HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dickw@IASTATE.EDU (Richard Wallingford)
Subject: Rush -- Insurance and AIDS
Reply-To: dickw@IASTATE.EDU (Richard Wallingford)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:34:53 GMT

Rush was talking about people whose insurance gets canceled when it
is found that they have AIDS.  He thinks it's just fine that they're
canceled because they caused their own condition (he used the analogy
that fire insurance won't pay if you set your own house on fire).

I don't think Rush understands insurance very well.  First, his
analogy is faulty because fire insurance *will* cover accidental
fires started by the homeowner (i.e. grease fire) and most AIDS
cases are contracted by accident (even if there is stupididty and
ignorance involved).  

Second, if a person has health insurance *before* he/she gets AIDS, 
then the insurance company should be required to pay up to the maximum 
lifetime benefit of the policy.  Risk is the whole principal behind
insurance coverage.  The insurance company is "betting" that you won't
get sick and you're "betting" that you will.  Both parties are agreeing
to take the financial loss if they lose the "bet" by signing the policy!

If the person has AIDS and is trying to get health insurance converage
after the fact, then they should be denied because there is no risk
to either party (Insuree is guaranteed to come out ahead and the
insurer is guaranteed to loose money).


On something totally unrelated, I've noticed that Rush has started 
making personal attacks on his enemies.  For instance, he said
Patsy Schroeder looks like she's constipated when she smiles (she does!).
It's a very accurate description and her smile *is* extremely annoying
but I'm worried about Rush loosing credibility by making these statements.

--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dick Wallingford      | Internet: dickw@iastate.edu                  |
|Center for NDE        | Packet  : wd0anb@n0an.ia.usa.na              |
|Iowa State University | I'm not a musician, but I play one in a band | 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Conservative?  Hahaha....
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:11:02 GMT
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL

I have noticed a definite hypocrisy in the term "Conservative", especially
as applied by Rush...

Has anyone noted that Rush, and most other "Conservatives", support the
measure which passed in Colorado (family values and all that)?

Yet, is not one of the founding principles of conservative thought that the
government should make fewer laws, and leave people more alone (than the
liberals)?

Indeed, just what kind of hypocrits are these folks?

(Note that I do not stake claim to either popular political ideology)

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh's radio show
Date: 3 Jan 1993 22:07:08 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Distribution: world
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
NNTP-Posting-Host: zorba7.larc.nasa.gov

In article <ghartzog.32cw@terapin.com>, ghartzog@terapin.com (Garrett 
Hartzog) writes:
> Path: 
> 
news.larc.nasa.gov!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!olivea!apple!netcomsv!terapin!ghart
zo
> g
> From: ghartzog@terapin.com (Garrett Hartzog)
> Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
> Subject: Rush Limbaugh's radio show
> Message-ID: <ghartzog.32cw@terapin.com>
> Date: 3 Jan 93 17:40:52 GMT
> Organization: BBS
> Lines: 5
> 
> Can someone tell me where in the Bay Area (SF area) Rush's radio show is on 
> and at what time?
> 

Sure!  Monday thru Friday, KNBR (680 Khz), 9am to Noon

Mike

Mike Rowland (Contractor),  MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.abortion
From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Organization: Organizations are irrelevant.
	<PATRICK.93Jan2232345@rio-grande.is.rice.edu>
	<1993Jan3.071835.832@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 16:42:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.071835.832@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:

   In article <PATRICK.93Jan2232345@rio-grande.is.rice.edu> patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
   >In article <1993Jan3.031248.29133@news.columbia.edu> rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston) writes:
   >
   >   In article <1993Jan1.195123.11272@ncsu.edu> dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:
   >  >In article <PATRICK.93Jan1095848@blanco.is.rice.edu>
   >  >patrick@blanco.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:
   >  >
   >  >> "USENET Warlord", I can understand -- you *did* make a show of threatening
   >  >> people in e-mail, and on other networks, no less.
   >  >
   >  >This is pretty funny coming from someone who's said
   >  >"march your fat black ass down here".   Who are you
   >  >going to threaten next with your racist remarks?
   >
   >   Doug Holtsinger, we can only hope.
   >
  >Nah.  I haven't had to threaten anyone yet, and I'm not about to start.
  >Just brandishing a Roget's Thesaurus at him ought to do the trick equally as
  >
  Better be careful, or someone might confront and ask if you have permit to
  carry that thesaurus......

  Never take out your thesaurus unless you intend to use it!

  :-)

Of course not -- I also have my 1971 AHD as a back-up.  Just remember:  when
thesauruses are outlawed, only outlaws will have thesauruses...:-)

--PLH, not feeling the least bit ubiquitous today


--
From: shapiro@cfsctc.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush on Donahue
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:22:40 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Organisation: SKS Computer Consulting, Inc.


In article <1992Dec23.170722.7051@midway.uchicago.edu>, gus3@ellis.uchicago.edu
(Christian Gustafson) writes...

>Oh, God, yes this clip made my skin crawl.  Was, then, the entire show
>carried on in this manner?  Rush sure has guts to venture into a hornets
>nest like that; it gave creedence to G. LeBon's observation of the sheer
>mindlessness of crowds.  

I disagree on the 'mindlessness' assertion.

I believe that it is readily evident that the people who were in the audience
are Phil-o-philes. Therefore it was more than likely that the deck would be
stacked in favor of Phil-liberals. I don't know if they would have pre-screened
audience members about this stuff, but I would daresay that it didn't surprise
me that the audience was heavily liberal and therefore anti-conservative. 

I am surprised that there was the amount of agreement on some topics. In fact,
I would attribute this agreement to Rush's ability to make his point in a
logical manner so that it begs for acceptance and agreement.

If I believed in the mindlessness of a crowd, I would have to fall into the
slippery slope that those of us dittoheads in this newsgroup are likewise
mindless idiots who follow on every syllable which Rush utters. 

I believe that here, similarly to the Phil show, the preponderance of people
are conservatives and therefore have a predisposition to being a dittohead and
therefore when we come out in 'force' here in the conference, we appear to be
of a crowd mentality.

>Donahue's audience is mostly female - I presume that they were hostile to
>Rush because their husbands/boyfriends/etc. are loyal fans!

This assertion begs the belief that females dislike/hate/etc. whatever their
husband/boyfriends like. I assume the assertion is that they are man-haters. 

My wife is more liberal than I am, but she respects my opinions (as I do hers).
When I found Rush and began listening irregularly at first, and then regularly,
she didn't care too much for him. But after we would both listen, discuss,
argue, and now watch as well, she found that she likes him. She may not agree
with him on everything (neither do I), but just because we disagree on issues
doesn't mean we can't like each other or him for that matter. He seems to me to
be a very nice guy.

Regards,
Steve.

/*******************************************************************
* Steve Shapiro                 * All views and opinions expressed *
* SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and are offered as-is *
********************************************************************
* Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org  BBS: (508) 664-6354 N81  *
*******************************************************************/
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Subject: Re: Whining bastards
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University Cyclotron Facility, Bloomington, Indiana
Distribution:  world
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 05:21:56 GMT

>In article <1992Dec30.181412.6382@wdl.loral.com> bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com writes:
>>-- 
>>+---------------------------+  ``Man has not a single right which is
>>| J H Woodyatt              |  the product of anything but might.''
>>| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |                           -- Mark Twain
>>+---------------------------+  

Precisely.  Rights are taken, not given by other people.

> 

Jim Graham 

        -> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
                          Neither do they speak for me.
 ______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu                              |
|           dolmen!jgraham@moose.cs.indiana.edu                        |
| BBS:      The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
|            (812) 334-0418, 24hrs.                                    |
|______________________________________________________________________|
From: tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 21:43:23 GMT
Subject: I'm Famous!
Organization: the HP Mtn.View Resp. Cntr.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

Jesus H. Christ!  I posted a shennanigan about a month ago re: bunker mentality
and you yahoos are still at it!  The thread is alive and well..
And not only that, Rush fans are at each others throats attempting to define
bigot etc.. you guys are funny! too serious.

						   
What is the big deal? I wonder how long a thread I can create if I 
claimed he was a transvestite? (define transvestite! I'm waiting...a-ha!
proof he is not a transvestite!)

I got E-mail accusing me of being a Communist, a Communist subversive,
looney leftist, to go away, a lackey of Satan, etc. etc..

Great fun boys! This is better than Mr. Toad's Wild Ride at Disneyland
for pure entertainment.  


PS why is Rush on at 12 midnite here on the west coast? I can see
10 or 11 O'clock but I have a hard time trying to stay awake waiting..

See you. Oh, thanks Edward Simmonds for the oblig sig.  I feel better
now.
From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: So, anyone want to talk about Rush Limbaugh around here?
Date: 3 Jan 93 18:15:27 GMT
Reply-To: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University Cyclotron Facility, Bloomington, Indiana
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

In article <nate.1008@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>, nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes...
>mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson) writes:
>>...my killfile is huge.
> 
>    Mine is not, but this morning I really kind of regret it.
> 
>    I've paged through almost 200 articles and this is the first one to 
>even make a token attempt to talk about Rush (Yeah, Michael!).
> 
>    Just for the record, let me state that I'm really, really bored with 
>        1) the "Gays in the Military" thread
>        2) the "Sexuality/Lifestyles" thread
>    and 3) everything to do with Steve Chaney (the new cross-post king)
> 
>    At this point I can only hope against hope that the people who have 
>been sustaining those tired old topics will find new interests once the 
>new semester starts. Thank heavens Rush will be back on the air in 24 hours 
>and 15 minutes.
> 
>--
>Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
>Psychology Department               Indiana University
>nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu

I'll second all of the above, Nathan. :-)

Jim Graham 

        -> ->Disclaimer: I do not speak for my company. <- <-
                          Neither do they speak for me.
 ______________________________________________________________________
| Internet: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu                              |
|           dolmen!jgraham@moose.cs.indiana.edu                        |
| BBS:      The PORTAL DOLMEN BBS/ParaNet ALPHA-GAMMA (sm) (9:1012/13) |
|            (812) 334-0418, 24hrs.                                    |
|______________________________________________________________________|
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Info needed: Rush Limbaugh's Radio program in Seattle?
Date: 4 Jan 1993 01:03:12 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Distribution: world
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
NNTP-Posting-Host: zorba7.larc.nasa.gov

In article <1i6ludINN2g7@shelley.u.washington.edu>, 
miaoh@carson.u.washington.edu (Hanjin Miao) writes:
> Path: 
> 
> Is Rush Limbaugh's radio show broadcasted in Settle area?
> Thank you for your help.
> 

Look in this newsgroup for "Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)"

mike

Mike Rowland (Contractor),  MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10540 alt.rush-limbaugh:12048
From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: New group proposal:  alt.conservative.forum
Keywords: yank, circle, wank, pull, taffy
Date: 19 Dec 92 22:07:55 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ

In article <1992Dec17.072428.9152@cs.com> larry@cs.com (Larry Spence) writes:
>In article <m0iVVB6w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
>>pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU (if God's your father then call home!) writes:
>>> I would like to formally propose a new group, alt.conservative.forum, 
>>> a moderated group to discuss conservative values and assorted political
>>> goings-on from a distinctly right-wing standpoint.
>>[...]
>>> A moderated group would cut out this gibberish and allow reasoned, intelligen
>>> discussion of the issues facing the country and the world.
>>
>>Is it just me, or is there a teensy little contradiction here?
>
>It reminds me of the term that Rush has been using: "taffy pull."
>
If you lefties think that this is a contradiction, you should spend some 
time over on alt.fan.dan.quayle.  I got kicked out of that group because I 
didn't think that dan is as dumb as the media portrays him.

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
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10661 talk.politics.misc:65280 alt.politics.bush:14894 alt.president.clinton:1255
From: randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton
Subject: Re: The Religious Right (was: Somalia
Date: 18 Dec 92 02:07:20 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

tim@kudzu.viewlogic.com (Tim Foster) writes:
>The feeling I get from reading your response, which very well
>might not be the way you feel, is you feel that there is a
>separate group of Christians who claim to be "born again".  Even
>if that is not what you believe, there are many people (especially
>the media) who feel that way (maybe even some people who call
>themselves Christians).  However, I would like to set the record
>straight.  The Bible, which is the cornerstone of all Christian
>theology, is clear that in order to be a Christian, one must be
>"born again."  Therefore, all Christians fall under that category.

>As for the "irrational" political views of "born again" Christians,
>I believe that you are being unfair in that judgment.  How else is
>a person supposed to form their views than by what they believe?
>If one says they believe something, but does not support that in
>every facet of their life, then aren't they being hypocritical?  

The Bible also says "judge not, lest ye be judged."  Jesus
says "sell all your possessions, give the money to the poor, and
come follow me."  He also says "take the log out of your own
eye before you criticize the speck in your brother's eye."  He also
says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."   Why then
are some people who claim to be "born again" so intolerant and judgemental
of people who are different from them, like homosexuals?   Why do 
they support government policies that allow the rich to accumulate
wealth while the poor grow hungrier?   To claim to be a follower
of Jesus and not to take his teaching seriously is hypocritical
and even irrational.

I am also a Christian- even a "born again" Christian.  I guess I don't
selectively read the Bible and filter out the things I don't like.


-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Randall Rhea                                        Informix Software, Inc. 
Project Manager, MIS Sales/Marketing Systems    uunet!pyramid!infmx!randall
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: Soul of the Republican Party
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:51:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.235046.3988@brtph560.bnr.ca> woodstock!chris@mcnc.org writes:
>
>  What happened this year was that George Bush's presidency was not marked
>by conservativism, but rather by moderatism.  (Remember Pat Buchanan's cry 
>that Bush had "Betrayed the Republican Party"?)  Reagan's, on the other
>hand, was clearly conservative, and (despite what current revisionists would
>say) he ended up as one of the most popular presidents in history.

Er, are we ignoring the somewhat uncomfortable fact that the
Republican National Convention, that extravaganza of conservatism and
nativism, didn't sit well with moderate Americans?

Reagan's victory was in 1980.  Bush lost in 1992, half-a-generation
later.  Political mores change (see Arthur Schlesinger's idea of
30-year cycles).

>
>  Rush said a few days ago that people like somebody who stands for
>something, and when they try to "moderate" their beliefs, it doesn't
>come off quite right.  LBJ & his "great society" programs are an example.
>Bush lost because in part because it was never really clear what he
>actually stood for.

This is true in the sense that Bush had to work extra-hard to secure
what should be the core of his support.  This does not mean that Bush
would have won the support of moderate Americans by becoming a
Buchanan clone.

>
>  The advantage of this for conservatives is that solid conservatism
>is where we've come from, so it sound vaguely familiar and wholesome --
>Family Values, Small Government, Praying in school, etc....  I don't 
>think that there'll be much disagreement that "Traditional" family 
>values are disappearing, or that government is getting bigger.
>

This doesn't necessarily reflect America in the '90s, though.  For
instance, the majority of women work, and would not like being
disparaged on national television.  The majority of Americans believe
in some sort of abortion rights.  The majority of Americans believe
that discrimination against gays is wrong.  And so on.




--
"What does not kill me only makes me stronger, right?"
	"Ooooh, no. You're weak as a kitten!"
From: scythe@hardy.u.washington.edu (The Grim Reaper)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: A scary thought
Date: 3 Jan 1993 17:13:42 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.u.washington.edu

In article <s06RwB8w165w@unkaphaed.gbdata.com> popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell) writes:
>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>> In article <1992Dec31.062952.6046@news.columbia.edu> rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.
>> >The thought that alt.fan.rush-limbaugh = alt.human-sexuality is truly
>> >a scary thought
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> So is a Democrat in the White House! :-)
>> 
>> Simon
>> 
>
>Not anywhere near as scary as Pat Robertson's vow to conrol the 
>Repukelikan party by 1996.
>
>--
>popec@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (William C. Barwell)
>Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 481-3763
>1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

What do you mean, '96?  This year's (er, *last* year's) election 
made it obvious that Pat Robertson and his loony ^H^H^H^H^Hfundamentalist
friends already control the Republican party.


Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh