HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush vs. Madonna (was Re: Rush just looks at the pictures
Date: 19 Dec 92 21:40:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec16.174629.8496@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com.mrg.uswest.com> greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com (Greg Bradt) writes:
>In article <crb2.724523499@Ra.MsState.Edu> Chad R. Berthelson,
>crb2@Ra.MsState.Edu writes:
>>>According to aa article in the Houston Chronicle a few weeks ago, 
>>>Madonna's book "Sex", bumped Rush's Book off of the New York best
>seller 
>>>list.
>>
>>That is true, BUT it only lasted two weeks, Madonna's book sold more it's
>>1st and 2nd week out than rushes did in it's 6th and 7th (If you compare
>>Rush's 1st and 2nd it beats madonna's total), but in madonna's third week
>>Rush pulled out ahead again and remains that way today!
>>
>
>Ah, yes, but there has still been more money spent on Madonna's book than
>on Rush's!

Did you pull this one out of your petard, or did you run the numbers? 
Because if you did run the numbers, you need help with your math.

Ted


-- 
So the Maples formed a union, and demanded equal rights, "The Oaks are just 
too greedy.  We will make them give us light!"  Now there's no more Oak 
oppression, for they passed a noble law.  And the trees are all kept equal, 
by hatchet, axe and saw.     -  Rush, The Trees
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Brian Rush )
Subject: Re: MurderPhobes, RapistPhobes, etc. (was: Re: antihomosex...)
Organization: UCLA Dept of Astronomy
Date: 22 Dec 92 22:53:25 PST

In article <1657@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu> libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson) writes:
>rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Brian Rush) writes:
>: A solution to the rhetorical confusion here:
>: 
>: Since gay rights activists have chosen to define homophobes as
>: anyone who does not think that homosexuality is a completely
>: normal, moral, and admirable life-style (and if they
>: deny this, they are LYING), then let us:
>: 
>: coin the term MurderPhobia to describe the viewpoint that murdering
>: other people is wrong.
>: 
>: coin the term RapistPhobe to describe anyone who is so
>: closed-minded as to deny rapists the right to live how they want.
>: 
>: coin the term TheftaPhobia to describe that unbelievably
>: primitive attitude that stealing is wrong.
>: 
>: After all, anyone who would say that they are against these
>: sort of actions is REALLY just secretely afraid that, deep
>: down inside, he/she/it actually wants to commit them too.      
>
>Instead, how about we come up with something, somewhere in
>the far depths of our little right-wing imagination, which
>homosexuality has in common with murder or rape?
>Surprise!  There ain't nothing
You TOTALLY missed the point!  I won't even bother to explain it to you.
If you ready more carefully and honestly you will get the point.  If you
are not intelligent enough to do that then you are not intelligent
enough to understand it by me explaining it to you.
>
>Bill    .


Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12442 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10864 alt.politics.clinton:19207 alt.politics.bush:15030
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Be
Date: 28 Dec 92 15:15:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <XL3DwB2w165w@major.panix.com> dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea) writes:

>But some of the things you advocate - like not teaching kids "organic
>evolution" - simply go against common sense. Schools should present
>information that is backed up by the best possible evidence. Physical
>evidence contradicts almost everything presented in the bible - so take
>it as just one more test of your faith. (That God, he must be some kind
>of prankster!)

That must by why you are an atheist.  You have little idea what the evidence 
or the Bible say.  Care to offer a few of you "contradictions" (by e-mail 
of course, since it is way off the topic of this group).

>Schools are in their current state because too many people are too busy
>trying to put a different spin on every part of the cirriculum. The
>lefties demand that kids get sex education - but the righties demand
>that they not - so the end result is that kids end up getting it, but
>it's so watered down as to be meaningless.

As a former educator (in public and private schools) I would add an 
important item to your list:  failure to teach the 3r's and fail students 
who actively refuse to learn.  I have a few horror stories that would 
curl your hair.

>As long as politicians are demanding that schools be surrogate parents,
>this crap will go on.

Bingo!  Right on.  But let's take it one step further.  There is a very 
active, large group philosophy among educators that claims that "parents" 
are the biggest problem for kids.  Not that parents aren't involved (though 
that is true), but that parents get in the way of what the teachers want 
to teach the kids.  Their prescription is to begin mandantory public 
instruction at the age of three.  They claim that the earlier they can get 
hold of the kids, the easier it will be to "teach" them the "correct" 
things.

