HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: schlegel@cwis.unomaha.edu (Mark Schlegel)
Subject: Re: Prediction: Limbaugh had hit his peak; He will soon fade out 
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:02:19 GMT

stegner_g@cubldr.colorado.edu writes:

>At least Morton Downey
>Jr. in his time had the balls to confront his political foes face to face on
>TV.  Rush?  He couldn't possibly do that.  He doesn't have the tenacity (or the
>ability) to face up to an opponent, either in his studio or over the airwaves. 

  Hmm, too bad - this could have been a good argument if your facts weren't 
  wrong.  Rush has faced up to opponents, I've seen him on Pozner and Donahue
  (which shows on CNBC on cable) and P & Donahue are both RABID Rush opponents.
  He has also been on another interview show on CNBC several times (I don't 
  recall the name of it).   He's been on the ABC network Donahue show, where
  they attacked him very viciously.  He has also been on MacLaughlin (with 
  host MacLaughlin), but I don't think John MacLaughlin would classify as a
  liberal enemy -- he may have had some enemies in the audience.

>All his call-ins seem suspiciously censored out in order to filter in only the
>callers who agree with him.  No, Rush only does best when he is totally
>insulated in his studio with just his own opinions vomiting from his own oral
>cavity.  At least he'd be interesting if he would have the balls to get on a
>serious Sunday morning political talk show and actually have to face an
>opponent by getting into a political discourse.  No, not Rush.

 This is wrong too, there is a disagreeing caller once in a while -- they are
 are the best callers in my opinion (more fun than the fan kind).  

>I just had to respond to this thread when I discovered that Mr. Alexander was
>the last to post to it.  I just couldn't let that unsubstantiated rhetoric go
>unchecked.

 Well, you need to get your facts straight too.  Rush has been on shows on TV
 with people that oppose his ideas and he has had critical callers on the
 radio show.
 
Mark
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Don Wiggins)
Subject: Re: Disclaimers on TV show
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 04:49:09 GMT

bparrish@rose.hp.com (Bill Parrish) writes:

>I'm curious... in Sacramento the Rush Limbaugh TV program is preceeded by
>a disclaimer... something to the effect that "The Views expressed on the
>Rush Limbaugh program do not necessarily reflect those of the staff and
>management of KCRA Channel 3, or its sponsors... etc".  I'm curious if this
>is done in other parts of the country.  

Not here in the beanfields of the midwest (WAND).  Apparently neither staff
nor management fears the outcry of wounded liberals.  It must be a
California thing.

|===========================================================================|
|Don Wiggins, German-Irish-American    | Success is getting what you want.  |
| & Lead Scout for the Baby Boomers    | Happiness is wanting what you get. |
|Internet: wiggins@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu |     -- Brother Dave Gardner        |
|===========================================================================|
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 12:41:21 EST
From: Jean-Luc Picard <JMC136@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: What's Rush's Fax #?

Does anyone know Rush's FAX number? Please send e-mail to the address
below since I don't look at netnews/usenet too often. Thanx.

 Dave Perrussel    dbp@ecl.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: maven@lerc.nasa.gov (Larry Fishbach)
Subject: Re: More About Gays in the Military
Reply-To: maven@hercules.lerc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:41:39 GMT

> 
 LOTS OF STUFF DELETED
> group and seemed to get along pretty well together. But by-and-large I 
> would agree that work-related affairs are a bad idea.
> 
> > Scott Aldrich
> > Battalion Chemical Officer
> > 1/138th ADA INARNG (Air Defense Artillery)
> 
> --
> Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
> Psychology Department               Indiana University
> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
                            
Reminds me of some good advice I got a long time ago re: sex & co-workers
" NEVER GET YOUR MEAT WHERE YOU GET YOUR BREAD"
                        
*******************************************************************************
maven@hercules.lerc.nasa.gov   Larry Fishbach @ NASA Lewis Cleveland Ohio
"Everything here is my own opinion"   Quoth the Maven "Evermore"
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: hampton@ais.org (Kevin Podsiadlik)
Subject: Re: Life Under Clinton/Gore '92:
Organization: UMCC
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 04:26:33 GMT

In article <palane.724390939@pv7427.vincent.iastate.edu> palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:
>
>By the way, the timber industry is all wet. There is a finite amount of
>virgin forest. When it is gone, the logging jobs will be lost but there
>will be no forest left. On the other hand, if we stop logging these
>forests now, the jobs will be gone but the forest will still be there.
>It's a resource that will be consumed.

You honestly think the timber industry is that stupid?  You don't think
they might, oh I don't know, *plan for the future*, and say, plant a
few trees to replace the ones they cut down?  Why would they do that
when they could work themselves out of business instead?

Or doesn't it count as "virgin forest" if a timber company planted it?
Methinks a tree's a tree, or at any rate, a spruce is a spruce,
no matter how it got to where it is, or whether anyone is around to
hear it when it falls.

>The further left or right you get, the more you look alike.

On this, we agree.

-- 
Kevin J. Podsiadlik          | 
Vaporware Engineer 2nd class |    "But, Master, what if we behave badly?" 
E-mail: hampton@ais.org      |    "You go to Detroit."
CompuServe: 71460,3602       |
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: gus3@ellis.uchicago.edu (Christian Gustafson)
Subject: Hmmm, where do Randians fit in with us here?
Keywords: ego,egg,Eggo
Reply-To: gus3@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:37:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.221339.19577@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) 
writes:
>	I'd like to add another one: religion. Though many of the most
>prominent right-wingers are rather shameless Fundie theocrats, there
>are right-wing atheists out there. Ayn Rand and her followers are some
>of them. I wonder if there will someday be a big fight between the
>Fundies and the Randroids...
>-- 
>/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
>/lip@s1.gov

Hmmm... are the objectivists of the world organized for any sort of
political action?  I realize that they have a few think-tank/teaching
institutes and all, but I really wonder: (1) How many _real_ Randians
there are in the U.S.; (2) Whether or not they are formally organized 
as a political contingency; and (3) If so, if they have their own pol.
candidates, like, say, the Libertarians have Andre Marrou.

In other words, besides the _indirect_ effects that books like _Atlas
Shrugged_ or the various collections of essais that Ms. Rand & her 
colleagues published have, by convincing isolated individuals of the merits
of her ideas, can we really speak of the Objectivists as a force within
American Conservatism?  I admit that I am quite impressed with Rand myself,
but I really do not know anything about the wider reaches of her current
audience.  In other words, is the late Ayn Rand a factor OFF college 
campuses? 

Oh, oh, this sounds like good bandwidth for the future alt.?.conservative
group, even though the Objectivists will very soon have their own, indiv-
idual news group.  Damn them! -we NEED one more then they do! ;)
cg
-- 
:::::======  gus3@midway.uchicago.edu  | FCC, FDA, FTC, FAA, EPA, FEMA,    
:::::======                            | IRS, FBI, FDIC, DLC, SEC, TVA,
===========  Paleoconservatives Unite! | and the Fed - STOP scrambling
===========  Re-take America, etc ...  | Conservative BandwiPH$$HDSBOBHJYQ$M@N
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: chrisf@brtph316.bnr.ca (Chris Fulmer)
Subject: Re: Soul of the Republican Party
Reply-To: woodstock!chris@mcnc.org
Organization: BNR Dept 3B91, RTP
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:50:46 GMT

In article <1gt8g0INNb4l@spim.mti.sgi.com>, mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen) writes:
|> [...]
|> Talk about seeing what you want to see.  In 1992 the Republicans did 
|> terrible in the voting booth, but they did an excellent job of demonstrating
|> clear ideological differences between the two parties.  [...]

Well...

  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.

  The campaign is the thing that more-or-less tried to paint Bush as a 
true conservative.  The party conservatives: Quayle & Kemp, for example,
managed to interject some conservative issues, Family Values being one 
of them.  However, the campaign itself see-sawed between portraying
Bush as a moderate and as a conservative.  The result was a mixed 
message of a wishy-washy president who didn't really stand for anything.

  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.

  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.

  The Solid Liberals, on the other hand, are unfamiliar to most
Americans.  Gay rights, Funding of Obscene Art, Support of Flag
Burning, etc..., are all things which are fairly new, and as a
result are kinda scary.  

------------------------------------------------------
Chris Fulmer                    Bell-Northern Research
Sr. Software Designer            Research Triangle, NC
mail to woodstock!chris@mcnc.org (preferable) or...
        chrisf@bnr.ca            (not so preferable)
Oh yeah.  The usual disclaimers apply here.
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10293 alt.rush-limbaugh:11795
From: larry@cs.com (Larry Spence)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: New group proposal:  alt.conservative.forum
Summary: conservative taffy pull
Keywords: yank, circle, wank, pull, taffy
Date: 17 Dec 92 07:24:28 GMT
Organization: Computer Support Corporation,  Dallas,Texas

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."

-- 
Larry Spence
larry@cs.com
uunet!csccat!larry 
Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10216 alt.politics.clinton:18709
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Clinton and Values
Date: 15 Dec 92 23:14:15 GMT
Followup-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

dnm9@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (David Neal Messina) writes:
=cstone@husc8.harvard.edu (christopher stone) writes:
=>If the Republicans are so eager to defend values in American politics,
=>then why do they insist upon extirpating values from foreign policy,
=>that is, playing realpolitik, with no regard to values.  (Not that
=>I don't understand the need to ally with non-democratic regimes, mind
=>you, but that the Republicans, who claim to hold values *above all*,
=>seems to be hypocritical here.)  Clinton has said that he favors
=>promotion of democratic values as a legitimate goal of U.S. foreign 
=>policy.

I am not a foreign policy expert by any means, but I don't know how you
can encourage (e.g.) China to effect democratic reforms by refusing to
trade with them or speak to them diplomatically. (Mind you, I do have
some problems with our current relationship with China, but I don't see
better alternatives.) It took South Africa decades to get to this point
in its history now (of course this also involved an international
boycott). The way you try to encourage change isn't to completely cut
off governments. You wouldn't get any help from Vietnam regarding
missing MIA's or remains of American soldiers if you say they must have
a democratic government first.

=I'll assume you don't mean the US is being expansionist, rather that
=they're trying to promote the national interests.  If my assumption is
=correct, would you explain why you think this is a bad idea, and how
=values are comporomised by promoting our interests?  If Clinton does
=as you intimate, I would, as a Republican, agree with that goal.

Again, I worry about the appearance of things. It's well and good that
Clinton decrees that his foreign policy will have as its prime directive
the encouragement of democracy throughout the world. The question is
what really will happen with regards to China, with the Latin American
countries like Peru, and the Arab states; does any interaction with
these countries constitute a conflict with the stated directive?

[Begin a discussion here, which unfortunately I may not live to see the
outcome on the net. Why can't there be a f* internet node in Shreveport,
Louisiana?]
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
	Vacation period (off-line): December 18 to January 11.
	Take care of the network when I'm gone.
FOUR MORE MONTHS!!! FOUR MORE CLASSES!!! FOUR MORE ACCEPTANCE LETTERS!!!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: How to phone Rush?
From: cstone@husc8.harvard.edu (christopher stone)
Date: 13 Dec 92 02:18:27 EST
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Does anyone know Rush's fax number (at the EIB network)
or his number to phone into the radio and/or TV show?
(I already have the e-mail address, thanks).
You can either post or send email to
cstone@husc.harvard.edu

Thanks,
Chris

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Posts by Rush? NOT!
Date: 12 Dec 1992 05:29:27 GMT
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Reply-To: pearsodc@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: hydra.rose-hulman.edu

Matthew Anderson writes:

>70277.2502@compuserve.com [that's Rush's e-mail address]
>Problem is, I've never been able to get through with that.  I get all my mail
>returned. I maybe doing something wrong? who knows.

No sir, you're doing everything just like you're supposed to.  Rush's mailbox
just fills up rather quickly (surprise, surprise) and when you can't stuff any
more mail into his box, it bounces back to you.

Keep trying though.  It once took me five tries to get a note through.
>
>Matthew Anderson
>andersmc@rosevc.rose-hulman.edu
>
clueless chuck
pearsodc@rosevc.rose-hulman.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: Flush Limburger
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 20:51:13 GMT


(bovine excrement claiming that Rush is today's Archie Bunker deleted)

Liberals post this fertilizer comparing Conservatives to racists and Nazis
and then wonder why we want a moderated newsgroup for conservative discussions.

I think it's been mentioned before, but when one goes around calling people
racists and Nazis for no reason, they trivialize the real meaning of those
terms.

Simon

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: smithmc@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Lost Boy)
Subject: Re: JESUS IS THE REASON FOR THE SEASON
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Distribution: usa, world
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 06:46:54 GMT

In article <BzDpoB.LGs@news.udel.edu> roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:
>In article <9DEC199220003748@zeus.tamu.edu> rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu writes:
>>In article <8DEC199220570631@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu>, mitcheec@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (Elliott Mitchell) writes...
>>|In article <1992Dec8.230714.941@cs.rochester.edu>, ray@cs.rochester.edu (Ray Frank) writes...
>>|> 
>>|>top of a publically funded Christmas tree.  Jesus, the reason for the season,
>>
>>	An increased tilt in the earth's axis with respect to it's
>>orbit around the sun and the consequent decrease in abosorbed solar
>>radiation is the reason for the season.
>
>Actually the tilt (23.5 degrees) of the Earth's spin axis *relative to its 
>orbit* around the sun doesn't change during the year.
>
>The tilt of the spin axis *relative to the Earth-Sun line* changes from 
>66.5 degrees (summer) to 90 degrees (fall, spring) to 113.5 degrees 
>(winter).
>
	[more astrophysics deleted, sorry about that]

Hey, we all *know* what the reason for the season is. It's YULE! It just
happened that when Christianity came in, the Church decided to make Yule a
Chritian holiday by saying that Jesus was born then. Rumor has it that
Jesus was actually born during the spring. Yule has always been a time of
giving and celebration. We paganfolk intend to celebrate it as such.

(Actually, I'm Catholic, but I have lots of paganfolk pals and I'm going
to celebrate Yule anyway wheither the Church says I should or not!!)

Blessed Be,
Lost Boy

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: Hmmm, where do Randians fit in with us here?
Keywords: ego,egg,Eggo
Organization: Quake Public Access
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 10:00:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.233744.14962@midway.uchicago.edu> gus3@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

>Hmmm... are the objectivists of the world organized for any sort of
>political action?  

We do participate in the influence of political events (though petitions,
education, essays, editorials, writing letters, etc.), but it's really
foolish for us to waste our efforts trying to elect people to office yet.
Look at the Libertarians...with all of the effort and money they expend
on trying to get people elected, how much have they achieved?  Very little.
We need to create a base of supporters before we can hope to influence politics
via getting "our" candidates elected.

>I realize that they have a few think-tank/teaching
>institutes and all, but I really wonder: (1) How many _real_ Randians
>there are in the U.S.; 

That entirely depends on what you would call a "randian".  If you mean "Someone
who has read Atlas Shrugged and thought was nifty, probably 10-15 million.
If you mean people who are really interested and have read and agreed with
substantial portions of Rand's ideas, there are probably a million or two.
If you mean people who have thoroughly studied and agreed with everything
she wrote, there are probably a few hundred thousand.  

>(2) Whether or not they are formally organized 
>as a political contingency; and 

There are lots of Objectivist organizations, including around a hundred 
student organizations on campuses (of varying sizes of course).  There are
also objectivist professional organizations for businessmen, scientists,
physicians, etc.

>(3) If so, if they have their own pol.
>candidates, like, say, the Libertarians have Andre Marrou.

No.

>In other words, besides the _indirect_ effects that books like _Atlas
>Shrugged_ or the various collections of essais that Ms. Rand & her 
>colleagues published have, by convincing isolated individuals of the merits
>of her ideas, can we really speak of the Objectivists as a force within
>American Conservatism?  

But we are not "conservatives"!  So how could we be a force in conservatism?
Our views about religion, abortion, business subsidies, and compromise with
the left would make us pretty unwelcome, don't you think?

>I admit that I am quite impressed with Rand myself,
>but I really do not know anything about the wider reaches of her current
>audience.  In other words, is the late Ayn Rand a factor OFF college 
>campuses? 

She certainly is!  There are lots of conferences, publications, and professional
organizations out there.  In fact, I would say that there is probably more 
going on with objectivism off-campus than on.

--Brian
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Khat (Summary Wed 12/9/92)
Originator: rja@mahogany126
Keywords: Rush Limbaugh Unofficial Summary
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Distribution: world,usa,alt,na
Date: 14 Dec 92 13:26:39 CST


Unofficial Summary for Wednesday, December 9, 1992:

> o       The troops in Somalia are encountering a drug, Khat,
> which is derived from a local shrub; Khat can cause paranoid
> psychosis and distort judgment, and is a favorite of the Somali
> gunmen who routinely chew the shrub's leaves to allay their
> anxiety. The Marines are thus being warned to expect possible
> psychotic behavior from some Somalis; US soldiers are also being
> told that the drug is readily identifiable in urine, and thus it
> would not be wise to experiment with it.

It should be noted that a Doctor on NPR stated that while Khat
is an amphetamine, the concetration in leaves is so low that the 
effect is the same as drinking a strong cup of coffee.  The effect
of excessive Khat chewing is the same as excessive coffee drinking.

-- 
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.warlord,alt.music.rush
From: saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu (Brian E. Saunders)
Subject: Re: RUSH?
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Madison
Date: 16 Dec 92 20:33:21 CST

In article <1992Dec17.001118.29516@tc.cornell.edu> inner-circle@crash.canon.co.uk writes:
>Hi. I saw a CD in the store today by a band called "Rush"
>and was wondering if this has anything to do with the movie
>"Rush" or maybe Rush Limbaugh (who is really funny!)
>Should I get it? I didn't like that movie much but I listen
>to Rush Limbaugh every day on the radio and heard he had an
>album out.
>
>Sorry if this is a newbie question but I've never heard
>of the BAND "Rush" before.
>
>Any ideas? Thanks.

Yes, they do.  Their original drummer, who most people call John Rutsey, is
in fact really Rush Limbaugh.  Though he supposedly has had nothing to do
with the band since Neil Peart (one of the best damn drummers in the world)
replaced him before their second album, he really is the inspiration for
quite a few of their songs, e.g. Red Lenses, New World Man, etc...
-- 

Brian E. Saunders			saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu