HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: steve@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com (Steven Martin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Can you say Prez Clinton ???
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:48:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U S WEST, MRG
XXXDate: Thu, 5 Nov 92 23:44:46 GMT
XUserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
XXXMessageID: <A71EFFFEF6020642@steve_martin.mrg.uswest.com>
NntpPostingHost: steve_martin.mrg.uswest.com

In article <1992Nov4.174942.1@woods.ulowell.edu> , enor@woods.ulowell.edu
writes:
>Can you say "President Bill Clinton"?
>
>P
>PR
>PRE
>PRES
>PRESI
>PRESID
>PRESIDE
>PRESIDEN
>PRESIDENT
>PRESIDENT_
>PRESIDENT B
>PRESIDENT BI
>PRESIDENT BIL
>PRESIDENT BILL
>PRESIDENT BILL_
>PRESIDENT BILL C
>PRESIDENT BILL CL
>PRESIDENT BILL CLI
>PRESIDENT BILL CLIN
>PRESIDENT BILL CLINT
>PRESIDENT BILL CLINTO
>PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON
>
>WOW I actually said that.  Well I guess admittance is
>the first step towards acceptance. 

Nope, so far the best I have been able to get out
is "Comrade President Clintski." But I find that most
of my liberal friends prefer it if I refer to him as
Slick Willy. Gonna be a fun four years, for the first
time a president I truly have no respect for at all! I
think I see why the liberals have at least been enjoying
themselves.

        Steve Martin
        steve@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and
 bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against 
 tyranny in government."  Thomas Jefferson
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: Liberals want to remove Admendment #10? (was Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:06:54 GMT

In article <1ds9bmINNd5h@agate.berkeley.edu> curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Dr. Bloor) writes:
>In article <1drs9qINN9vd@agate.berkeley.edu> curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Nov11.191913.9088@novell.com> bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>>>
>>>[blather]
>>
>>Dr. Bloor is on Line 2 and would like a chat with you.
>>Let me put him on.
>
>Ok.  First, Boerner, I'd like to point out that you are a cottonhead.
>Yes, a cottonhead.  A complete and utter cottonhead, of the worst kind.
>What is a cottonhead, Boerner?  Is a cottonhead anything like a
>cottonmouth, Boerner?  No, Boerner, it is not.  A cottonhead is a
>person with cotton in his head.  Mull that over for a second, why
>don't you, Boerner.

[...blather...]

Take a chill pill Curtis, and relax, I had to spend an hour this
morning cleaning the spittle from my machine.

Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail exterior to Novell.
From: gspncm@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Minister of Misinformation)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Sore LosDEREGISTER
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:03:44 GMT
Reply-To: gspncm@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology


>In article <1992Nov6.190243.1@woods.ulowell.edu> enor@woods.ulowell.edu writes:
>>It ceases to amaze me how the Liberals are such sore
>>winners.  We who call ourselves conservatives have 
>>been very gracious to Mr. Clinton saying we hope for
>>the sake of the country that he does a good job. 

Well, not all.  His Pompousness continues to rain idiotic insults on the
character, family and motives of Governor Clinton.  His attacks are, as always,
mean in spirit, destructive and self-promoting.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:17:22 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Turn out the lights as you leave...

In article <1992Nov6.004104.22586@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, htuttle@nyx.cs.du.edu
(Harry Tuttle) says:

>[....]
>Bye, bye Rush.  You probably don't read these posts, but I guess now
>you'll have lots of time to.  The pink slip is on its way...

So, you have no clue at all about Rush, then?  Most people will try to get a
      clue about Rush before predicting anything about his show.

Say, listened to any good hate-mongering on the radio, lately?

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:29:32 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Clinton wins in LANDSLIDE - NOT!!
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins) writes:

> 
> Bill Clinton did not win in a landslide at all....he won a simple
> plurality, i.e. more votes than anyone else. In fact, some 57-58%
> of all voters voted for someone OTHER than Bill Clinton, i.e.
> a BIG majority of voters opted for someone other than Bill Clinton.

But he creamed Bush, a man who SHOULD have been able to win
easily.

> 
> I hope the Democrats realize all this and become more moderate and
> mainstream and totally reject the Democratic platform of years past.

I do too.
I am not confident.

doug
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton
From: rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:47:45 GMT

rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>Dittohead who?  This was crossposted.  I was laughing, actually, at
>John Palmer, the one who started this, the very model of the new liberal.

Before the flames arrive, the last sentence has at least half a smiley
on it.
-- 
A tree never hits an automobile except in self defense
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8486 alt.president.clinton:373 talk.politics.misc:59890
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Network projections
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:53:34 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <BxLyKH.H4q@ssesco.com> nau@ssesco.com (William Nau) writes:
>>Plus something noone has mentioned is the FACT that ABC news on the evening
>>newscast (before even the first poll closed) said (DIRECT QUOTE) "Since WE
>>promiced not to predict results of the election until the polls close, we
>>will not do that, but, the winds of change are in the air."
>>
>>I immediately changed channels.  Face it the Networks (at least the three
>>major ones) are A**HOLES who want to affect the election for their own
>>benefit.
>
>I can't remember which network it was, but one of them declared Clinton
>a winner ONE MONTH before the election.  That pissed me off.  In general,
>this year, I didn't watch any of the news on the election.  I just watched
>the debates, interviews and Perot's charts.

You know, if you go beyond politics, the way the network gets ratings figures
on entertainment shows is also open to suspicion.  Ever wondered why the trash
shows get high ratings and are allowed to stay on the air while anything with
a shred of intelligence gets canceled?  Then they try to convince us that we're
supposed to like the gutter swill they're cranking out.  The ratings figures
always seem to contradict public opinion about those shows.  The meda has
elevated crap to high art.  Instead of just informing us and allowing us
to make up our own minds (think for ourselves) they have taken it upon
themselves to dictate to us what movies to see, what shows to watch, and
what music to listen to, and who to vote for.  Is this a form of censorship??
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:07:58 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: The Decline of America
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Nov11.021352.3815@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, htuttle@nyx.cs.du.edu
(Harry Tuttle) says:

> [...]
>His book is comic-book conservatism for the common man.  It's for
>people who don't want to think too hard, and wish that America would
>turn back to the halcyon days of the 1950's when white men reigned
>supreme and others cowered in fear and awe.

So, you didn't read the book, then?  Most people -read- the book they are
reviewing.

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:16:18 GMT
Subject: Re: Rush is such a bad loser
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman]) writes:

> 
> Hold on a minute here.  Maybe its just me but where does someone who
> probably spent election night kissing a picture of Ted Kennedy mistake the
> point that Rush is making.  The point of there being a victory for
> conservaitves is true.

It is partially true.  It is a victory for moderation.
Anyone who sees Bush getting defeated as a victory for
conservatism is playing quite loose with definitions.

> The future of the conservative movment is in good hands. There are several
> new Quarterbacks on the horizon (hint, hint) Men like JACK KEMP, BOB DOLE
> and WILLIAM WELD are leaders capable of bringing the Regan Revolution to its
> rightful conclusion.  Rush can only aid in their endeavors by speaking the
> truth.

Kemp and Dole will be very interesting possibilities.
> 
> 
> Remember it is not the size of the victory that has been won, but the level
> of expectations its creates.  

And Rush is making the point that expectations are low, given that
there is no mandate.

> 
> Remember I promise to keep a kosher kitchen in the white house if elected.

Read my lips:  No new taxes.

I hope my point is clear.  All politicians lie to get elected.  There
ARE no exceptions.

doug
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8304 alt.rush-limbaugh:9379 alt.politics.bush:13686
From: jcburt@gatsibm.larc.nasa.gov ()
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Date: 10 Nov 1992 21:25:57 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: gatsibm.larc.nasa.gov

In article <10NOV199213360109@sscvx1.ssc.gov> seitzler@sscvx1.ssc.gov (JOHN SEITZLER) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.171300.11448@netcom.com>, jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)           writes...
>>Man, I can't believe the complaints I'm getting with my sig - isn't it amazing
>>that for 12 years, Democrats have been ridiculing Reagan, Bush, Quayle, and 
>>anything conservative, yet when they are finally victorious they allow no 
>>dissent whatever? I was going to change this sig after about a week or so, 
>>but since it's irritating so many whiny liberals, I'm going to keep it around
>>for a while. 
>>-- 
>>John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>>                           | Support the coup!
>>CompuServe: 74076,1250     |
>>Internet: jrs@netcom.com   |
>
>_________________________________________________
>
>Personally, I think your sig is great!  I am continually amazed  how
>'out of control' the liberals get when we don't 'see the light'.  
>All I can say is these same raving Libs (or RL's) will be talking out of
>the other side of their mouths when Slick Willie really messes things up
>(and rest assured he will!!!).  The last laugh will be ours.  It'll take
>12 years after Clinton's 1 term to straighten out the mess he will make.
>Don't tell me to 'give him a chance', just listen to what he promised!!! 

As opposed to what Bush promised in '88 and in '92 ? Perhaps you don't realize
that many of the people voting for Perot and Clinton *weren't* voting on
the promises of the candidate, but on the record (or lack there of) of Bush...
Haven't you realized that *all* candidates lie to some extent and *all*
candidates promise things that they cannot deliver...I would think you'd
be well accustomed to that idea considering how many campaign promises
Bush DID NOT deliver...