>--
>Socialized medicine: Health care with the compassion of an IRS auditor, the
>intelligence of a DMV employee, and the cost control of the Pentagon.

Such wisdom!

Ted

-- 
So the Maples formed a union, and demanded equal rights, "The Oaks are just 
too greedy.  We will make them give us light!"  Now there's no more Oak 
oppression, for they passed a noble law.  And the trees are all kept equal, 
by hatchet, axe and saw.     -  Rush, The Trees
From: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Columbus vs Indians (was Re: PC lives)
Date: 31 Dec 1992 20:49:44 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: clesun.central.sun.com

>>I don't know of any school, history books, courses, that glorify and celebrate
>>the conquest and destruction of native cultures, so we're safe there.

>I know some Indians that could describe some to you.

Please poll them, and report here.

>
>On the other issue, giving back "some land," from where do we get this land?
>National forest land would be a good start.

Which national forest land goes to which tribes?


>>Since the main theater of operations of the Conquistadores was Mexico, the 
>>>Caribbean, and South/Central America, how can the US give that land back to
>>>whomever?

That's not our problem.  U.S. citizens should worry about land pertaining
to treaties that the U.S. signed.
>

	I agree that the US government shamelessly stole and cheated Indians
out of treatied lands.  But the topic of this discussion relates to Columbus
and the Indians of that area, specifically.

	Dave


Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: adamfox@b115.super.org (Adam Fox)
Subject: Re: Rush Courts the FAAAR Right
Organization: Supercomputing Research Center, Bowie, MD  USA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:36:55 GMT

In article <nate.957@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>, nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

|> >Rush implied(IMHO) that christianity was more normal
|> >and morally correct than other religions and deserves
|> >to be taught in public schools.  He was also blaming
|> >the removal of religion from schools for many problems
|> >facing youth.  And of course, he blamed the liberals.
|> 
|>     I'm not sure that Rush's choice of the Ten Commandments was really 
|> intended to imply that Christianity is superior to any other religion,
|> although I got the definite impression that he was implying that some 
|> religion is better than no religion at all.

Agreed.  I believe he was being taken a bit too literatlly with the 
"10 commandments".  I think there are very few out there who would 
think that the concepts in the 10 commandments are not good things.
(Don't steal, Don't Kill, Honor your parents, Don't covet other people's
possesions, etc).  His point was that once respect for human life is
lost, which he believes is happening, then do not be surprised when youth
begin killing each other.  His insistance is that somewhere in the cirriculum
of our schools, these basic values have been lost and replaced with special
intrest material (like "Daddy's Male Roommate").  His point is that we need 
to re-focus our teaching to tell help give our children a respect for life.
Religion is one of the few areas that teach this and just about ANY religion
teaches this.  And with the virtual ban on religion in our public schools, 
he proposes that it is little wonder that children have little respect for 
life (the soul, as he puts it).

In this case, I do not believe he is advocating any particular religion.

-- Adam Fox
adamfox@super.org
 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jpsb@NeoSoft.com (Jim Shirreffs)
Subject: Re: Your own words, of course != bigot
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa, world
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 22:06:42 GMT

In article <1246@blue.cis.pitt.edu> sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>I suspect that you don't know what the word bigot means.  Why
>don't you look it up, and then perhaps I'll understand why you
>object being called one.
>
>(You might re-read the first quote I provided after you've read
>the definition.)
>
>Susan
>

Actually Susan I did look it up, just to make sure you were not "slyly"
complementing me. And yes I noticed the quote in your orginal post.

One question:

If I am correct in my assuption that homosexual sex is wrong, am I still
a bigot?

This is a yes or no question.


jim shirreffs

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: briand@anasazi.com (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices (was  Re: Sexuality)
Organization: Anasazi Inc Phx Az USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 23:45:00 GMT

>In article <1992Dec30.185545.26789@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>>
[deleted stuff]
>
>>All people are asking is that unless you can come up with some
>>*secular* reason for why their lifestyle choice is bad, you grant
>>them the same rights they are willing to grant you: the right to
>>live their life without persecution.

Tell that to a smoker.  Clearly this is a lifestyle choice, and yet
non-smokers have persecuted them out of most public places.  Why?  Because
non-smokers find smoking offensive, smelly, and possibly dangerous to their
health.  But in this battle the rights of a clear minority, have had little
weight in comparison to the greater good of the public.  That is the rights
of the majority have been deemed more important than the rights of a
minority.  

