HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mitcheec@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (Elliott Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Rush Butchers Facts for his own Agenda
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:33:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.060812.13762@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>, 
tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes...
>With that in mind, what about the 13 million listeners Rush claims?
>Well, first of all he admitted this last week that only 3 to 3.5 million 

>...lets apply Llimbaugh math;
> 
>Of those 3 million probably 1/2 of them are ottid heads like myself.
>Of the remaining 1.5 million, .5 million probably only listen because they
>agree with a few things Rush says, and like the entertainment value.
>So that leaves less that 1 million people who actually agree with
>much of what he says...

Don't forget one of my favorite statistics:  More people voted for Perot
than listen to thEwIndBag.

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
| Elliott Mitchell
|  Peabody College at Vanderbilt University
|  Nashville, Tenn. Home of the Grand Ole Opry
|  IN: mitcheec@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu | BN: MITCHEEC@VUCTRVAX
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: gorney@picard.med.ge.com (Felix Gorney Mfg 4-6983)
Subject: Re: Religious Right
Organization: GE Medical Systems, Magnetic Resonance
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:22:44 GMT

: >   Tim Irvin apparently argues that people should be allowed to do
: >whatever they want, provided they don't hurt others, (or presumably
: >do not use fraud).  This is precisely the position taken by Andre Marrou,
: >and I can get a reference if you like.  But you're forgetting something:
: >to say that such and such "should" be allowed is to advance a moral
: >position.  It is just as moralistic as a morality that calls for
: >prohibition of an action.  Permissions and prohibitions differ in
:
Maybee we need a constitutional ammendment stating that the govt. shall
neither promote, nor prohibit abortion. This could easily fit under
seperation of church, and state. That way, the govt. could not make 
abortion illlegal. Of course, the liberals would argue that it prohibits
the govt. from providing money to institutions that provide abortion. 
That is if they wanted to appear consistent.

Felix Gorney

 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu  
Subject: Flaming Conservative (Re: Liberals DO oppose First Amendment rights)
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 03:08:00 GMT

In article <BxoBI8.39r@news.iastate.edu>, barrett@iastate.edu (Marc N. Barrett) writes...

|   I would be happy to.  A few weeks ago, some femists here at Iowa State
|started really pushing the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the Iowa
|Constitution.  They put signs up EVERYWHERE pushing the admendment and
|advertizing rallies by true feminazis like Eleanor Smeal.  Many of the
|signs were outright male-bashing, such as the ones that headlined
|"WE REMEMBER ANITA HILL!!!!"

	Yes, it certainly is terrible.  Those people tearing down the signs
certainly are not liberal, though.  They are apparently not open to ideas,
as being liberal entails.

	Here on this campus, we experience just the opposite.  Flyers hung 
up for liberal causes get torn down by conservatives who fear change.

	I'd say there are opponents of free speech in every camp and on
every side.

	Are you people too stupid to realise this?

     ____                _
    /    )               /          
   /    /               /       
  (____/   ___     ___ /   ___,    ___   ,___ 
__    /   ____)   /   /   (__     /   )  /   )
 /   /   /   /   /   /       )   /   /  /   /     __
(___/   (___(_  (___(_  (___/   (___/  /   (__    \/

      God commanded Isaac to kill his son.  It is said to have been
      a test for Isaac.  But it could only have been a test for him
      if indeed God had truly commanded him to do so.  And of course
      God would not lie.  So we see that some of God's commandments
      may be in conflict or contradiction with others.  I suppose
      that we should find this Acceptable.  Discuss




Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: pugh@pico.math.ucla.edu (David Pugh)
Subject: Re: The quintessential dittohead!
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 02:15:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.143329.17661@ryn.mro4.dec.com> shapiro@cfsctc.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov13.180732.1303@dbsun.uucp>, hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
>writes...
>
>>After all, Rush knows everything, and he's always right, right?
>
>Nope. 
>
>Only 98.1 % of the time.
>
>Sorry to disappoint you.
>
>Regards,
>Steve.
>

This means he is wrong 1.9 % of the time. Therefore it is possible that
when Rush says he is right 98.1% of the time that this is in fact one
of the 1.9% of occasions when he is wrong! In which case he could be
right any percentage of the time.

THEREFORE (!!) it is quite possible that he is ALWAYS WRONG !!

I tend to believe this conclusion 98.1% of the time.