John



Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: johnt@meaddata.com (John Townsend)
Subject: Re: Limbaugh's Falseness Revealed
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:18:36 GMT

In article <Nov.11.14.37.09.1992.15457@math.rutgers.edu>, jvogel@math.rutgers.edu (jeff vogel) writes:
|> Fascinating article in the New York Times today. It seems that our dear,
|> dear idol, Rush Limbaugh, not long before his radio show went on the
|> air, hosted a New York radio talk show with a highly liberal slant.
|> He had often complained that his views, while popular, were not getting
|> good ratings, and that he had some interesting ideas for what to do if the 
|> show was cancelled.
|> 
|> It is clear to me that he is really a closet liberal, only pretending to
|> be a closed-minded idealogue in order to appeal to the more common of the
|> common man and make a lot of money.
|> 
|> Anyway, I strongly recommend the article. 

LIAR.  No such article exists.  We have the 11/11/92 NYT online on Lexis/Nexis,
all 244 articles of it, and none of them even mentions Limbaugh.  There have
been no articles in the NYT about him since 10/1/92.  Nice try.

-- 
// John Townsend                                   Legal Conversion Engineering
// Mead Data Central          "Don't blame me,        johnt@skibum.meaddata.com
// 8891 Gander Creek Dr.     I voted for Bush."        ...!uunet!meaddata!johnt
// Miamisburg, OH  45342                                         (513) 865-7250 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (kellmeyer steven l)
Subject: Re: Summary Tue 11/10/92
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 02:45:33 GMT

In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh you write:

>Unofficial Summary of the Rush Limbaugh Show

>for Tuesday, November 10, 1992

>by John Switzer

>Phone   Wendy from South Amboy, NJ

>The willing media also trumpets leaders such as Gloria Steinem,
>and has faithfully reported her statements that the Republican
>emphasis on family values is akin to the patriarchal repression
>that was created under Nazism. Wendy has heard this comparison
>before - that one of the first things Hitler did was to outlaw
>abortions.

I have heard this lie entirely too many times.  Germany became a
state in 1870.  The German constitution of 1871 specifically 
outlawed abortion and provided jail penalties for both the doctor
who performed the abortion and the woman who had it done - one of 
the strictest anti-abortion laws in the world.  That law stayed on
the books until *1935* (Hitler came to power in 1933).  Hitler never
outlawed abortion - it was already outlawed when he came to power and
had been outlawed for 60 years.  The law banning abortion was re-instated
in Germany immediately after the war (on the Democratic side - on the
totalitarian side, of course, it expanded even further than it had
under Hitler, which was quite an accomplishment in the mid-20th century)
and remained the law of the land until this year, when Germany's abortion
law was again "liberalized".

In fact, it was Hitler's creation of eugenics courts in 1935 that 
permitted the first abortions in Germany for reasons other than 
imminent danger of death for the mother.  Witnesses at the Nuremburg
trials quoted Hitler as saying that he (Hitler) would personally
shoot the man who interfered with abortions in Eastern Europe.
The history on this is quite clear - abortion expanded under Hitler.
Gloria Steinem has been repeating the lie about abortion being 
banned for so long, and so loudly, that no one has bothered to 
research the facts.


Steve Kellmeyer

-- 

Steve Kellmeyer 
kellmeye@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: cs125c51@dcl-nxt31.cso.uiuc.edu (cs125 student)
Subject: Rush's undeniable truths of life
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:40:51 GMT

Does anyone out there have a list of Rush's Undeniable Truths of Life? I have  
heard about them for so long from him, but have not seen them anywhere. 

Thanks.

P.S. I wonder what kind of "witty sarcasm" the liberals here will come up with  
on this post. "Perhaps UT of L #33: Rush Sucks". Boy, wouldn't that be a hoot.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: enor@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: CLINTON PLAGURIZES REPULICANS IN ACCEPTANCE SPEECH TO NATION
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:43:08 GMT

CLINTON PLAGURIZES REPUBLICAN PLATFORM IN ACCEPTAANCE SPEECH

Am I the only one who caught the Clinton plagurization of the 
Republican Platform Tuesday night.  Among his acceptance speech
to the nation Clinton said "We need to give people a hand up not
a hand out".  My My My thats what we Republican's have been 
saying for 12 years.  

I hope Jack Kemp was listening because that's a good place to start
the '96 campaign.  His slogan could be.  Why elect a plagurizer of me
why not elect me.  


*********************************************************************
*                                          * Just remember like Dr. *
* EEEEE  N    N   OOOO    RRRR            * Seuss said " I meant    *
* E      N N  N   O  O    R   R          * what I said and I said   *
* EEE    N  N N   O  O    RRRR          * what I meant an Elephant  *
* E      N   NN   O  O    R  R         * is faithful one-hundred    *
* EEEEE  N    N   OOOO    R   R       * percent."  The elephant     *
*                                    * truth justice and the        *
*                                   * REPUBLICAN  WAY               *
*********************************************************************
The views expressed here are my own and in no way reflect those of 
the University of Massachusetts at Lowell, or any of it's affiliated
institutions.   But they should.

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre,alt.politics.clinton
From: tgpt_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Guptill)
Subject: Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 21:15:48 GMT

In <1992Nov5.202924.12593@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> mk009b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu ([Matt Kaufman]) writes:

>Don't be too sure of yourself.  The ratings for yesterday's show was
>astounding, their buddy so I'd keep the rush-limbaugh groups if I were you.
             ^^^^^
>It's the best education money can buy.

It sure is.  Now what did I do with that transfer application?...

Tom.  (Who wonders who they are and what they're doing with that comma.)
-- 
|Tom Guptill           | tgpt_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu  (internet)  |
|CPU Box 277445 U of R |  "    " @db1.cc.rochester.edu (alt internet) |
|Rochester, NY 14627   |  "    " @uordbv (bitnet)                     |
|(716) 274-0156        | (if mail to uhura fails, try db1 or uordbv)  |
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8133 alt.rush-limbaugh:9207
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush vs. facts
From: kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 08:39:42 GMT
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services

steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree) writes:
> >In <1992Nov2.022055.7768@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@red-dragon.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
> ->>	I've been really wondering about the GOP tactic of trying to
> ->>convice the public that they are not really miserable. Assuming that
> ->>things are really better then they seem, it strikes me as poor
> ->>political judgement to tell the general public that they are wrong.
> 
>  Get ready for "happy time" stories in the media. They are now going to tell
> us that maybe our attitude is making us think that life in the USA is worse 
> than it actually is. Nightline ran a "happy time" story last night and will
> run another on friday.
> 
>  Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.

Yup; the media has been badmouthing the economy for ten years, trying to
portray every bit of good news as having a rotten side, and hyping
anything even remotely bad, because they knew that as long as the economy
was O.K., the peepul would NEVER elect a democrat president. So congress
did all they could to scuttle the economy, and the national press (except
for the Wall Street Journal) has emphasized the negative. But things
aren't now, and never were, as black as they painted it.  The economy IS
on the rebound, however weakly (and the weakness is due mostly to the
lingering efects of the 1990 tax hikes) and will continue to do so.
Neither Bush NOR Clinton will be responsible for the improvement, but
watch for Dan Rather to point out about a zillion times that as soon as
Clinton was elected, the economy started to take off. (It won't take off;
it'll continue to stagger up 'till Slick Willie and George Mitchell pass
the first tax hike, at which time it'll plummet, and
Clinton/Mitchell/Foley will pronounce it a "delayed reaction to the
fiscal irresponsibility of Reagan/Bush". ) 


Ken Mitchell
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu
From: BJGLEAS@auvm.american.edu (bj gleason)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Music on the Radio Show
Date: 11 Nov 92 04:11:24 GMT
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center

Does anybody know the name of the music that is played at the beginning of
the radio show?

thanks...

bj
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:7948 alt.politics.bush:13208 alt.politics.clinton:15891 talk.bizarre:36893
From: jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,talk.bizarre
Subject: in fairness to finerty (was Re: rmgroup alt.fan.rush-limbaugh)
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:55:13 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Originator: jcarroll@ferris


In article <1992Nov5.153402.22809@netcom.com>, jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
> In article <1992Nov5.082832.19492JPII@tygra.Michigan.COM> jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) writes:
> >In article <1992Nov5.034239.3528@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mbur@nyx.cs.du.edu (MAC) writes:

(much intolerant ranting from both ends of the political spectrum elided)

> -- 
> John Switzer               | Impeach Clinton!
>                            | Support the coup!
			       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
this appears to be advocacy of the violent overthrow of the US Gov't,
and is just as improper, illegal, what have you, as finerty's juvenile
shenanigans.

I would like to go on the record as being staunchly opposed to any sort
of violent overthrow of the United States Government, being a peace-loving
individual.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8327 alt.rush-limbaugh:9398
From: lawson@ecst.csuchico.edu (M. Todd Lawson)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Is Rush getting tooooo irritating?
Date: 10 Nov 1992 23:35:10 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu


    I've been a big fan for years now, but Rush is starting to get sooo
  irritating that it's embarassing.  This "Clinton screw-up watch" is getting
  a bit annoying. He's Prez. now, so let's at least hope he does a reasonable
  job. Personally, I'm gwetting embarrassed to say that I'm a Republican.
  Oh well...
   

   Let me know how you think...

   Todd.
-- 
===============================================================================
M. Todd Lawson -- Lawson@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu
California State University, Chico. Computer Engineering Dept.
It happens to the best.  It happens to the rest.