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: blumb@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Bill Blum)
Subject: Re: Breeder reactors (was Re: Justification for the Space Program
Organization: SEDS National Board Member
Distribution: usa, world
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 05:28:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.065426.29288@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <1992Dec20.044836.26997@seq.uncwil.edu> session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions) writes:
>>bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>>
>>>Speaking of breeder reactors, why doesn't the U.S. have more of
>>>them?
>>
>>Because they're too damn dangerous.
>
>Hardly. The Candu thermal breeder is about the closest thing we 
>have to a passively safe system. Hell they let unsupervised
>college students run them. The reason breeders aren't widely
>used is that uranium is $10 a pound. It would have to be $100
>a pound before breeders break even on costs.

Yeah, breeders are not terribly hazardous.

However, they may play a part in the future because of uranium-supply
considerations.  It's too iffy to tell at this point, but there MAY be a
need for them in the future.
(Please see _Introduction to Nuclear Engineering_, Second Editon, by John
Lamarsh, section 4.6 pages 149-163)

-- 
Bill Blum			* "God willing...we shall return."        
Purdue University		* Gene Cernan, The Moon, Dec 1972(BSEE P.U. 56)
School of Nuclear Engineering	* Member of the SEDS National Board
blumb@sage.cc.purdue.edu 	*        Ad Astra Per Ardua!!
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: MurderPhobes, RapistPhobes, etc. (was: Re: antihomosex...)
Date: 26 Dec 92 15:50:45 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson) writes:
: >rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Brian Rush) writes:
: >: If that's the only response you can come up with, then just
: >: replace Murderers, Rapists, and Thieves with Prostitutes,
: >: (adult)Pornography advocates, and Drug Users.  It is just as easy to say
: >: that these people don't hurt others, when in reality they do.
: >: 
: >: The "we don't hurt others" line is the only line that gays have that
: >: even comes close to being a substantial argument, but it quickly falls
: >: apart.                
: 
: >Argument by assertion.  Kindly attempt to say something intelligent
: >so that we can have an actual discussion here.  Towit:
: 
:     Arguments without assertions are a little dull, don't you think?

Certainly, as are arguments which consist entirely of assertions,
with no supporting evidence.
: 
: >How, exactly, do homosexuals hurt other people AS A FUNCTION OF
: >THEIR SEXUALITY?
: 
: >Why do gays *need* "a substantial argument" for their sexual
: >practices?
: 
:     It might help gays to gain political concessions if they could show 
: evidence that homosexuality strengthens or pertuates our society. Look at 
: mothers, for example. The mothers of America have traditionally been the 
: primary care-givers for children, and Americans (like all historically-
: minded peoples) pay a lot of attention to the needs of their young. I doubt 
: that we will ever (even in Rush Limbaugh's wildest dreams) see government 
: entitlement programs like aid to mothers with dependant children enacted 
: for single gay men with no particular attachments. If you could grab your 
: legislator by the collar and say "Look, buddy, if you don't support us gays 
: then you're flushing future generations down the toilet" then you might 
: get a little more support.
: 
: --
: Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
: Psychology Department               Indiana University
: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu

Well, I couldn't say that, because I'm not gay.  You're probably
right, though, if you're speaking only about public opinion.  If 
you're saying that you believe that all human activity which
doesn't directly perpetuate the species is wrong, then I must ask
you to turn off you're computer at once and devote all your time
to reproductive sex. (Insert Smiley)
Bill
From: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Homophobe: A definition please!
Date: 22 Dec 1992 16:57:56 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: cd651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wally L. Blume)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey S Linder) says:

>
>HOMOPHOBE:  Person who is considered to be suffering from a mental illness
>            (an irrational fear of homosexuals) because they opposes the 
>            politics/policies/agendas of homosexuals.
>
>JSL.

 Please tell me what dictionary you found this in as my search revealed no 
such definition. What psychology journal was it that characterized this
opposition as a mental illness? I myself have been called a homophobe
but I do not hate homosexuals. Why didn't you just come right out with
the real definition...
HOMOPHOBE:  A dirty name that homsexuals, liberals, and their supporters
            can call people who don't agree with their view point.

This whole word smacks of Political Correctness. 

 
-- 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   /   / __  /  /     |         Wally Blume         | Earth:
  /   / _ / /  / /_/  |      Internet address:      |    Mostly harmless.     
 /_/_/ /_/ /  / __/   | cd651@cleveland.freenet.edu |-HH Guide to the Galaxy
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12377 talk.politics.space:1626 sci.space:18345
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.space,sci.space
Subject: Re: Justification for the Space Program
Date: 29 Dec 92 16:48:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Rochester

In article <JMC.92Dec28192905@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:

> Let me add to the previous post the estimate that the total amount of
> matter humanity has processed in its history is less than 10^12 tons.

Some interesting facts:

Estimated mass of manganese nodules on the ocean floors:  ~ 10^12 tons.

Average concentration of metals in nodules (percent)

	Element		World Average	Pacific Clarion-Clipperton Zone
	--------------------------------------------------------------
	  Mn		   18.6			25.4
	  Fe		   12.47		 6.66
	  Ni		     .66		 1.27
	  Cu		     .45		 (not listed, > .45)
	  Co		     .27		 1.02


World-wide, nodules are estimated to contain billions of tons of
copper and nickel, and enough manganese to supply current mine demand
for that element for roughly 10,000 years.  Additional sources of
metals (such as copper and cobalt) are available as crusts on the sea
floor, and in massive sulfides deposited at mid-ocean ridges and then
carried away by plate motion.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 31 Dec 92 04:24:51 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Dec30.162502.6756@asl.dl.nec.com> dillhoff@aslws01.asl.dl.nec.com (Doug Dillhoff) writes:
>
>Unlike heterosexuality, which is dictated by nature, homosexuality
>is a lifestyle choice and should not be presented as such to school
>children.

      Bwahahahaha!  This is perhaps the most ludicrous statement
I've seen on this newsgroup (OK, maybe not).  How can it be that
heterosexuality is not a choice, but homosexuality is?

			-Phil

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12659 alt.politics.clinton:19372
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 31 Dec 92 20:05:48 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

I think that it's time to post the Gabler quotes again.  Mel and
Norma Gabler are sort of the patron saints of the movement to
censor schoolboooks and curricula.

Here's a quote from Mel:

"When a student reads in a math book that there are no absolutes, 
suddenly every value he's been taught is destroyed.  And the
next thin you know, the student turns to crime and drugs."

Here's a quote from Norma:

"What some textbooks are doing is giving students ideas, and ideas
will never do them as much good as facts."

Susan

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 1 Jan 93 03:35:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Carolina State University

In article <1992Dec31.013739.7064@ux1.cts.eiu.edu> 
cfthb@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Howard Black) writes:
>wgb3@pyuxf.uucp (25336-buoni) writes:

>> What is relevant to this discussion is whether or
>> not the school system should be teaching social values traditionally
>> dealt with in the home.  I say NO!

> And I say, again, that describing a fact != teaching a social value.
> Homosexuals exist..always have, always will..this can be taught without
> passing judgement.  

Could the existence of certain bible passages which condemn 
homosexuality be taught in the schools without passing judgement? 
What about teaching the existence of Creationism?   


Who decides which controversial subjects should be taught in the 
public schools?   What makes you think that public school officials
won't teach YOUR children about subjects which YOU have objections to? 


>Howard Black


Doug Holtsinger
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12270 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10697 alt.politics.clinton:19104 alt.politics.bush:14920 alt.politics.homosexuality:8451
From: berger@gauss (Mike Berger)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 21:47:15 GMT

jnomina@andy.bgsu.edu (A.P.K.) writes:
>Then what ARE you addressing, if not such incidents?  I cited one,
>which was reported to me personally, and you write it off as anecdotal.
>I understand that, somewhat, in that it becomes second-hand knowledge
>to you personally.  However, it was reported -- to me, and I and another
>NCO dealt with it accordingly (and not nearly as harshly as would have
>been done if we'd reported it even higher up.)  As one of two moderators
>of the incident, I find it to have been a little more than merely an
>allegation.
****
Surely you aren't claiming that one incident (I didn't read the details
of it - was somebody killed?) is an indictment of all gays serving in
the military.  If so, then you'd obviously agree that the Tailhook
incident merits the expulsion of all heterosexual males from the military.

And I'll bet the number of heterosexual misdeeds far outnumbers the
homosexual misdeeds in the armed forces.
--
	Mike Berger
	Internet    berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12856 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11320 alt.politics.clinton:19499 alt.politics.bush:15401 alt.politics.homosexuality:8838