David (the Anti-Rusht)


--
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
   David Pugh,  UCLA,  CA         |     Hot Dog, Jumping Frog
   pugh@math.ucla.edu             |     Albuquerque  -  Prefab Sprout
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: Liberals DO oppose First Amendment rights
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
	<BxoBI8.39r@news.iastate.edu> <BxopKz.FIq@ns1.nodak.edu>
	<1e6b57INNgqb@spool.mu.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:04:25 GMT

In article <1e6b57INNgqb@spool.mu.edu> marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:

   She can't be very bright then.  Rush says there are only 13 (or so)
   Feminazis around, you'd think Camille could have someone stop any (or
   all) of the 13 at the door.  Or even schedual around whereever the 13
   are going to be.

Which always makes me wonder. With so few "real" feminazis around, why is 
Rush so hysterical about them?

Can we infer that an equal level of Limbaugh indignation on other "whackos"
like Democrats, liberals, animal rights advocates, environmentalists,
human rights activists, homosexuals, disgruntled Viet vets, upper
atmospheric chemists, etc. implies only "12 or 13 of them" out there?

   >Nuff said.

   Yup.

   (oh, for the people lacking a clue phone  :-)

So, why *does* Rush Limbaugh continue to scream? Reminds me of the ole
Wolf Man at XERF sometimes. 

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..
Tularosa: tullies, roses, lava, white sands, and home of THEM! (atomic ants).
Organization: The Leader Desslok School of Diplomacy
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 01:53:02 EST
From: Mark 'Mark' Sachs <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Liberals DO oppose First Amendment rights
Distribution: usa
 <SWB.92Nov20161857@marvin.ae.utexas.edu>
 <1992Nov21.055221.12643@infodev.cam.ac.uk> <1ekv6aINNdaf@agate.berkeley.edu>

Great! You all have racked your brains and produced, er, at least five
(or was it six?) examples of, ferexample, those darned liberals shouting
down people like Bruce Herschenshoen (sp?) at a rally. Excellent job.

Now go back, have another look at your lists. How many of those were
examples of said liberals using the *government* to stomp people's civil
rights?

Oh? None?

I can think of lots of examples of the Reagan/Bush administrations stepping
on First Amendment rights.

After all, the Evil Liberals are just taking advantage of THEIR first
amendment rights by causing trouble at rallies. Note that I do not APPROVE
of this; it's extremely rude. One such event took place here at PSU, as a
matter of fact -- a rally for Dick Thornburgh ended up attracting more
anti-Thornburgh folks than pro-, and he never showed. While I agree that
Thornburgh is a bozo, he shouldn't have been prevented from speaking.
But -- this is important, read it slowly -- this wasn't the _GOVERNMENT_
censoring him. It was people exercising their First Amendment rights
(handed down to us by God, according to R.L.). What are you going to
do? Censor the protestors (as was done to anti-Bush protestors at his
rally here?)

Actually, I get the feeling a lot of people would be in favor of censoring
the protestors, with force of government. Sigh, and they say _liberals_
want to control people...

 "But Dr. Radium, was that necessary?" "Rez, _everything_ I do is necessary."
[Your blood pressure just went up.]        Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
DISCLAIMER: If PSU knew I had opinions they'd probably try to charge me for it.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8904 alt.rush-limbaugh:10091 alt.politics.bush:13972
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Date: 17 Nov 92 16:27:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Nov15.171641.28584@seq.uncwil.edu> session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.171300.11448@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
>>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>>                           | Support the coup!
>
>I'd like to make a couple of comments in this thread concerning John's
>current .sig.
>
>I really don't mind it very much, after all it is a free country and you
>can say just about anything you want to. (It is illegal to threaten
>the life of the president with mere words.) But I do think that is it
>pretty stupid. Mainly since Clinton isn't president yet!! He is the
>President-ELECT. You can't impeach someone who isn't the president yet!
>GIVE THE GUY A CHANCE TO SCREW UP FIRST!!!

But he has already promised to screw up, by saying that he will remove 
the ban on gays in the military, etc.  I have not heard one of his 100 
day promises which is not a screw up, at least IMO, therefore, as far 
as I am concerned, HE ALREADY HAS SCREWED UP!!!

Ted (author and originator of the term `Zackane') Krueger


-- 
"We will bury you! We will bury you! We will bury you!"
      - some ex-Soviet leader            
                   krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Sniveling Whiny Conservatives
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:30:21 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Computing Systems

Brilliant!  wonderful!  I couldn't have said it better.  Please keep it up.
I know you are going to get royally flamed on this.  That's like praise so
let's hear more!

