HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: graham@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (JIM GRAHAM)
Subject: Re: The "L" word
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: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 15:50:32 GMT

In article <B8cBwB1w165w@major.panix.com>, dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea) writes...
>mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus) writes:
> 
> 
>> 2) Tax exemptions for all religious income and property should be repealed.
> 
>You won't get any big argument from me on that one. The first tax bill
>to arrive at Our Lady Of Perpetual Motion might show 'em that maybe all
>those social programs they support actually *do* cost something!
> 
>> 3) Only charitable organizations that directly benefit the poor should remain
>> tax exempt.
> 

So, where does the Salvation Army fit in?  It's both a religious organization
and one that directly benefits the poor, isn't it?

> 
>> 5) The country should go to a year-round school calendar.
> 
>Cripes. The public school system already pretty much trashes the minds
>of kids - why let them finish the job?

Not to mention the fact that the parents are actually doing most of the
work of the teachers, nowadays (at least they are around here).

> 
>> 6) The Electoral College should be done away with.
> 
>Does this involve firing politicians? I'll go with it. :)

Definitely!  Direct representation by the majority of the people.  Screw
the population proportions of various states.

I'm not being sarcastic here.  I'm serious.

Of course, liberals will never go for that.  Remember, the average
Joe/Joe-ette aren't intelligent enough to make decisions about their
lives.

>> 8) Anyone who is invited to speak anywhere should be allowed to be heard, and
>> any disruptive elements should be removed from the venue.
> 
>Hmm.. You obviously have something in mind, but I can't figure out
>exactly what; almost every case I read of involving hecklers or harassed
>speakers involves a "conservative" speaker..

Yup.  It happened here, on-campus a little over a year ago.  No matter that
the speaker was considered a person militantly opposed to abortion.
The liberals (translate that "children") in that particular
audience wouldn't allow the speaker to make his speech.  If I recall,
it took a little security to get the guy off-stage, before they
hurt him.

Of course, some days later, the pro-choice crowd (the same) had their own
speaker, and there was no heckling going on there.

Who showed more thoughtfulness here?

Who showed more respect for the first amendment?

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: jdough@unf6.unf.edu (Joseph Dougherty)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: What ARE We Against!
Date: 20 Dec 92 14:39:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of North Florida, Jacksonville

Mike Rowland commented:
"Jerks are Jerks, and when they are homosexuals, they do
a disservice to the others.  It seems to me that the
honest, reasonable homosexuals should start being a little
more descrimating about who they support, and realize that
hanging around dirt makes them dirty!"

	I'm not gay but have a number of gay friends who <sort of> feel
this way. They're perfectly great people in every way. Some are conservative,
some are liberal. Most have strong religious views. A couple come from 
straight marriages that didn't work out <that's another post>. But none of 
these folks support the loudest or most radical groups. 
	However, like anyone who has an alternate or unusual lifestyle, they
often fear making their opposing views known. They fear being lumped in with
those whom they don't support, just because they're gay.
	It's like being conservative: the minute you make it known, people
think you're aligned with David Duke or some radical religious fanatics.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com (Mike Jones)
Subject: Re: Conservative Values (Re: New group proposal:  alt.conservative.forum)
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 00:29:22 GMT
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
: Mike Jones (mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com) wrote:
: : mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz) writes:
: : : Russ Anderson (rja@mahogany126.cray.com) wrote:
: : : : In article <1gl52rINN4mf@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, 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.
: : : : What are "conservative values"?
: : : : Take the following issues:
  [much diatribe and vitriol delete]
: There is NO such thing as the conservative position.  Good enough for you?

Thank you. That was my premise. 

   Mike Jones  |  AIX/ESA Development  |  mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com

Drive New York city avenues at 31 mph and you'll make all the lights.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11048 alt.politics.clinton:19349 alt.politics.bush:15208 alt.politics.homosexuality:8684
From: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Sexuality
Date: 31 Dec 92 14:45:40 GMT
Reply-To: rj24@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Robert  Johnston)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Dec31.135554.9320@kodak.kodak.com> bryant@neural.Kodak.COM (Steve Bryant) writes:
>
>>The point is, I don't want someone teaching my children values that
>>do not reflect the christian values that this country was founded on.
>>-- 
>
>I don't want someone teaching my children your christian values, your
>moslim values, your jewish values, your homosexual values. I don't want 
>any of your values. I'll teach my children my values, thank you.
>
>The primary purpose of schools should be a basic education including,
>reading, writing, and arithmatic. And, should exclude social engineering
>masquerading itself as education. If you want someone other than 
>yourself to teach your children values, take them to sunday school.

Not only is this foolishness in the extreme, it is completely infeasable.
I want to teach my children to be cannibles. Do I have the right?
I want to teach my children that all christians should be shot. Do I have 
right?
I want to teach my children that America is an evil place, and they should 
strive to overthrow the government by any means necessary. Do I have the 
right?

Part of living in a civilized community is compromise. I give up my 
rights to perform acts harmful to the community, and in return I am 
free of such acts by others. (theoretically speaking, of course) It is,
IMNSHO, harmfull to our comminty not to teach general tolerance of all
people, to all people. I feel that EVERY school, public or private, should
have to teach such things. No one has the right to keep his children
from becoming tolerant, productive members of society.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:11353 talk.politics.misc:66105 alt.politics.bush:15416
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Enough Already!
Date: 4 Jan 1993 00:59:29 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 <C036wF.8C8@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don 
Wiggins) writes:
> In alt.fan.rush-limbaugh a couple of geniuses write:
> 
> 	>In article <1992Dec30.142658.14090@novell.com>,
> 	bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
> 
> 		>> In article <C01x89.MC1@NeoSoft.com> jpsb@NeoSoft.com
> 		(Jim Shirreffs) writes:
> 
> 		>>contention that anal intercouse is WRONG, men butt
> 		fucking
> 
> 	>male member into and the results thereof(see baby), and the
> 	>anus for the removal of waste. I believe each
> 
> Folks, would you _PLEASE_ consider taking this stuff to
> alt.politics.homosexuality where it belongs, and stop subjecting everyone
> else to it?  Jeez, I'm trying to eat lunch here!
> 
> 
DITTO--alt.tasteless would also be appropriate!
mike

Mike Rowland (Contractor),  MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: Homophobes in the Military..what nobody is talking about: (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:18:00 GMT

Greg Halbrook (gsh@iti.org) wrote:
: roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:
: 
: >>    There is one issue I would like to bring up if I may, and that is what I 
: >>see as hypocracy on the part of many who are arguing for the end of the ban.
: >>Having been in the military, I know what if feels like to be looked down on
: >>and considered second-class citizens, especially by the same people who 
: >>expect the military to accept gays with open arms.  It's kind of like saying 
: >>to the military "You must accept us and our values, but you are scum and 
: >>don't expect us to accept you and your values."  To me, that is blatant 
: >>hypocracy.  Well, that's just my opinion and I welcome any 
: >>flames/disagreement or discussions on the subject.  Thanks :)
: 
: >The two paragraphs above are the most thought provoking (to me, anyways), 
: >I have seen in this thread.  Thanks!
: 

Dittos :)

: >With regard to the second paragraph, I will point out that gay people who 
: >are already in the military have accepted "you and your values" and 
: >simply want to be accepted themselves for the good soldiers that they are.
: 
: >Didn't the "scummy military soldier" idea die out in the 80's or earlier?
: >I thought most everyone was behind the military *personnel* in the Persian 
: >Gulf, even if they weren't all behind the leaders.  This is an honest query, 
: >not a counter-argument -- you know more on this matter than I would.
: 
: 
: It's hard to explain the feeling of being looked at like one of those losers
: from high school who couldn't get a real job and had to join the military.

Take about 10 seconds and think about all the movies and TV shows that portray
members of the military as stupid, moronic, uneducated, incompetent, etc.  It
is too bad that a 2 hour movie gets 3 minutes of this crap stuck in it,
ruining what is otherwise a possibly good movie...

: --
: 						Greg.
: 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: rrhodman@cwis.unomaha.edu (Avalon)
Subject: Re: Posts by Rush? NOT!
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 06:04:41 GMT

I have gotten email through by sending it around 2-4am CST.  It generally
seems to get through most of the time then.

--
From: dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Charities in the '80's (was Whining bastards)
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 93 21:53:24 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department

jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:

> In article <1992Dec31.192617.27344@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, sborders@nyx.cs.du.e
> |> Hmmmm.  Looks like a *few billion* 'points of light' to me.  Face it: the
> |> Eighties *worked*.  The rich got richer, *and* the poor got richer.
> 
> This is the stupiest thing I have ever seen posted on the
> net.  The POOR GOT RICHER?   Go tell that to all of the
> GM workers who lost their jobs, all of the steel mill 
> employees.  Tell it to the homeless and those trapped
> on welfare.  They'll laugh in your face.

Statistics don't apply to individuals; GM, specifically, is a case of
incompetent management having an adversarial relationship with it's
incompetent labor force.

> Not only did the poor get poorer, the middle class joined
> the poor.  Check it out.  Record numbers of people slipped
> below the poverty line during the eighties.

Every reliable statistic shows that the nation, as a whole, had a
nice-sized jump in it's standard of living. Some statistics can be
misinterpreted to show the opposite, though: Idealogues give you half
the story "record numbers of people joined the ranks of the unemployed",
while not telling you that the population increased at a higher rate,
and those unemployed tended to stay there for a shorted period of time.

> We're all poor anyway, thanks to VOODOO ECONOMICS and 
> the Reagan-induced NATIONAL DEBT!

Hehe. Speak for yourself. I just bought a new car, and I'll be sending
several thousand off to the jackals in DC as a result of the profits
I've made on my investments. Hey, better to have 'em working for the
government than to have to step over them on the street.

Funny, all my friends did very well in the eighties (and continue to do
pretty good). Maybe it's you?



--
"To call something 'Public' is to define it as filthy, inefficient and
dangerous. The public toilet is the epitome of social spending."
                                                 - P.J. O'Rourke

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: Valid Space-related research...
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 23:08:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.082644.25866@fcom.cc.utah.edu> freier@mail.physics.utah.edu (rodney james freier) writes:
(re: Biosphere II)
>   Regardless of where the funding is coming from or what the intent
>actually is, it is the kind of experiment that MUST be done before any
>plans for colony projects can even begin.  (Not that I approve of 
>colonization plans, mind you.)  I freely admit that if data is not 
>being taken properly, then Biosphere is a scam.  

The problem with Biosphere II is that there are just too many variables
-- If the people involved were interested more in science than in
ideology, they'd have tried a number of simpler combinations of life
forms instead of attempting to create a microcosm of the entire
planetary biosphere, with animals rather than the grand-standing of
putting people in it.  I just hope their data collection is more
science-like and less advocacy-like than their experimental setup.

-- 
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
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: keep your pants on, Mark
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Um, err... I *know* I saw it here a few days ago...
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 04:33:35 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.173923.22408@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> ece_0028@bigdog.engr.arizona.edu (David Anderson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.172846.5252@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mark A. Cochran) writes:
>>
>>Since you've come out of hiding David, are you now ready to admit
>>publically that your "facts" about abortion (supposedly obtained from
>>the lancet) were either invented by you to serve you propaganda
>>efforts, or misrepresented by you (for the same reason) or just plain
>>bogus nonsense?
>>Or do you plan to continue dodging all questions addressed to you?
>>Come on David, either back up your claims with some documentable
>>evidence, or join DODie, DJR, and others in the Professionial Idiots
>>and Liars Hall of Fame.
>>
>>--
>>                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
>
>I'm not hiding anywhere.  I just haven't had time to address all
>the questions sent my way.  And I will be out of town for the next
>month, so you'll have to wait (I know you'll miss me, but you'll
>get over it...:).
>
>But I promise to return with the Lancet article.  I didn't invent
>or misrepresent anything.
>
Come on David. How hard can it be to provide a citation? You
apparently had the article from which you claim you obtained the
figures. So how hard could it have been to post the citation?
I think you're just hoping people will forget by the time you come
back. PLanning on joining Petey Ny in the "it's not my fault, it's the
newserver" club by this dodge huh?
Weak try.

--
                  Mark Cochran          merlin@eddie.ee.vt.edu
These are the views of my employer. They also represent the views of
your employer, your government, the Church of your choice, and the
Ghost of Elvis. So there.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: Flush Limburger
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
	<LARRY.92Dec21112413@peak.psl.nmsu.edu>
	<Bzp0y0.8ML@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 14:16:20 GMT

	[.. definitions of "bigot" deleted ..]

JIM> Fine.  So far, I've seen two definitions of "bigot".

JIM> But, no one has YET shown a single definitive example that
JIM> shows Rush to be a bigot.

JIM> I suspect there aren't any, or I would have been flooded with
JIM> them by now, considering how quickly the left tends to label
JIM> those opposed to their ideologies, without first getting the
JIM> facts.

JIM> I'm waiting....

There you have it, folks. Definitive PROOF that Rush Limbaugh is NOT 
a bigot.

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).
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
From: parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 22:03:55 GMT

dsh@eceyv.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger) writes:

>In article <1992Dec28.154215.13989@rchland.ibm.com> 
>jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:

>> This is the same attitude I have seen from pro-lifers
>> all along.  They'll get arrested to save a life, but
>> once the baby is born they could care less.  Try to get
>> some of these folks to support social programs like
>> WIC or foodstamps.  

>Actually, most pro-lifers that I know support social
>programs like WIC and foodstamps.  And the poor tend 
>to be the strongest opponents of abortion.  

Something just doesn't sit right when people in poverty are having more
children than people who are well off.  And people wonder how a country can
end up with 1% of the population owning 99% of the wealth.  It's sad.

>But I don't follow your reasoning.  If someone supports 
>the criminalization of an immoral act, then why must they 
>support those who wish to commit that act?  Does my support 
>of rape laws imply that I must satisfy the desires of  
>potential rapists?  If not, then what's the difference
>between that and abortion? 

Hold on.  In the case of rape, the attacker is adding a burden to society
through hospital care and police investigation of a violent crime.  In the
case of abortion, a burden is *removed* from society.  (or an individual,
depending on whether you think society or the parents should be responsible)
It is not the one doing or having the abortion, it is the child that results
from *not* having the choice of abortion that we expect you to support.  Your
rape analogy does not hold.

>>Jared Dahl

>Doug Holtsinger

-Rob
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson)
Subject: The Way Things Ought to Be
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 23:38:06 GMT

So how many of you got a copy of the book for Christmas?

I did (and boy is it hard to find in Canada...so my family keeps
reminding me....).

Slow start. He keeps emphasizing how hard he worked to actually
*write* a book, then describes in detail how much other people did to
actually *write* the book.

Didn't like the extended quotes from his radio show. Lazy writing.

But the pace picks up nicely about a third of the way through, and
becomes vintage Limbaugh.

All in all, I really enjoyed it.

Michael
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mykes@shell.portal.com (mike myke schwartz)
Subject: Re: New group proposal: alt.conservative.forum
Organization: Portal Communications Company
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:38:33 GMT

Russ Anderson (rja@mahogany126.cray.com) wrote:
: 
: In article <BzCu8L.EA8@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins) writes:
: > rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu writes:
: > >	The Right has its own set of buzz-words, principles, slogans,
: > >and ideologues.  In fact, wasn't the term, "politically correct" first
: > >used by Right wingers to refer to a set of political assumptions that had
: > >begun to prevail in America?  I never heard of the term until conservatives
: > >on this campus used to as a rallying cry to fight off perceived liberal
: > >policies here.  In doing so, they're setting up their own agenda of
: > >"how things ought to be".  That's the essence of a Politically Correctivist
: > >system.
: > 
: > It seems to me that "politically correct" was a term originated by the
: > Marxists, and was used to describe their own internally acceptable thoughts
: > and ideas.  I'll have to do some digging and get back to you.
: 
: As a life long liberal (going back to the days of Hubert Humphrey) I have
: to admit that the first I heard the term "politically correct" was when
: conservatives started screaming about it a couple years ago (~1990).
:

To the best of my knowledge, PC is a term to describe a liberal movement in
education (at least originally).  In order to be politically correct, an
educational institution should be required to teach a different curriculum
than has been traditionally taught.  For example, women and minorities are
not represented well enough in historical context with respect to course
content.  Specific examples would be: in music courses, Beethoven and Bach
get far too much share of the course content, while less "renouned" women
or black composers of the same period were being ignored.

The problem with this original kind of PC is that during the period in
question, white males so dominated the culture that it is very easy to
get, say, printed works of Bach than for some black composer.  More often
than not, the works of the black composer would not have been written down -
handed down by "word of mouth" so to speak.

Obviously, since the term was first coined, the concept has been applied
to all parts of society (such as clinoccio's cabinet) and is a general
pain in the ass.  But being/causing a pain in the ass is the liberal way :)
so naturally, we conservatives are going to scream about it...
 
: -- 
: Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
: ------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
: EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion