.mit.edu (Lee W Campbell) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.215805.16376@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
@ In article <1992Sep10.174759.20588@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
@ >In article <1992Sep9.232655.712@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> andy@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
@ >
@ >	[suggests importing Japanese railroad technology...]
@ >
@ >	This (presumed) economic and technological nationalist
@ >concedes defeat...
@ 
@ What is Petrich babbling about?  His mind reader is broken.  Nothing
@ in my posting concedes defeat or espouses nationalism.

	I'm just extrapolating from typical flag-waver "We're #1!!!!"
rhetoric. Why would we need to import Japanese or German maglev
technology if we're #1 in all things, including maglevs.

@ The claim was that MagLev technology works.  If it does, let's buy it.
@ If it isn't ready to buy, then the MagLev folks need a true claim.

	And you won't even concede that this is something that other
nations are ahead on? That we're NOT #1 on maglevs?

@ I like trains, but that doesn't mean that they can do anything I'd
@ like to have them do.  Petrich is offended that I'd suggest testing
@ one of the train myths.  If Petrich really wants to argue that the
@ truth wrt trains doesn't matter ....

	What???

@ >>As long as efficient public transportation has to be subsidized by
@ >>supposedly less efficient automobile use ....
@ >
@ >	If you are talking about the gas tax, I think it's just to
@ >give a stable source of funding.
@ 
@ Giggle.  If mass transit worked in the US, fares would be a stable
@ and adequate source of funding.
@ 
@ >	Actually, cars in America are subsidized pretty heavily.
@ 
@ Yeah right.  I note that the "subsidies" listed are PAID by car users,
@ and car users alone; it's just that they're not paid through the gas
@ tax.

	Wrongo. Fuel taxes, registration fees, and tolls cover only
part of costs; a lot of money for roads comes out of general funds,
which are raised from non-drivers as well as drivers.  One figure I've
seen is 38% (source: Joseph Vranich: _Supertrains_). And that's just
the beginning.

@ I especially like the "free parking" subsidy.  The places that put in
@ "free parking" sure seem to think that the biz that results is worth
@ it, and "free parking" is a selling point to car-users only.

	My, don't you love freebies!

>   Well, one key cost that's not charged to gas users is the cost of
>environmental damage. Last september's Scientific American had an
>interesting article about how standard accounting practices entirely
>neglect environmental values or damages.

/Loren


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4526 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5237
From: scottm@intime.intime.COM (Scott Michel)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush - The TV Show
Date: 10 Sep 92 16:35:12 GMT
Distribution: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: IntelliMED Corporation, Santa Monica, CA

In article <1992Sep9.171234.11475@infonode.ingr.com> bowman@infonode.ingr.com (Tony Bowman) writes:
>What is the name of this show, I can't find it anywhere and have missed any
>reference here and on the radio program.

Sorry, but Gov. Herr Count Willhelm von Slick Willy has outlawed it in your
neck of the woods. :-)  But seriously, it's the "Rush Limbaugh TV Show",
at 3:30pm (1530 hrs), starting Mon, 16 Sep.

>
>
>bowman@infonode.ingr.com
>-- 
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Tony J. Bowman    Intergraph Corporation	Huntsville, Al

-scottm
From: mjb@acsu.buffalo.edu (Matthew J. Bernhardt)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Limbaugh Letter?
Date: 10 Sep 92 00:23:32 GMT
Organization: UB


	Since I haven't had the time to listen regularly in the past few weeks,
I'm not privy to the necessary details for subscribing to the Limbaugh Letter.
Could some kind soul please Email the necessary information?
	Thanks.

-- 
Matt Bernhardt
University of Buffalo             THIS SPACE FOR RENT.
mjb@acsu.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: chrisda@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (David Christensen)
Subject: Re: No taxes
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 01:56:11 GMT

In article <1935@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:
>In article <92255.135751JER4@psuvm.psu.edu> JER4@psuvm.psu.edu (John E. Rodway) writes:
>>...
>>urge you to suggest the following.  For Mr. Limbaugh to become the ultimate
>>conservative, he should advocate the abolishment of all manditory taxes and
>>make paying taxes voluntary.  Churches and charities do very well this way
>>so why not the government?  Maybe we could install boxes in 'Stop and Go',
>>...
>
> Dosent a country in Europe already do this. People decide at the end of
>the year how worthy the government was and then decide how much tax do-
>nations to give. Is it Sweden or Switzerland ?
>
> Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.

Don't know about Switzerland, but the last I heard, Sweden had a Democratic
Socialist government--you know, with national health care and family leave,
paid for with steeply progressive taxes--which surely explains why their
economy is in such a shambles :) 

Maybe you think of Monaco?

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Clinton Appeals to Hate
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:41:27 GMT

nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

>mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:

>>Sounds like envy and jealousy to me.

>    Maybe that too, but would the poor be envious or jealous if they 
>weren't greedy as well? I think that in this case jealousy and envy are 
>the results of other factors. In any event, I don't think that Clinton's 
>"rich vs. everyone else" scenario is designed to appeal to hate. Most 
>poor people don't hate rich people; at least I doubt it since they want 
>to be rich too (as demonstrated by the large numbers of lottery tickets 
>they buy in their attempts to become rich).

>    I still stick by my original prognosis. Greed, pure and simple.

Again, this argument makes sense, Nathan, but what most conservatives 
have a problem with is that these tend to only be issues when the
liberals declare them so.  And when liberals declare an issue, the media
is usually more than willing to go along.  A lot of what you're seeing
on the net is conservatives trying to point out a double standard.  When
a conservative tries to use the same issues that liberals came up with,
they are rationalized and called "non-issues".  

Take the Quayle vs. the draft "issue" of four years ago (and continuing),
and compare it to a frighteningly similar Clinton vs. the draft
"non-issue" of today.  

If Leslie Stall can state without compunction on the Evening News that
"conservatives frequently use the welfare issue to divide and create
a hatred of the lower class by the middle class," it *should* stand to 
reason that Clinton is doing that same thing now.  In fact, what we have
is the press saying things like, "It's about time somebody did something
about the obvious welfare problems we have." 

-- 

Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4915 alt.fan.dan-quayle:3798
From: sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.dan-quayle
Subject: Re: Why Can't Republicans or Programmers Spell?
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:08:06 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <6272@huxley.cs.nps.navy.mil> jxxl@cs.nps.navy.mil (John Locke) writes:
>
>Computer programmers built the USENET and at the same time initiated this
>completely bogus and self-serving idea that the illiterate use of the
>language was okay, and even irrelevant. 

Actually, Our Boy has shown that language abuse is OK, but actually
necessary for political advancement.

>Of course, if they wrote their
>programs with the same attitude, the programs would not work

They do.  They don't.

>These
>same people belch at the dinner table, wear their jeans with the top half
>of their butt cracks showing, and bath infrequently. And then they complain
>they can't get dates. Sadly, they usually end up marrying insane women who
>are looking for a way out of the half-way house.

Hey, my wife is not insane!
>
>What does this have to do with Republicans? Simple: Republicans make lousy
>programmers. How do you like them apples?
>
>John

Here in Washington, RepubliCons grow wonderful apples!

Stop mixing apples and quayles! :-)

-- 
| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions)
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger. NOT!
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:25:50 GMT

billd@gdstech.GRUMMAN.COM (Bill D'Camp) writes:

>According to your quote he agreed to join an ROTC program, apparently
>with the concurrance of his draft board, but changed his mind and did
>not join.  My question is : did his draft board know he had reneged on
>his agreement?  He had already been drafted and was excused because of
>agreeing to join ROTC which he then failed to do.  Somehow this still
>looks like "draft-dodging" to me.

When Clinton decided to not go through with the ROTC program, he had
his father notify his draft board and was put back on the draft rolls
before the draft lottery a few months later virtually assured that he
would not be drafted.

And the ROTC thing was NOT what excused him from the actual induction
notice he received. He was in England at the time, studying at Oxford
on a Rhodes Scholarship, and the induction letter did not arrive until
after the date of induction. This was a not so rare occurance, and he
sought, and received, a postponement of his induction date.