Cheers.
---
===============================================================================
Mitch Sako	LSI Computing Systems			Office	408-433-4187
internet:	msako@lsil.com				FAX	408-433-8796
uucp:		lsil!msako
RIME:		->REDBARON, conference=POLITICS
Disclaimer:	Opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone and do not
		reflect those of anyone else including my organization,
		my management or my mother
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
From: asper@sbctri.sbc.com (Alan E. Asper)
Subject: Re: Flaming Conservative (Re: Liberals DO oppose First Amendment rights)
Organization: Southwestern Bell Technology Resources, St.Louis, MO
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:36:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.171546.18854@csc.ti.com> dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page) writes:
>
>What did Abraham do?
>
>"Then they came to the place of which God had told him; and Abraham built the
>altar there, and arranged the wood, and bound his son Isaac, and laid him on
>the altar on top of the wood.  And Abraham stretched out his hand, and took
>the knife to slay his son." (Gen 22:9-10)
>
>Which of God's commandments do you propose are in conflict here?

Not to nit-pick, but the Commandments (the Ten) don't appear until the book
of Exodus. You have to figure that Abraham was doing what God told him to
do, which, technically, is a Commandment. Right?
Anyway, people often use Old Testament
examples -- the "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" and "eye for an
eye" stuff -- to show how crazy and evil Christianity is. Fundamentalists
notwithstanding, it's the New Testament -- the "treat others as you want them
to treat you" stuff -- that is relevant to a discussion of (non-crazy-and-
evil-Fundamentalist-jerkoffs) Christianity.
Alan

My opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: pugh@pico.math.ucla.edu (David Pugh)
Subject: Not in a Rush to see Rush anymore
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 03:26:26 GMT

Well, I used to be a fan of Rush but now that Clinton has won
and Rush has started this TV show, I can only say the following:

 Rush is BORING, PATHETIC and REDUNDANT.

He won't last ya know.

David (the AntiRusht)

--
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
   David Pugh,  UCLA,  CA         |     Hot Dog, Jumping Frog
   pugh@math.ucla.edu             |     Albuquerque  -  Prefab Sprout
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mitcheec@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (Elliott Mitchell)
Subject: Re:  not all white males are rich and wealthy
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:53:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov22.185537.2901@pellns.alleg.edu>, paT bUcHAnaN writes...

>Elliot, quit being such an assanine person and admit that you are biased  
>against white males and that you are no better than say anyone in the KKK.

That's EllioTT, two Ts.  And when you find that dictionary, look up 
asinine.  And what on earth gives you the notion that I am biased against 
white males, being that I am one to begin with?

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
| Elliott Mitchell
|  Peabody College at Vanderbilt University
|  Nashville, Tenn. Home of the Grand Ole Opry
|  IN: mitcheec@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu | BN: MITCHEEC@VUCTRVAX
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mitcheec@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (Elliott Mitchell)
Subject: Re:  not all white males are rich and wealthy
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 21:15:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.202947.7282@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, 
howiegbk@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Jr Howard Mea Turner) writes...
>By inferring that all white males wish to be oppressive and hold down
>other ethnic, religious, non-heterosexual person, you detract from
>your argument.  You have committed the same mistake.
> 
>...And what I think sucks is this:
> 
>	Scholarship money that should be earmarked for worthy students is
>instead earmarked for minority students.

Howard, when and if you get that scholarship you want and when/and if you 
get into school (if you aren't already there) look up the difference 
between infer and imply.


+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
| Elliott Mitchell
|  Peabody College at Vanderbilt University
|  Nashville, Tenn. Home of the Grand Ole Opry
|  IN: mitcheec@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu | BN: MITCHEEC@VUCTRVAX
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wr001b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (william e raftery)
Subject: Re: IMHO - What does it mean?
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 08:55:04 GMT

In article <=zlq2-k@lynx.unm.edu> hagerjd@carina.unm.edu (John D. Hager) writes:
>>are going to be misled. IMHO both the strident anti-Rush people and the 
>----I keep seeing this acronym and I have no idea what it means.  Could
>    somebody please send me some e-mail and explain it?  Thanks.
>   
>    John D. Hager
>    hagerjd@carina.unm.edu
>

IMHO stands for:
	In
	My
	Humble
	Opinion
From: don@ocf.berkeley.edu (Don Bromley)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Not in a Rush to see Rush anymore
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: 23 Nov 1992 00:43:22 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandstorm.berkeley.edu

In article <41447@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs) writes:
>In article <By4J0C.KHM@news.cso.uiuc.edu> wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins) writes:

[text deleted]
>
>I am surprised.. Does one have to listen to Rush to help
>Conservative people accept the  defeat. It's now more than ever that
>we have to stop their raving and insulting arguments and should help
>them get used to liberalism and social responsibilities (ouch).

  "Somehow liberals have been unable to acquire from life what
  conservatives seem to be endowed with at birth: namely, a healthy
  skepticism of the powers of government agencies to do good."
				-Daniel P. Moynihan

  People will never have to get used to liberalism, because liberalism
  doesn't last.  As far as social responsibilities go, who do you think
  pays the taxes that you free-spending liberals dole out?  It's hard-
  working people... not you bleeding-hearts!  It's the Right which 
  creates the jobs the Left complains about!

>Don't worry I won't abandon all of you until they find a cure.

  If I were you, I'd head to the former USSR, they need someone like
  you to turn that whole capitalist transition around!  And look at
  the poor East Germans.  Soon they will be experiencing the miserable
  conditions created by capitalism in West Germany!  Boo-hoo-hoo!

>
>Sincerely
>Pim van Meurs
>
>-- 
>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

					-Don Bromley
					don@ocf.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea)
Subject: Re: Limbaugh Watch - Day 17
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: 20 Nov 92 16:35:29 GMT

In <1992Nov20.082220.18551@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman]) writes:

>I'm sorry but as a Conservative I must take a stand.  	

*Take* that stand, baby!  Just do it!

Day 17 has come and
>gone and the Conservative Movement 	

The Conservative "Movement"???!!?!?!?!????
Molotov cocktails and all?

is alive and well.  	

Alive, perhaps...

We need only look at
>the future and see that the decade of the 1980s was not the GREAT EVIL that
>you people are making it out to be. 	

Small hint:  the 1980's are in the _past_, not the future.

 The average American Worker's salry
>increased by over 15 % during the 1980s and this period took place during
>the longest peactime prosperity in our country's history. 	

Unemployment rose to 10.1% under Reagan.  And sure it was peacetime to
suburban brats like us, but not all wars get sanctioned by Congress, 'member.
Tell the El Salvadorans and Nicaraguans that the 1980s were peacetime.

 The Liberal Elite
>of this country seeks to revert back to a time when the government "TOOK
>CARE" of its people. 	

Whereas the Conservative Elite seeks to perpetuate a government that doesn't
give a shit about its people.

 This is not only dangerous, but sets a bad example of
>the American way of life.  Our country was founded by men who believed that
>individual liberty and freedom meant that a person could only be limited by
>his or her own abilities.  	

Whereas today intelligent people can see that the most able people do not
always find themselves in the most important positions, but rather the people
with the most influence.

>The 1980s created a sense of pride in America for being the best in the
>world and we still are.  	

The 1980s had nothing to do with it.  America is the best, has been for some
time, and probably will continue to be for some time.  That doesn't mean there
isn't room for improvement.

>You nay sayers out there take the Regan Bush years as being 12 years of
>hell, but can anyone seriously think that the pipe dream presidencies of
>Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, or second term of Jimmy Carter would have
>brought about a more positive result.

Don't know.  Never got the chance to find out.  All I know is what I've lived
through, and yes, it was 12 years of hell.

Rather we
>should be as closed minded as the liberals claim we are.	

Go for it.

>Keep this in mind when you are trashing someone who has stood up for these
>basic American Values and has not only succeeded but has excelled.

BzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZzzzzT!!  Thank you for playing.



Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Not in a Rush to see Rush anymore
Date: 22 Nov 92 05:39:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Nov22.032626.10475@math.ucla.edu> pugh@pico.math.ucla.edu (David Pugh) writes:
>Well, I used to be a fan of Rush but now that Clinton has won
>and Rush has started this TV show, I can only say the following:
>
> Rush is BORING, PATHETIC and REDUNDANT.
>
>He won't last ya know.

A $100 says he'll still be on the air, with at least 536 radio stations and 
200 TV stations by March, 1993. Care to put your money where your mouth is?
-- 
John Switzer               | "Lobbyists are circling Clinton like slugs
                           | around a saucer of beer."
CompuServe: 74076,1250     | -- Alexander Cockburn, LA Times 11/15/92
Internet: jrs@netcom.com   | (P.S. Impeach Clinton, support the coup!)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mitcheec@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (Elliott Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Here's why I love this guy...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Vanderbilt University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:44:00 GMT

In article <mpf1.722107037@Isis.MsState.Edu>, 
mpf1@ra.msstate.edu (Morris P. Fields) writes...

<several pounds of Morris' baggage deleted>

>Get off your high horse and really consider what you are asking for.
>Are you asking for equality or are you asking for power over other groups
>that you feel should be given to you for you time as a down trodden people?

I am asking that white males <particularly, but I'd entertain an extension 
of that request> be honest with themselves, and realize that things are 
different and better for them, on account of their race, on account of 
their history, on account of their gender, than things are for very nearly 
every non-white/male in the United States.

+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
| Elliott Mitchell
|  Peabody College at Vanderbilt University
|  Nashville, Tenn. Home of the Grand Ole Opry
|  IN: mitcheec@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu | BN: MITCHEEC@VUCTRVAX
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton