HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Why Bush would/will burn for the delay in florida
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Distribution: usa
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:53:57 CDT


In article <1992Sep11.202818.14845@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas) writes:
> In article <1992Sep11.140452.17935@dbsun.uucp>, hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey) writes:
> |> In article <mykes.0dl8@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
> |> >
> |> >The Bowlen amendment was unconstitutional.  If congress is allowed to make
> |> >laws that restrict or eliminate the presidential powers of foreign policy
> |> >institution, then congress becomes the only branch in government.  A GREAT
> |> >example of spitting on the constitution.
> |> 
> |> Would it have been too much trouble to get a majority of those nine
> |> people known as the Supreme Court to agree with your statement before
> |> they broke the law?  The law may have been unconstitutional, but it
> |> is up to the Supreme Court to decide, not the executive branch.
> |> 
> It's the Boland amendment(s).  They changed yearly.
> 
> For the Supreme Court to make a decision there must be a case or controversy.  I.e.
> a law must be broken and somebody tried for it's violation before the courts will 
> rule on whether that law is constitutional.

No.  Take the Gag Rule for example.  The law was challenged and apealed to 
the Supreme Court, yet the rule has never been implemented.

> In the U.S. the federal courts do not issue advisory opinions.

But laws can be challenged before they take effect.  Another example
is the Utah law banning nearly all abortions.  It was challenged as
soon as it was passed, but before being implemented.

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Polls R Us
Keywords: horserace, poll, kick the bastards out
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 21:19:18 GMT

In article <5yynl2q.madhaus@netcom.com>, madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:

|> More good news from the Cultural Elite Distribution Centre (CNN).
|> Formerly-disgraced-but-attempting-rehabilitation-ex-President Nixon
|> advised Bush and Quayl to forget California and concentrate on
|> Illinois and New Jersey.

	I found somwthing better then Polls in the New York Times this
sunday: financial reports. Observe:

	The dems and the GOP both need to raise $55M to match their
matching funds. At present, the Dems have $53M, the GOB has only $7.8M.

	The major parties can only contribute $10M to their candidate.
The Dems have raised their $10M, the GOP has raised only $2M.

	The Dems raised a record amount of money in August ($17M), and
they will probably break that in September, whereas the GOP has not been
touching it's fundraising goals at all.

	(My favorite) The Dems received a little over $800K on the Monday
following the Republican National Convention, most in quanities of $5-$15.

	This bodes well for Bill and Al, who can effectively blow off
fundraisers for the next 7 weeks and spend time hustling votes instead.
George and Our Boy are going to have to work a little harder to pay the
bills. (No one doubts that the GOP will eventually raise the money,
even if they have to get Neil to steal if for them).

-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens,
 nor should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God"
                                     - George Herbert Walker Bush, Feb 1989
From: acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:42:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Great Beyond

In article <6197@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil> rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero) writes:
>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.

Contrary to prevalent right-wing fantasies, Doonesbury was _not_ moved
to the editorial pages for having opinions, err, being liberal.

Doonesbury was moved to the editorial pages because Trudeau will not allow
papers to run his very artistically detailed strip at the size most
papers run the comics at. Some right-wing papers may have moved it
for politics, but most were responding to Trudeau's policy.
-- 
The world is not analog. The world is digital,
with an incredible number of bits.
Arthur C. Adams (not the comic-book artist)                        <fnord>
E-Mail acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: crosmun@crosmun.rtp.dg.com (William Crosmun)
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger. YUP!
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 18:47:26 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

In article <1992Sep1.180900.24779@novell.com> bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.120949.7529@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>>I am not going to argue the merits of either of these people's "war
>>record", but I would like to discuss this double standard the Democrats
>>have on these two.  It was OK for Clinton to do anything legal to 
>>avoid being drafted, yet Quayle is not afforded that right?
>
>Well, I don't know if having family connections applying pressure is
>all that legal.  But suppose it is - here's how I look at it - would I,
>or most other young men without the benefit of wealth and pull be able
>to pull off what he did?  If not, is that right?

A better question might be: if you could, would you? And if you would, then is
what he did right?

>
>Brendan
>-- 
>Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
>Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
>Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail.


===============================================================================

William Crosmun
crosmun@dg-rtp.dg.com

===============================================================================

"Socialism has a bad name in America, and no amount of wishful thinking on the 
part of the left is going change that in our lifetimes....The words Economic
Democracy are an adequate and effective replacement."

						   Derek Shearer - Advisor to Bill Clinton

===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mhmulli@eos.ncsu.edu (MARTIN HARPER MULLIS)
Subject: Re: Rush's TV Show: Will it Succeed?
Originator: mhmulli@c00452-313mn.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: mhmulli@eos.ncsu.edu (MARTIN HARPER MULLIS)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:00:47 GMT


 Hello,

 I just found this group,  my name is Martin and I am from Raleigh.

 In reply to Rush's TV show, it is on at about noon here. Needless to say
 that I doubt any one will be able to see it.  All the good conservatives will
 be to busy earning a living.

    MHM
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5185 alt.rush-limbaugh:4407
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:13:30 GMT
	<1992Sep3.164143.4987@newsgate.sps.mot.com>
	<1992Sep8.193748.20669@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
	<1992Sep9.004424.26651@newsgate.sps.mot.com>
Distribution: usa, na
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory

The mention of Hanoi Jane reminds me of a bumper sticker we saw:

	Nuclear power plants are built better than Jane Fonda.

Slapped on the same bumper, right below it, was another:

	But which would you rather spend the night with?

Actually, the real difference between Jane Fonda and Dan Quayle is about
100 IQ points.

L.
"Yeh, Buddy..            | larry@psl.nmsu.edu (Larry Cunningham)|  _~~_
 I've got your COMPUTER! | % Physical Science Laboratory        | (O)(-)
 Right HERE!!"           | New Mexico State University          |  /..\ 
 (computer THIS!)        | Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA 88003    |   <> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are CORRECT, mine, and not PSLs or NMSUs..
Yo! Bottoms up! US motto. Boy!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: steph@cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson)
Subject: Re: Scarey tag line...
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: world,usa,na,alt
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:46:57 GMT

In <1992Sep15.073754.13406@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:
[snip]
>Quick, of the following Roman emperors,  which names do you recognize:

>Octavian:  Ruthless, hard working, consicenous
>Antonius Pius:  Diliegent, religious, a good emperor
>Caligula:  A coward, who vainly splashed at the sea side and exhorted
>	the legions to go die for his beliefs,  a person of no great
>	intellect, who helped to destroy the Julio-Claudian tradition.

I recognized all of them.  If you had listed Octavian by his better 
known monicker "Augustus Caesar", a lot more people would recognize his
name than Caligula's.  (For that matter, I hardly think Caligula "helped
to destroy" the Julio-Claudian tradition.  Claudian ruled *after* Caligula,
as did Antonius Pius and the vast majority of the "good" emperors.  The
only tradition observed by the Emperors was the understated but effective
use of absolutism pioneered by Augustus himself.  Julius Caesar was never
emperor, only a dictator.)

>Yup - if the Nation ever sinks to such depths that we elect Mr Potatoe
>Head,  I'm sure that the school kids will read about his presidency.

I very much doubt that they would.  My U.S. history class barely made it
to WWII, and my history book only went through Nixon.  (It's just as well
that it didn't get to recent times, considering its slanted coverage of
more recent events.)  Even in the portion of history that we did study,
many Presidents were glossed over.  How many school children would recognize
these names:

Martin Van Buren
Franklin Pierce
James Buchannan

Worse men than Quayle have been President.

--
Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Gigabit Study Group 

  "It is considered good to look wise, especially when not 
   overburdened with information" -- J. Golden Kimball
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5390 alt.rush-limbaugh:4846
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Scarey tag line...
Date: 15 Sep 92 07:37:54 GMT
Distribution: world,usa,na,alt
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

>jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>
>-- 
>John Switzer               | 50 years from now, nobody will
>                           | remember Candice Bergen or Murphy
>74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | Brown, but every school kid will
>jrs@netcom.com             | be taught about President Quayle.

If Quayle every became president,  then the quote would undoubtably be
true.

Quick, of the following Roman emperors,  which names do you recognize:

Octavian:  Ruthless, hard working, consicenous
Antonius Pius:  Diliegent, religious, a good emperor
Caligula:  A coward, who vainly splashed at the sea side and exhorted
	the legions to go die for his beliefs,  a person of no great
	intellect, who helped to destroy the Julio-Claudian tradition.


Yup - if the Nation ever sinks to such depths that we elect Mr Potatoe
Head,  I'm sure that the school kids will read about his presidency.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco)
Subject: Re: Rush's TV Show: Will it Succeed?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 20:39:59 GMT

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

>Depends :)

>> I don't see it as very likely. In most places, its on late-night.
>> I'm sorry, but I don't think that at midnight people are going
>> to want Rush Limbaugh-style talk. After all, late night
>> programming, except for Nightline, tends to be very light
>> fare - Arsenio, Letterman, Leno... I don't think a lot
>> of people are going to give up comedy and celebrity interviews
>> for solid politics, especially very strong views like Rush's.
>>

>Rush Limbaugh's style is light fare, too.  Feminazi TV commercials
>ought to be hilarious if done well...  As for other late night fare,
>I am a night person.  I typically watch nightline, then Crossfire,
>then C-SPAN.  Arsenio has an excellent show.  So does Letterman.
>Jay Leno does not make me laugh - in fact, he comes across as a
>hateful and vengeful person (to me).

>> Also, while right-wing views are popular on talk radio, right wing
>> TV shows have generally failed - look at Morton Downey. Admittedly,
>> Downey took a far more abrasive style than Rush, but viewpoint-wise,
>> they aren't that different.
>>

I predict that Rush will do very well with his new show. Unlike most
talk shows, his will be starting out with a huge base support of
potential viewers. Also, without Johnny Carson on the air, there is
simply no comedian who'll make fun of the Democrats. Arsenio Hall
makes no attempts whatsoever, and Jay Leno clearly puts most of his
efforts into Bush bashing. Rush should provide a little balance -
or maybe it would be better stated to say that he'll give viewers
a choice other than turning the TV off.
.
:wq
:
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page)
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Organization: Texas Instruments
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:58:01 GMT

|> 
|> The parents should mandate, to a point.  Once again, if a large group
|> of Muslims should move into your school district, do you want them
|> mandating required courses in Islamic history?  Do you want passages
|> from the Koran posted on the school walls, because they have mandated
|> this?  Do you want "voluntary" prayers to Mecca led by the teacher?
|> 
|> >> Rhetoric aside, you, as an educator at a public instituion, have shed
|> >> your individualism and become a spokesman for the State.  That happened
|> >> the moment you accepted tax money.  As a spokesman for the State, you
|> >> cannot "respect an establishment of religion."  Congress passes a law
|> >> giving you tax money, you cannot use that money to preach your religious
|> >> beliefs.
|> 
|> >Spokesman for the STATE is correct.  Not for the federal government.  There
|> >is a major difference, you know.  Where does it say in the constitution that
|> >the State of Utah can't promote a religion?  As long as they don't prohibit
|> >practice of other religions, there is nothing legally wrong.
|> 
|> The State of Utah, or any other state, may not use federal tax dollars to
|> promote a religion.  When the state accepts federal tax dollars for,
|> education, they agree to abide by a set of rules.  Because of the
|> Constitution, these rules include the prohibition of "respecting the
|> establishment of religion".  If the Federal Government didn't pay for
|> it, the individual states could do whatever they wanted.
|> 
|> I just do not want to see my tax dollars go to support your religious
|> beliefs.

Nor do I want to fund the secular humanists.  Remember, the same Supreme Court
that removed prayer from schools because it "promotes" a religion has also
declared that secular humanism IS a religion.  Secular humanism IS being
supported with federal $s in public schools especially in the areas of sex and
HIV/AIDS education.

It is also interesting to note that federal $s are rather routinely used by
PBS to broadcast New Age sermons.

So where is the establishment clause in these cases?
  
Doug Page

***  The opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my  ***
***  employer.                                                             ***
From: roberts@triton.unm.edu (Robert Smathers)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush's TV Show: Will it S
Date: 15 Sep 92 02:39:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <LARRY.92Sep13193623@peak.psl.nmsu.edu> larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way) writes:

>Well, if CBS has the rights to it, I wonder why it is available on ABC and
>NBC in my area?
>

Rush Limbaugh's TV show is syndicated (Multimedia Entertainment).  
Syndication basically means TV stations in a market bid for the
rights to carry the show and the higher bidder wins.  Maybe 
his show is flat fee, tho -- if you can afford it, you can carry
it.

COMMENTS FROM SHOW #09149 - SP:

Great Show!  Funny, Rush's humor seems to come through better
on TV than on radio.

Do away with the audience.  You don't hear an audience on the radio
show, do you?!?!?  

Re-do the set.  Very stupid.  It would be so cool to have the set
a "radio station" where Rush would sit down at a desk with the EIB
microphone and his Rush Limbaugh neon sign behind him -- the viewer
gets the feeling he is sitting in the studio watching the Big One
work.

No late night Rush Limbaugh viewings for me!....

Robert
roberts@triton.unm.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex)
Subject: Re: Why's George in trouble?  (hint - he's got big ears...)
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 15:27:26 GMT

In article <1897@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:

	[re: perot]

>   The way he left the race. He has angered a lot of people. I personnally
>think that the smart money is on the person Perot didnt endorse. Perots   
>followers are so mad at the way he dumped them that they will vote for the
>man Perot dosent want. Now the real question is how many people are angered
>at Perot and how many people are still hearing the pipers song ?

	I don't think that perot has endorsed either candidate. Clinton
probably benifited the most from perot, but it looks more like luck then
anything else. Perot took the heat off of clinton, so that clinton could
position himself better, but I don't think it was a deliberate strategy
on perots part.

	perot wrote an article that ran in the NYT editorial page about
a week ago, and he was talking about the need for both parties to learn the
lessons of his campaign. He didn't say anything specific about anyone.



-- 
                               Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
The feminist agenda is a socialist, anti-family political movement that 
encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice 
witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians. - Pat Robertson 1992
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: bnolte@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Bill Nolte)
Subject: Re: Bush and the Debates
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:26:30 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

From article <1992Sep13.235742.15521@afterlife.ncsc.mil>, by acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams):
> Why is George Bush so afraid to debate Bill Clinton?
He's not.
> 
> The Bi-Partisan Commission on Debates, whose plan both parties
> agrees to follow, stated a plan for three debates, including one
> next week. The plan was to be more of a real debate (the candidates
> and one moderator) rather than the "two person way press conference"
> format from past years. One debate is scheduled for the week 
> of September 13.
> 
> Clinton immediately accepted the plan. Bush know wants to go 
> back to the traditional format, contrary to the agreement. He also
> only wants two debates.
> 
> It seems obvious to me why Bush is so afraid - he knows that, on the
> issues, he can't stand up to Clinton face-to-face. A real debate
> means he's have to directly argue policy with his opponent, rather
> than just field questions from the press. He just doesn't have
> the guts - he'd rather just set and cast aspersions on Clinton's
> draft record. 

If you read up on things instead of assuming that Dan Rather is God,
you would know that this so-called bi-partison group cleared dates
for the debates with the Clinton camp, set up the dates, and then
told the Bush camp when they would be held.  Sounds like a "set up"
Bill Nolte
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Date: 5 Sep 92 23:29:56 GMT
Organization: Amiga makes it possible
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (beta) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith

In article <1898@celia.UUCP> steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree) writes:
> In article <1992Sep3.220901.22041@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com writes:
>
> >Comparing an intellectual with antiwar sentiment to a rich kid
> >chickenhawk is both insulting and unfair to Clinton.
>

Comparing a chickenhawk who did serve with a chicken shit who would be
bold enough to be president better be insulting to Clinton.  As insulting
as he and the democratic party are to the people.  Unfair?  HAHAHA.  Cry
foul when relevent issues are brought up.

>  You shouldnt compare a person who has financed his entire life through
> taxing the common people with a man who has worked hard his entire life
> in the private sector. He received no inheritance from his grandfather
> and only has stock from his mother.
>

You have to compare the two to decide who to vote for.  Period.

>  Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.

--
Amiga programmer of: GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle
Sega Genesis programmer of: Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
	<ART.92Sep10130122@world.std.com> <nate.549@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:21:53 GMT

In article <nate.549@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

   art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
   >I don't know if Quayle was a good lawyer or a bad one, but if you listen
   >to Ted Kennedy you'll come off with the idea that he was a pretty damned
   >good Senator.   Kennedy actually said that.

       I guess it takes one to know one, eh? I don't wish to detract from your 
   point, but I can't say that I would consider Ted Kennedy to be the best 
   judge of what makes someone a good legislator. Maybe he just admires the 
   way Dan holds his liquor.

Well, you've almost got a point there.  The fact is I despise the Senator
from Chappaquidick, but I also have to admit he works hard (for all the
wrong things, yes, but hard he works).  And in that sense he is a "good"
senator.   He and Quayle worked on several things together when Quayle
was a senator, and Teddy has had nothing but good to say about him.

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:5282 rec.humor:28418 talk.bizarre:29774 talk.politics.misc:44941