As to the latest news of his uncle, I do not know the whole story yet and
will not comment on it until I do.

-- 
Zack Sessions
sessions@seq.uncwil.edu
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
"Good health is merely the slowest form of dying."
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: alexo+@cs.cmu.edu (Alex Orenshteyn)
Subject: Re: Clinton Screws Up! Press Reports It!
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 23:15:47 GMT


>listen to Rush. It's also well-known that Albert Einstein was not a whiz
>in school in mathematics. The point Rush is making is that you should
In fact, Einstein was always VERY good in math., this myth has been propagated
out of ignorance. The grading system in Einstein's school was different from
the accepted norm, I believe, the grades ranged from 5 to 1, where 1 was the
highest grade. I know it must make a lot of people feel more comfortable with
their own ignorance of basic mathematics when they hear about "Einstein's
problems" with it. In fact, Einstein's abilities in math were quite excellent.
From: schang@pitvax.claremont.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Date: 15 Sep 92 00:09:05 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Pitzer College

In article <5181@news.duke.edu>, eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
> For a little levity in the doldrums of politics, I'm interested in what
> you would think a Clinton cabinet would look like. We already have a little
> idea of who Clinton thinks is qualified to be Vice President and Justice of
> the Supreme Court (Marchbishop Cuomo). It has even been remarked that
> Hillary will get a Cabinet position (like Secretary of State, not Attorney
> General -- can't remember the source). So anyone out there please fill
> in the following blanks (humor please) with regards to who you think will
> be in a Clinton cabinet (and other executive office positions).
> 
 Secretary of State: Elvis (he's been secretly holding gov. positions)
 Secretary of Defense: Elvis
 Secretary of Treasury: Charles Keating
 Attorney General: Dan Quayle
 Secretary of the Interior: Elvis
 Secretary of Health and Human Services: Elvis
 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development: Elvis
 Secretary of Energy: Saddam Hussein
 Secretary of Labor: every mother-to-be on the face of this earth
 Secretary of Education: Paul Reubens(aka Pee Wee Herman)
> << Keep adding more positions that I forgot. >>

	You want Positions?  Howabout:
		The Missionary Position
		The Chinese Basket
		The Shower Stall Double Entry
		Rear Entry
		69

 
> Chief of Staff
> National Security Advisor:
David Duke
> Joint Chief of Staff (military)
> Surgeon General: 
Wierd Al
> Director of Office of Management and Budgeting (?)
> Federal Reserve Board Chairman
> "Drug Czar": 
me
> << Add more executive positions. >>
> -- 
> Emil Thomas Chuck (Duke BME '93)		eyc@acpub.duke.edu
> I'm too busy for my class, too busy for my clubs, too busy for my work.
> I'm too busy for my mail, too busy for my news, too busy for my calls.
> I'm too busy for this .sig. 
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:4355 rec.humor:28092 alt.politics.bush:4354 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5158 alt.politics.correct:5250
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,rec.humor,alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.correct
Subject: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Summary: Just a little political fun
Date: 8 Sep 92 16:30:13 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

For a little levity in the doldrums of politics, I'm interested in what
you would think a Clinton cabinet would look like. We already have a little
idea of who Clinton thinks is qualified to be Vice President and Justice of
the Supreme Court (Marchbishop Cuomo). It has even been remarked that
Hillary will get a Cabinet position (like Secretary of State, not Attorney
General -- can't remember the source). So anyone out there please fill
in the following blanks (humor please) with regards to who you think will
be in a Clinton cabinet (and other executive office positions).

Secretary of State
Secretary of Defense
Secretary of Treasury
Attorney General
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Education
<< Keep adding more positions that I forgot. >>

Chief of Staff
National Security Advisor
Joint Chief of Staff (military)
Surgeon General
Director of Office of Management and Budgeting (?)
Federal Reserve Board Chairman
"Drug Czar"
<< Add more executive positions. >>
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck (Duke BME '93)		eyc@acpub.duke.edu
I'm too busy for my class, too busy for my clubs, too busy for my work.
I'm too busy for my mail, too busy for my news, too busy for my calls.
I'm too busy for this .sig. 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.dan-quayle