HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ged1@crux2.cit.cornell.edu (Gregory E. Daigle)
Subject: ENGLE (WELFARE..LIBERALS)
Summary: At least you watch the show
Organization: Cornell Information Technologies
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:33:36 GMT

Engle, okay, so at least you are not like that kid who said "Rush Limbaugh
sucks.  Your main food for thought, howver, is similar to that of most of
today's liberals' in that your discourse revolves around refuting points made
by the conservative pact.  To me this suggests an inability to express 
original thought.  Your wait and seee attitude suggests that you are a 
follower and not a leader in that you are willing to trust someone based
on what you admit to be unknown policies.  Maybe you'll eventually be able
to think for yourself...you had better hope that Bill can because you have
a lot of blind trust in him.  I should imagine that your next response
will once again be an attack on my written word.  Really, Engle, why don't
you come up with a little more than the "you're wrong" attitude that has been
so prevalant for the last twelve years? You want us all to be entranced by the
wonderment that Bill will bring but if your attitude is at all indicative of
Bill's then we are all going to be in some serious hurt.  I guess that it is
good that Clinton is not a true liberal because as evidenced by your discourse
this could become a nation in which we all go about telling each other that
he/she is wrong.  Pretty constructive, Mr. Engle.

By the way, keep watching the show...It may  be on for an extended period
 many can compete with Letteman.  You'll still be to hear him though.  See
 what a little thought can bring as opposed to simply reaction.

 I await with Shakespeare's proverbial bated-breath to see what you might
 come up with this time...I imagine that once again, there will be a lot
 of ">" delineating my text.
 what a little thought can do as topreaction.
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:9611 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8512
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: President Clinton
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:30:23 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
=O.K.  I am possibly (arguably) the most conservative regular poster 
=to this group.  It is time to give President Clinton a chance to make 
=his policies work.  Please, let's not bash him for campaign promisses, 
=let's wait and see how his policies work.  
=
=Bill Clinton is now my president, and I desire to show honor to that 
=office by witholding criticism until (if) his policies fail.

I'll show about as much honor for a President Bill Clinton as the
Democrats held as much honor to President Bush. (User-friendly humor*)

>But believe me...I will hound him unmercifully if (when) his policies 
>fail...If that failure is his fault.

Well, it sure won't be because of gridlock.

The best thing about this election is that for the next two years (House
and Senate change, remember) anything that goes wrong is one and only
one party's fault with regards to the economy, health care, foreign
policy, crime, etc. The Democrats are glad they're in charge; I'll be
happy to know they won't be able to finger-point (unless if it's Reagan
or Bush or Harry Truman).

*User friendly humor: read into the statement as much humor as you
want.
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
	My humor button seems to blinking randomly. Read at your own risk.
I don't have to have a 4.0 GPA to succeed in life because I'm 
good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
From: marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush's Future...
Date: 10 Nov 1992 16:32:21 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <1992Nov10.083628.21169@mr.med.ge.com> gorney@picard.med.ge.com (Felix Gorney Mfg 4-6983) writes:
>"Slick Willie" promised everything to everybody. Welfare, healthcare, airfare,
>cabfare, you name it, he promised it. 

He did?  I missed the airfare and cabfare part, unless that was only for
congress-critters.  I bet you got that from Rush, and we ALL know if
Rush said it MUST be true.

?>It is Rush's solemn duty to inform the
>voting public, when Slick doesn't uphold his promises. 

Rush's duty is to Rush Limbaugh.  And that duty is  to make $$$ for
Rush Limbaugh.

>Also, sinse Slick ran
>as a moderate, it is also Rush's duty to keep an eye out for situations that
>prove that Slick is not the person he said he was. As I'm sure these 2 issues
>alone could take up hundreds of hours of air time, 

Yes, three hours of Rush reading FAXes and crumpling paper would make
for a boring show and he wouldn't make money.   And as someone was saying 
about people bitching and how some people can't stop, well, it just gives
Rush something more to bitch about.

>I'm sure Rush has his work
>cut out for him.

Hey, any job that makes ya 6 digits must be tough, right?  Think how
your salary pales in comparison and how hard YOU work each day.  Hard
work is ahead for Rush.

It will even be harder if Clinton turns out to be a good prez, hell
then Rush will have to work overtime stretching facts.
-- 
Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that
MS-DOS - it's not   marc@milestn.mil.wi.us    is your problem, not mine!
my problem!     If it was said on UseNet, it must be true.
   Unix - It's a nice place to live, but you don't want to visit there.
From: tsv@Unify.com (Tim Vannaman)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Slick Willie
Date: 4 Nov 92 14:52:27 GMT
Organization: Unify Corporation (Sacramento)

Well, we have a new prez.  Now, instead of hearing that big sucking sound
of jobs going to Mexico, we'll hear a big sucking sound coming from our
wallets as taxes go up!!!!!!

Ugh!, I think I just felt my taxes going up!

Tim.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh: Victory from Defeat
From: kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:36:09 GMT
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services

marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
> In article <1992Nov6.140151.4548@novell.com> bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
> >It was interesting hearing Rush deny that a) the Republican party hase
> >taken over by the Religious Right and b) it doesn't matter anyway.  At
> 
> Also note:  Rush had almost no "religious adds" on his show two years
> ago.  Now, one can hear adds for tapes/books to set you on the moral
> path sold by people traditionly associated with the "religious right".
> Also note Rush is inot the show for the money.  Now, when has Rush bit the
> hand that feeds him?
> 

Trust me; Rush doesn't get involved with all of his advertisers. Some he
does, obviously, like Snapple and the Conservative Chronicle, but not all.
For example, the company that makes "Hooked On Phonics:, one of his
advertisers, markets an American History course on audio cassette that's
clearly in the "left-wing revisionist" camp; it's even narrated by Martin
Sheen! 

And it's highly likely that the "religious" ads that you're hearing are
local; I haven't heard even ONE here in Sacramento, which indicates to me
that they're probably not national in origin. Remember, one of the reasons
that local stations CARRY the Rush Limbaugh Program is that it is a VERY
highly rated radio show, and they can demand high advertising rates during
it; much higher than they can for lower-rated shows. And after all, it's
the local stations who have to make the money to keep the transmitters on
the air.......

Ken Mitchell
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: God Help Us All! (mutter, mutter,) Amen!
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:24:33 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.201330.23765@eng.ufl.edu> jason@hal.eel.ufl.edu (Jason Nadrowski) writes:
>As I was comming to school today I say a flying pig.
>
>Hey did you hear Clinton won.
>
>
>
On Wednesday morning, 11/4/92 I heard Hell had frozen over--the Democrats did
indeed win :-)

That's a joke people!!   I'm not a sore loser about it.

Simon
From: rickertj@athena.cas.vanderbilt.edu (John Rickert)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: God Help Us All! (mutter, mutter,) Amen!
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:26:18 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Vanderbilt University Mathematics Department

In article <grendel.721584279@camelot> grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea) writes:
>>
>I don't know who or when you're referring to, but the court hasn't been in the
>hip pocket of the liberals since Warren Burger, and that was quite a bit before
>I was born.

   This is just plain wrong.  The Court may not be moving at the blinding
speed it did during the 50's, 60's, and 70's, but it is still making decisions
which are profoundly activist.

   A particularly egregious example of this is Missouri v Jenkins, which was
decided in _1990_, under the Rehnquist Court.  In that case, the Supreme
Court determined that federal judges have a right to order certain other
bodies to raise taxes.  (This is nothing short of usurpation.)


John Rickert						Quis custodiet
rickertj@athena.cas.vanderbilt.edu			ipsos custodes?
							   -- Juvenal
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:9504 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8425
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:03:34 EST
From: Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: So much for Rush as prophet!
 <1992Nov6.111259.10468@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com.mrg.uswest.com>

In article <1992Nov6.111259.10468@uswmrg.mrg.uswest.com.mrg.uswest.com>,
greg_bradt@msmgate.mrg.uswest.com (Greg Bradt) says:

>Not so amazing is the fact that he has had *nothing* to say about his
>Perot prediction which was off by 320%.

...except for saying that the only true surprise, to him, was that Perot
got double-digits.  He said that, but you must've missed it.

>Greg Bradt  aka  ()The Lensman()

------------
Kurt Ludwick
------------
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: C'mon Nathan Engle...
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:22:52 GMT
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University

ged1@crux2.cit.cornell.edu (Gregory E. Daigle) writes:
>Hmm, better.  I like that...not the pedantic psychologist (a la Frazier 
>Crane) that I though.

    Well, that's better. I would consider it a great offense to be called a 
pedantic psychologist. I'm a pedantic computer scientist. I just work for 
psychologists.

>       No real personal malice was intended but I really do see a lot of
>       arguers as opposed to thinkers and it bothers me, even those within
>       my own political arena.  No new hot topic right now, Bush is on a
>       vacation of sorts, Clinton is playing golf and thinking about how
>       he (Hillary probably) will redesgin the Lincoln bedroom.

    In my home my dear wife has responsibility for all bedroom redesign, 
but Bill and Hillary have an unusual relationship. I wouldn't be surprised 
if neither one of them took the lead but instead handed off responsibility 
to Chelsea who, as a teenage girl, I assume would make installation of more 
phone lines the first priority.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: bill.martin@hal9000.UUCP (Bill Martin) 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: WANKERS
Date: 11 Nov 92 04:48:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: HAL 9000 BBS, (313)663-4173, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Reply-To: bill.martin@hal9000.UUCP (Bill Martin) 

CD>Subject: Re: WANKERS
> What is a wanker?

A male organ not discussed here. Also a Pinko!

Bill Martin, PCB14.5a/10 #018155 Lurking
---
 . DeLuxe. 1.21 #1343s . I Don't Want The World, I Just Want Your Half.
 . RNet 1.08R:: W-Net : Lightning System III . Stateline, Nv. . 702-588-0315
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush loses out to Madonna
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:21:38 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

young@ssdd475a.erim.org (Peter Young) writes:
% eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
%>   Well, I prefer seeing Madonna in a teddy than Rush in one.
             ------ 
%>   Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
%>	   THANK GOD IT'S BASKETBALL SEASON!!!!!
%
%Hey, Emil Thomas, can you post a gif of Rush in a teddy?  I bet a lot
%of us would like to see that!  Come on, you can't sit on hot pictures
%like those, Emil.

Sorry, I wish I could. I'm selling out to the highest bidder. Does Ross
Perot have an Internet account? :-)
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck	eyc@acpub.duke.edu	Biomedical Engineering 1993
	THANK GOD IT'S BASKETBALL SEASON!!!!!
I don't have to have a 4.0 GPA to succeed in life because I'm 
good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Gay marriage (was: The Difference Between Cs 
From: jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu (j. tinkle )
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:52:23 PST
Distribution: usa
Organization: California State University, Bakersfield

No, I didn't mess up.  If this isn't a FAQ, it should be.  Why the hell is this
newsgroup called alt.fan.rush-limbaugh when the man is rarely ever mentioned?

Jennifer, Republican Extraordinaire, "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for him."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now that it's over, I've received 5:1 e-mail.  5 pro-Bush, isn't this great?
we're gonna win in '96 for sure! to each 1 pro-Clinton nyah.  In light of
this, I still don't understand how he got elected.
--------------------------------------------------
mandate, v.  Democrats saying, "All right! It's ours again! Let's SCREW 'EM!!"
landslide, n.  Election by 40% of the vote, 5 points above 2nd place.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:9262 talk.environment:4536
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.environment
Subject: You have to question that the media is/isn't liberal?
From: jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu (j. tinkle )
Date: 8 Nov 92 16:13:01 PST
Organization: California State University, Bakersfield

In article <1992Oct27.231526.19389@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes
:
>In article <wevJJHu00awUMRfEZb@andrew.cmu.edu> Gary James Patalsky <gp2f+@andr
ew.cmu.edu> writes:

>	And evolution is one of the most important results in biology.
>And calling it a "fraud" is an insult to all the thousands of
>biologists who have worked on evolutionary questions. If you wish to
Ok, maybe I will leave this in.  Well, then, my response is insulting to them.
And I am a scientist!  But I don't believe in evolution.  As you are probably
thinking right now, who says that all scientists are right?  IF they are 
wasting their time, that's too bad.  I've I'm wrong for believing in
Creationism, that's too bad.

>	How is the Sierra Club "extreme"?
Being from California, I should know.  Some of their leaders are environ-
mentalist extremist tree-huggers.

>	"Liberal" media? That's a time-honored right-wing charge. 
Ok, but you think they AREN'T?  Then why is it that we never heard anything
good about Reagan/Bush economics in this election, and all we heard about 
Clinton/Bore was how they were going to save America by taxing the rich?
Taxing the rich has been tried before and failed.  Under Reagan/Bush we
have had very LOW inflation, among other factors.

>It seems that right-wingers are sore losers whenever the news media do
>not portray them as superior beings.
I disagree, and I'm Conservative.

Jennifer, Republican Extraordinaire, "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for him."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now that it's over, I've received 5:1 e-mail.  5 pro-Bush, isn't this great?
we're gonna win in '96 for sure! to each 1 pro-Clinton nyah.  In light of
this, I still don't understand how he got elected.
--------------------------------------------------
mandate, v.  Democrats saying, "All right! It's ours again! Let's SCREW 'EM!!"
landslide, n.  Election by 40% of the vote, 5 points above 2nd place.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:9164 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:8060
From: stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Javier LaSalle Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Polls and the media
Date: 6 Nov 1992 18:54:35 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

From stalker Fri Nov  6 12:53:18 1992
Subject: Re: Electoral Mandate?
To: archer@elysium.esd.sgi.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:53:18 CST

> 
> 
> >	You misread this.  70% said that no they are not worse off then they
> >are 4 years ago.  That means only 30% are WORSE off.  Now, would you feel
> >very good if you had made economic progress in four years?
> 
> >- Stalker
> 
> Actually, you missed it.  The exit polls on ABC showed exactly the opposite.
                                             ^^^^^  hmm...     
> 30% felt better off, 50% about the same, 20% worse.  I may have that
> chunk on video tape if you want confirmation.
> 
> -- archer
> 
> 
> 
> 
Well still even with your data here, only 20% are worse off, that is even
better.  I didnt miss anything, there have been polls all year long where
about 60% of the people think the economy is worse off than 4 years ago, but
only about 30% or so (of these same people mind you) said that THEY personally
were worse off.  The economy thing was mostly media made up.  I know it is bad,
but it's not terrible, we dont have to be poor.  Just think, (this was on Rush
Limbaugh last night), 5 days ago the media said we are heading for doom and
gloom, and now Clinton hasnt even stepped into the White House yet, some     
sources of the media are already saying the economy is recovering!!!! 
Overnight!!!  It's magic!!!  But when Bush said that a week ago, the media
said, "Well it's just sad to see how out of touch, the president is."  
No we have to wait for the media to say it.  What a bunch of bull.


- Stalker

-- 
|  stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu  | University of Wisconsin Milwaukee   |      
|----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
| "If the answer is 'What's the question?', then the question is." |  
|                                     - Paul T.G.E. Britton        | 

-- 
|  stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu  | University of Wisconsin Milwaukee   |      
|----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
| "If the answer is 'What's the question?', then the question is." |  
|                                     - Paul T.G.E. Britton        |
From: stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Javier LaSalle Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush Limbaugh, the waffle KING!
Date: 6 Nov 1992 19:18:24 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <4NOV199217352687@utkvx3.utk.edu> drevik@utkvx3.utk.edu (Drevik, Steve) writes:
>Listening the the show today, I was really shocked to hear
>Rush and listeners ssaying things like.
>
>  "Well, it's better for us that George Bush didn't win the election"
>
>and "George Bush really ruined the accomplishments of Ronald Reagan."
>
>WAIT A MINUTE!  I thought this man was a *great* president!!!  The
>*best* man for the job!
>
>
>WAFFLE  WAFFLE  WAFFLE  WAFFLE  WAFFLE   WAFFLE  WAFFLE  WAFFLE
>
>Let's not turn the EIB studios into a Waffle House!
>-s
>

He was the best person for the job, compared to Clinton and Perot.  Just
because Rush may of said he was not as good as Reagan doesnt mean he is 
worse than the waffle king himself Bill Clinton.  Bush wasnt running
against Reagan, had he been running against Reagan, he would not be the
best man for the job.  Need I go on?  You obviously dont know a waffle 
when you see one.  Im sure Rush never said that Bush was the *best* 
president, or that he was the *absolute best ever for the job*, if he
was then that means he was better than Teddy Rooselvelt, and Abraham
Lincoln, and George Washington, and the others who are in the top ten.
A Waffle is when you say one month to one group that a middle class tax
increase is central to anyone's economic plan, and later in the election
say you will not raise taxes on anyone making over $200 G a year.  Its
saying that you didnt get drafted, and later we find you received a 
draft notice.  It's saying one week that you were with the people who opposed
the PGW and the next week you critize the president because he didnt go in
after Saddam Hussien, that we stopped too soon.  Shall I go on?  Which Bill
Clinton are we going to see in these four years?  Bill Clinton the Liberal
or Bill Clinton the Moderate like he tryed to campaign as.  If he can stand
up to the Democratic Congress and actually make his 'moderate' ideas work,
I think that would be great.  And if for some reason his Liberal ideas
work, that would be great too, but I dont think that will happen because
we tryed that 12 years ago.  Do you want to go back to double digit inflation,
unemployment and intrest rates.  Be my guest if you do.  Gee, at least if you
dont have a job, you dont have to pay taxes I suppose.  But, Im not going
to be gloomy about this, I just hope Mr. Clinton, does the right thing.


- Stalker

-- 
|  stalker@csd4.csd.uwm.edu  | University of Wisconsin Milwaukee   |      
|----------------------------|-------------------------------------|
| "If the answer is 'What's the question?', then the question is." |  
|                                     - Paul T.G.E. Britton        | 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: God Help Us All! (mutter, mutter,) Amen!
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 16:08:24 GMT

In <9125@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, David E. Joslin writes:

>tcanham@kilroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Tim Canham) writes:
>>Absolutely amazing.  A dope-smoking, draft dodging, skirt chasing,
>>peace hippie is President and Commander in Chief.

>Yes, but what makes this even more amazing is that for all his
>faults, Clinton is such an improvement over George Bush.

I don't know about that.  People pooh-pooh foreign policy these days, but how
will President Clinton handle an international crisis or if (for example) the
communists regain power in Russia?  They do still have the missiles pointed
at us...

Is Clinton an improvement over Bush?  Let's answer that in four years.

>David
>William Weld in '96.

Bill Weld is a good man.  He'd have a good chance in a general election, but I
doubt that the Republican Right would let him win the primary.  That's too
bad for the people (like me) who became Republicans after Carter's tax, spend
and inflate policies failed.  I'd like to see Weld run as a Libertarian if he
didn't get the nomination.  Of course, his political career with the GOP would
be over if he did...sigh...

Weld is in a similar position as Congressman Tom Campbell was this year.
Campbell opposed Herschensohn in the CA primaries in June.  Campbell was a
moderate, pro-choice, pro-environmental Republican who was moderate on social
issues and conservative in spending-related issues--a winning combination.
He would have clobbered Herschensohn or Boxer in a general election, but he
lost the primary to Herschensohn (45% to 42%) and Herschensohn became the
Senate nominee.  The primary system tends to weed out the moderates and gives
us a choice between two unacceptable extremists.

Tim Irvin
****************************************************************************
Don't blame me.  I voted Libertarian.

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh