HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:20:37 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.004257.6204@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>Like I have stated before, both labels where carefully chosen by each
>group to have the greatest impact.  This debate is not about whether you
>approve of the names.  It's about whether the news media blindly uses
>whatever a liberal organization wants to be called and refuses to give
>the same consideration to a conservative group (or idea).  

Well, sure, whether I approve of the names or not is not the issue - my
point is that maybe the "liberal" media has a reason for calling
pro-choicer's "pro-choice" and pro-lifer's "anti-abortionist", which is
they believe in calling groups by names more reflecting their true
nature.  In this instance, they believe that saying "anti-abortion"
more reflects what pro-lifer's mean to accomplish, and "pro-choice"
accurately reflect that groups goals.  I'm not saying this is what
actually happens, it's just an idea.

>Examples abound.  How about the Peacekeeper missle?  The media wouldn't
>have it.  They refused on idealogical grounds.  How about the Strategic
>Defense Initiative?  It was immediately belittled by the media who to
>this day call it the Star Wars program.  

Again, maybe they didn't buy into the idea that is WAS a peacekeeper or
that SDI WOULD provide a Strategic Defense.  If you believe you see a
wolf in sheep's clothing, you don't call it a sheep, you call it a
wolf.  And it is not just liberal who do this - pro-lifer's call
pro-choicers "pro-abortionist".  I suppose this reinforces my point, in
this case, pro-lifer's don't think the issue is about choice it's about
ABORTION.

>Before you liberals line up to say things like, "but it *shouldn't* be

Ahh, I'm a liberal to a conservative and a conservative to a
liberal.

Later,
Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail.
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican Convention
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:20:42 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <37095@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs) writes:
>Well Steve, you surprise me, I had not expected you to admit you are
>a liberal but according to your words above, liberals start filling
>usenet with mindless counter attacks when their addiction to biased
>media is being broken.

 Sorry, I was trying to address the poster who said liberals must be mindless.
I dont think they are. This was a conservative who was being slightly arrogant.
I do admit that we conservatives could get addicted to the many Rush Limbaugh
type conservatives shows which will evetually spin off from his show. We must
remember this and at least try to perceive the liberal point of view. This is
what your liberals are doing right ? Trying to perceive the conservative point
of view.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone. 
               "Whats going to happen Hal" 
               "Something Wonderful"
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3700 alt.politics.bush:1960 alt.politics.clinton:2147 alt.politics.elections:10785 talk.politics.misc:40360 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4594
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.news-media
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican Convention
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:13:55 GMT
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology

alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:

>In article <1992Aug19.010825.16749@afit.af.mil>, jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:

>|> For liberals to counter charges of a general liberal bias in the news 
>|> media with, "no, there is really a conservative bias", is beginning to
>|> wear thin.  It is an established fact that the news media is
>|> considerably to the left of mainstream America.  If you can't comprehend
>|> how that might possibly affect the kind of news and analysis we get 
>|> everyday, you are not being very truthful with yourself.  

>It may be an established fact in your world, where the Rush Limbaugh Show
>is a balance perspective, but out here there are quite a number of people
>who believe that the media is pro-government and pro-business.

Every poll I have ever seen (including one I posted by the L.A. Times)
has put the news media considerably to the left of the American public.
Would you like me to repost it or email it to you?

Who have you heard say Rush is a balanced perspective?  Even he will
tell you that he only provides counterweight to the rest of the media.
And just as I am trying to provide examples of what I consider liberal
bias in media, could you think of an example where the media is
pro-business?  I would like to be able to look for it--I have to admit
that I have not seen it, but that may be because they are just agreeing
with my own point of view.  As for pro-government... They are most 
certainly advocating more of it (a liberal doctrine).  But if you are 
saying they are pro-administration, I'll have to ask you what world you live in.

>From where I sit, the media coverage of Republican convention is about the
>same as the media coverage of the democrats, except that there's more of
>it. Right wingers complaining about the way Clinton gets to talk must have
>forgotten the way that Ross Perot domonated the front pages during the
>Democratic convention. For all the anti-GOP sentiment, there is an awful
>lot of positive coverage, 

The only thing I've seen that even remotely looks like positive coverage
was the analysis of Jack Kemp's speech.  They commented on how
"moderate" it was.  That is a compliment coming from a reporter...


Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Available: Software Engineer or MIS. MSCE, 1 year C++, Unix Experience
	   Highly motivated, keeps political opinions at home!
	             Seattle area, only.  513-233-4502
From: smothers@nauvax.ucc.nau.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Time is Right Wing??????????
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:01:23 GMT
Organization: Northern Arizona University


      If time is right wing how did Gorbachev make man of the year?
Newsweek right wing? I dare anyone to show it. If this assertation was
made about u.s. news and world report, I might think you an overreactive
liberal but TIME????? Catch a clue.

mark
smothers@nauvax.nau.ucc.edu


----
I POST ABUSIVE E-MAIL.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3852 alt.politics.bush:2522 talk.politics.misc:41300
From: thyat@sdf.lonestar.org (Tom Hyatt)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Republican Convention - Worst Camera shots.
Summary: Dorky camera angles.
Date: 22 Aug 92 06:19:02 GMT
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access


On a note that is divergent from the actual content of the Republican National
Convention, I was wondering what some of the netters thought were the worst
moments (from a technical standpoint, NOT of a politically biased standpoint).
 
The two most glaring examples I can think of were during and after George
Bush's acceptance speech.

1.  CNN for some odd reason decided to have a camera angle pointed directly
at the back of President Bush's head for about 2 1/2 minutes.  The focusing
of the camera was such that all we saw was the quality of his hairdo. 
Perhaps this was some producer's idea to keep us from "reading his lips" 
(REALLY BIG :-)  !)

2.  The pen-camera affixed to one of the CBS floor correspondents' head at
the very end of George Bush's speech.  An unsteady shot of (a) looking directly
up at the falling balloons and (b) Secret Servicemen wading in hip-deep balloons
wasn't exactly my idea of good camerawork.

Can anyone else think of other technical blunders that took place during the 
two candidates' conventions?  

Tom H.

-- 
==========================================================================       Tom Hyatt                          | My disclaimer:  I am not affiliated        USENET: thyat@sdf.lonestar.org     | with any USENET sites, organizations       RIME:  -->LUNATIC (Tom Hyatt)      | or personnel. The views given by me        Prodigy: KKDH77A (quit yer laffin!)| are mine, and nobody else's.  Nyah!       ==========================================================================
-
---
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Sorry example Re: Keys to the election
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:44:21 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

Sorry. Bad example. This is what I meant instead of the Baker thing.

mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
:hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Bob Hooker) writes:
:> Right now we are in a face off,  Bush doesn't want to attack first,
:> Clinton has no reason to risk an attack.  Bush is trying to draw Clinton
:> into a negative battle but it is not working.  Time is on CLinton's side in
:> this game so Bush has to attack sooner or later.
:Bush/Quayle have been under merciless attack since a few weeks before the
:dem. convention...
:> An attack will put Bush at risk,  if Clinton can position right the press
:> won't stop talking about it for a week,  that is 1/8 of the time left till
:> the election.
:The biased media calls any kind of Bush attack sleaze politics and praises
:the Clinton campaign.  That's not going to stop Bush.
	The media are covering every COUNTERATTACK by Clinton more than
the attacks by Bush lately. Although this does show that Clinton won't
make the mistakes of waiting too long to be defined by his opposition,
this coverage is stifling Bush from making any substantive criticisms of
Clinton.
	When it comes to Clinton's economic plan or health care plan,
Bush said it would raise everyone's taxes and so on. I heard so much
more coverage on Clinton's response that he was using scare tactics
rather than introduce a plan of his own and Clinton goes on to talk
about how much better his plan is, that the perception of Bush is that
he's an idiot (your own personal opinions notwithstanding).
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
August 31, 1992 - May 16, 1993	Duke football? What's that?
From: thompson@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: What does 'ditto' mean?  
Date: 15 Aug 92 19:38:25 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

Dear Fellow Dittoheads,

What does the word 'ditto' refer to?  I was told a while ago, but I
can't remember.  So what does 'dittos from such and such a place' mean?

Thanks,

Rush Forever!



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Charles A. Thompson               |  thompson@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu         |
|  University of Kansas              |  thompson@ukanvax.cc.ukans.edu        |
|  _Avid_ SkiBum                     |  OS/2 2.0 is for YOU!!!               |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Look for Recipe Pro(tm), an interactive recipe database, coming soon...   |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican Convention
Date: 21 Aug 92 07:51:23 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1827@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:
>We shouldnt be to surprised by these people. They may have become addicted to 
>the liberal bias, event sensational, pro-big government and mindless coverage
>that occurs in the national media outlets. Some PBS fans actually state that 
>PBS isnt biased. A network that is partially funded by the government is not
>going to have a big government bias. Thats funny.
> Breaking the addiction is what causes normal liberals to start "foaming at the
>mouth" and filling usenet with mindless, arrogant counter attacks.
> The more they "foam" the greater the addiction.
> First law of opening the mind.

Well Steve, you surprise me, I had not expected you to admit you are
a liberal but according to your words above, liberals start filling
usenet with mindless counter attacks when their addiction to biased
media is being broken.




Pim van Meurs


> ps - Lets remember this and not get to arrogant ourselves.
>
> Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.


-- 
Pim van Meurs  UC San Diego Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Mail Code A-030  	 UUCP : ...!ucsd!ssurf.ucsd.edu!VANMEURS
UCSD La Jolla  CA 92093  ARPA : VANMEURS@ssurf.ucsd.edu
(619)-458 9729 Home	 Bitnet : VANMEURS%ssurf.ucsd.edu@sdsc
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh fans
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:50:06 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug13.054533.22327@spdc.ti.com> dostalik@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Bill Dostalik) writes:
->In article <1788@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:
-
->> Dont forget us over educated people who have spent more hours in free
->>market based educational systems then the average masters holder. As 
->>having gone through both college and free market based education I can 
->                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
->I like what you say, but what is "free market based education"?  And isn't
->college just that?  People *do* choose their college, and the state schools
->compete with private colleges.  (Apologies if this is has been discussed).
->

 I was hoping to avoid discussing this. My comment was out of anger.
My feelings towards my college education are very deep and very bitter.
Fellowed professors who have no incentive to increase their communication
skills, text books biased and way out of date, etc etc.
My feeling towards Free Market education are very deep and very positive. The
fact that the companies I worked for actually paid me to attend certified
schools to receive lots of certificates and diplomas, and that the free
market education was more "in tune" with what the free market actually
needed, etc etc.
 My government education was partially financed via covering tuition due to
high college entrance test scores. Thats one positive point. 

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: kuch@reed.edu (Jerry Kuch)
Subject: Re: the Keating 5
Organization: Ugg Inc.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:13:05 GMT
Distribution: world,local

In article <13AUG199213251296@misvax.mis.arizona.edu> dfriedman@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (D R Friedman) writes:
>In article <1992Aug13.162811.12863@umbc3.umbc.edu>, alex@umbc4.umbc.edu (Alex S. Crain) writes...
>>In article <mykes.0ca9@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
>> 
>>>Remember the Keating 5?  Where's all the unbiased news coverage of those
>>>guys?  Note - they are still in office.  S&L, my butt :)
>
>Both of these senators from Arizona in a lot of people's opinion, including
>my own are crooks.  They are from both parties and symbolize what is
>wrong with the political process these days.  The common person is
>shut out by both parties.  They ought to combine both parties and
>have one republicrat convention.
>
>Then we could have choices like:
>
>Bush/Clinton
>Clinton/Kemp
>Quayle/Gore
>Gore/Baker
>Baker/Quayle
>Mrs.Clinton/Robert Dole
>Mrs. Bush/Jerry Brown

While we're on the nightmare ticket list, how about...

Quayle/Liddy
Specter/d'Amato
Bush/Sturgis
The Emperor/Darth Vader

>
>Denny 
>-------------------------------------
>My .sig is broken and it wont post any more


-- 
Jerry Kuch (t-gerldk@microsoft.com) | "Sic Gorgianus Allos Subjectatus Nunc."
  "I was wrong to play God.  Life is precious, not a thing to be toyed with.
   Now take out that brain and flush it down the toilet." - Montgomery Burns

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.misc
From: reh@wam.umd.edu (Huddleston)
Subject: Re: Republican Convention - Worst Camera shots.
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 01:12:46 GMT


Well, personally, I can't wait to get ahold of a still photo of one of Dan
Quayles'
many Hitler-style salutes.  I've got a little collage~ in mind that I'm even
going to try and get NEA funding for :-).

Read my lips: Clinton in '92.

-- 
Richard Huddleston  reh@wam.umd.edu    | "It is the greatest possible victory
These are my personal opinions.        |  to be, to continue to be, and to
                                       |  have been in a universe that seems
NeXTSTEP is better: Boycott Microsoft  |  indifferent to us."  Norbert Wiener
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Keys to the election
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:59:07 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug13.124454.14697@husc3.harvard.edu> koumis@husc4.harvard.edu (Anthony Koumis) writes:

->How about during the primary season -- Clinton was lambasted on all
->sides (NY POst and marijuana smoking, for example).

->Since you cant remember that far back and seem to miss the articles
->about concers still on CLinton's character, perhaps you are
->illustrative of why Bush's poll ratings could go up -- people
->have such short memories they cant remeber how bad Bush has been
->throughout his term.  Remember, that this net couldnt come up
->with any real conclusive 3 things that Bush has accomplished that
->were any good.

 The problem is that the press cant seem to remember this stuff. Very
few of these allegations were rebuffed in toto. Clinton even turned
the alleged pot smoking question into some sort of liberal joke. 
 Why couldnt he honestly admit it. It would not have changed my mind
either way. The fact that he wasnt honest is the real issue here.
 You probably have to be a liberal to not understand that.
Why has the press forgotten clinton trash but remembers bush trash ?

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: chrisda@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (David Christensen)
Subject: Re: TRANSCRIPT OF REAGAN'S SPEECH
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 06:54:49 GMT

In article <FOX.92Aug19150446@graphics.nyu.edu> fox@cs.nyu.edu (David Fox) writes:
>In article <4630@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>
>   [...]
>   << Somewhere in here he cites a quote by Abraham Lincoln. If someone has
>   this part of the speech, please add it on here! Thanks. >>
>   [...]
>
>Don't bother ... it turns out the quote Reagan attributes to
>Lincoln has been known for 75 years to have been said by Rev.
>William J. H. Boetcker, a minister from Erie, Pa., born
>in 1873.  By the way, Reagan omitted two of the Reverend's
>10 maxims:  "You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more
>than your income", and "You cannot establish sound security
>on borrowed money."   (New York Times, 19 August 1992.)

Yeah, well... along the same lines, remember the Contras were morally descended
from the Founding Fathers.  ;-)   (But we LIKE him so it's OK).

Oh, and Reagan remembered landing with the boys at Normandy.  ;-) ;-)   [but we
feel good when he tells that story, so it's ok.]

Oh, also he must of been out of the loop during Iran/Contra ;-) ;-)  ;-)
[but he's such a funny, grandfatherly old man; he wouldn't tell a lie!  ;-)   ]

;-))  David  ;-))  Christensen
;-))  chrisda@atlantis.cs.orst.edu   ;-))  ;-))  ;-))

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mcgead@operators.its.rpi.edu (Darren McGeary)
Subject: Re: Buchanan's speech at convention
Keywords: Buchanan Rush Limbaugh
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Distribution: world,usa,na
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 00:44:36 GMT

In article <m8#nq+n.mvp@netcom.com> mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.140957.13428@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>>> Mr. Clinton, however, has a different agenda.  
>>> At its top is unrestricted abortion on demand.
>>Which, of course, is a lie.  (Not that it is suprising 
>>that Buchanan would resort to lying.)
>
>Oh, really?  What restrictions on abortion are supported by
>Clinton?  What restrictions on abortion are part of the
>Democratic platform?
  
Third trimester abortions except for cases where the woman's life is in
danger, for one.

>
>-- 
>Mike Van Pelt          | What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
>mvp@netcom.com         | Judging from realistic simulations involving a
>                       | sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
>                       | can assume it will be pretty bad. -- Dave Barry


-- 
Darren McGeary -  mcgead@rpi.edu          Freedom of religion means freedom 
PRO-CHOICE - THE AMERICAN WAY             FROM religion!!
Banish religion from government!          -These are my opinions. They just
Atheists Unite!!                           happen to also be the right ones.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: There he goes again..
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 21:33:05 GMT

Phil_Warburton@grace.UUCP (Phil Warburton) writes:
>Conservative? Me? I'm not OLD enough!

    Well, there, you have something to look forward to.

>There is no such thing as a conservative.. They are all old farts.. 

    Thanks very much on behalf of all the greying liberals out here in 
netland. Some of us "old farts" are on your side (at least we thought 
we were until you started making wisecracks like that one).

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.news-media