HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:01:52 GMT
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA

In article <20314@optima.cs.arizona.edu> gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes:
>In article <10AUG199202070553@jetson.uh.edu>, wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (Porter, William M.) writes:
>> There was some discussion in this thread about whether the media prefer to
>>speak of "anti-abortionists" (instead of "pro-lifers") and whether it makes any
>> difference. 
>> Personally, I would be happy to see both sides described as "pro-abortion" and
>> "anti-abortion". That would clear things up a good bit.
>
>Funny, I always think of it in terms of "pro-choice" and "anti-choice"
>people. Seems to spell it out pretty well....
>
On the contrary, it seems to make more palatable a generally unpleasant
concept no matter which side your on.  It further abstracts the action
of abortion rather than focusing the issue.  Pro-choice does not imply 
the general right to choose but is specifically about the act of choosing 
an abortion.  I am not aware of anyone using the pro-choice label when 
referring to anything other than abortion.  It is obviously a euphemism.

By the way, I am neither anti-abortion nor pro-abortion but somewhere
within the intermediate range.  I do object to moral high ground
approach which finds the term pro-choice so useful to it's purposes.
Let's call it what it is, if you are uncomfortable with the feeling the
term abortion gives you then maybe you should ask yourself why.

Mike Best
{mcdphx|asuvax}!anasaz!best
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3749 alt.activism.d:2712
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Keys to the election
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (beta) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 13 Aug 92 01:18:16 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <1992Aug12.183459.4293@ils.nwu.edu> hooker@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Bob Hooker) writes:
> In article <4389@news.duke.edu>, eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
> > 9) Key 9: scandal. The incumbent administration is untainted by major
> > scandal.
> ????  S&L and Iraq-gate.  Iran-Contra trials before the electon, could go
> anyway.
>

Remember the Keating 5?  Where's all the unbiased news coverage of those
guys?  Note - they are still in office.  S&L, my butt :)

[ stuff deleted... ]

> Right now we are in a face off,  Bush doesn't want to attack first,
> Clinton has no reason to risk an attack.  Bush is trying to draw Clinton
> into a negative battle but it is not working.  Time is on CLinton's side in
> this game so Bush has to attack sooner or later.
>

Bush/Quayle have been under merciless attack since a few weeks before the
dem. convention...

> An attack will put Bush at risk,  if Clinton can position right the press
> won't stop talking about it for a week,  that is 1/8 of the time left till
> the election.
>

The biased media calls any kind of Bush attack sleaze politics and praises
the Clinton campaign.  That's not going to stop Bush.

> Looks bad for Bush.

Bush is just starting.  After the convention next week, expect a big rise in
his poll status and approval rating.

--
Amiga programmer of: GRn, MailMinder, Budokan, Beyond Dark Castle, Dark Castle
Sega Genesis programmer of: Dick Tracy and Marble Madness.
Mike Schwartz  (ames!zorch!amiga0!mykes or mykes@amiga0.sf-bay.org)
1124 Fremont Ave.
Los Altos, CA 94024

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3835 alt.activism.d:2762
From: rogerl@Ingres.COM (Roger Leuthner)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican convention
Date: 21 Aug 92 22:16:07 GMT
Reply-To: rogerl@Ingres.COM (Roger Leuthner)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501

In article <1992Aug21.192407.14144@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>rogerl@Ingres.COM (Roger Leuthner) writes:
>>>jswitzer@afit.af.mil attempts:
>
>And *you* may want to start by including the question that I was 
>answering in your post.  It's very easy to make somebody look foolish
>by editing their article.  

Net.lesson 1.

>>On the other hand, we could just get George Bush back in there, he's got
>>some really great issues he's concerned with (substantial!):  family
>>values (!), God in our hearts, capital gains tax cuts, war on drugs,
>>school prayer, an apple in every pigs gaping mouth (think we can fit
>>another one in there Danny)?
>
>And I choose to make you look foolish by keeping your post unedited...

I don't get it.

>>ps. apparently you don't know what 'NEA' stands for (unions??).
>
>I'm not above making a mistake.  The NEA stands for National Education
>Association?  As far as I knew, they were a teachers union/professional
>organization.  Feel free to let me know if I have erred.

Right.  My mistake.  I have 'National Endowment for the Arts' on the brain.
Sorry.

>I am not quite as brash as you.

God (that's doG spelled backwards), I hope not.

>I also try to remain calm about it.

Which you have done a fine job of here, in the face of a quite obnoxious
posting which just bordered on personally insulting.

>Discussing the issues in a rational way can be informative for both
>sides.  Ranting, like the above, only tends to alienate people and 
>make your case that much weaker.

Really, I don't have a case.  Except the one I sit on, or the one that
sits atop my shoulders.

Chip, you are a good sport; even if you are full of shit, er, I mean 'right
wing propaganda'.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Clinton's broken promise
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:09:19 GMT


pvanmeur@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Pim van Meurs) writes:

>But after being successful to balance a budget in Arkansas for the
>last 12 years, isn't Clinton going to do much more good if he gets
>the chance to do the same for the whole country. Even Arkansas will
>benefit from this.

I have been meaning to ask somebody about this.  Doesn't Arkansas have
a balanced budget law, like most of the other states?  If they do, 
he was sure blowing smoke at the convention when he said he had balanced
it 11 times.

>Isn't it ultimately better for the country to have a decisive policy
>towards the deficit than a political fight in which the president
>will veto everything congress passes and congress will block
>anything the president wants. 

Let's test that theory by "cleaning house."



Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Available: Software Engineer or MIS. MSCE, 1 year C++, Unix Experience
	   Highly motivated, keeps political opinions at home!
	             Seattle area, only.  513-233-4502
Organization: The Leader Desslok School of Diplomacy
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 11:31:00 EDT
From: Norman St. John Polevaulter <MBS110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Repost -- Poll shows GOP convention giving Bush a bounce

In case this gets Republicans' hopes up, just remember that the 1984
Democratic covention boosted Walter "Loser" Mondale to a 2% lead over
Ronald "Juggernaut" Reagan. It was gone soon enough.

[Your blood pressure just went up.]       Mark Sachs IS: mbs110@psuvm.psu.edu
       DISCLAIMER: If it ain't money, Penn State doesn't care about it.
   "Ladies and gentlemen, I've suffered for my music! Now it's your turn!"
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: fox@cs.nyu.edu (David Fox)
Subject: Re: Buchanan's speech at convention
Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
Distribution: world,usa,na
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:57:59 GMT

In article <_2gyjhm@rpi.edu> mcgead@operators.its.rpi.edu (Darren McGeary) writes:

   In article <4t!nqbl.jrs@netcom.com> jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:
   >Elect me, and you get two for the price of one, Mr. Clinton says of
   >his lawyer-spouse. And what does Hillary believe? Well, Hillary
   >believes that 12-year-olds should have a right to sue their parents,
   >and she has compared marriage as an institution to slavery - and life
   >on an Indian reservation.  

   This thing about Hillary comparing marriage to slavery has been taken
   completely out of context.  But when has that stopped Pat.

Actually Mrs. Clinton's paper was addressing how to save children who
are being sexually abused by their parents.  Obviously Pat opposes
this sort of interference in the family for his own reasons.
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush in Amerikkka.
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:02:51 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Aug17.163344.20501@ils.nwu.edu> comegys@eci.bbb.cal (Fred Comegys) writes:

->Dittoheads,  better called unthinking fascists,  are the enemy--and if they
->think that they can engage in such hatred without consequence they will
->learn that they are wrong to late.

->Blacks, wymmyn, Gays and radicals will defend themselves.
->===================================
->THE ONLY SOLUTION--A REVOLUTION

 I think you may have missed the boat. Rush is the revolution. You are the
fascists. We Conservatives want poor people empowered via capital, not put on 
the permanent Democrat voting block via welfare. We liberated poor people 
from slavery and will now liberate them from welfare dependency. They have
been lied to by their liberal leaders. We also think poor people are very 
capable of improving and expanding their positions in life. Some of the
most intelligent people I have meant, happened to be poor. 
 The so called "socialists" have distributed the drug called Big Government
far and wide. We conservative and free market liberals are going to break
the addiction and the distribution.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.news-media
From: bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Organization: Novell, Inc. --Austin
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 19:18:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.141928.10723@afit.af.mil> sbrady@afit.af.mil (Stephan P. Brady) writes:
>Gee,forgive me while I diagree.  Now let's see, if you switch your
>statement around, won't it sound quite silly?  See:  "I find the
>pro-choice label dishonest because it implies that since I'm pro-life I
>am therefore anti-choice and anti-abortion.  Geez, I guess I'll have to
>only order Big Macs at McDonalds on my way home this evening and I'll
>have to start tying pregnant women ("parasitically challenged" according
>to U.S. News and World Report in June) up to keep them from even
>considering an abortion"

Well, your argument stands up as long as you take the statement
"pro-choice" literally.  Instead, if you view it in the context of the
abortion issue, "choice" becomes limited to the idea that women should
be able to choose.  Similarily, "pro-life" in the context of the
abortion issue and that alone, still implies (to me at least) that
anyone who is not pro-life is anti-life and should be out canvassing
for abortions.

Later,
Brendan
-- 
Brendan B. Boerner		Phone: 512/346-8380
Internet: bboerner@novell.com	MHS: bboerner@novell
Please use ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ if replying by mail.

Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Subject: Re: TRANSCRIPT OF REAGAN'S SPEECH
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 01:07:07 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Keywords: Ronald Reagan, Republicans, Republican National Convention,

In article <17681eINN9i3@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes:
>
>In article <4630@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
>|Excerpts from former President Ronald Reagan in the keynote address 
>| You'd never know that our
>|standard of living remains the highest in the world.
>
>This is a flat out lie.

How about some statistics to support your view or do you believe in the
Democrats' time-honored technique of proof by intimidation and reptition?

>| You'd never know
>|that our air is cleaner than it was 20 years ago.
>
>Another lie. (although I think in some cities it may be correct)

Again, do you have any proof? I get really tired of lame-brains who post
these kinds of messages - "it's true, not it's not, it's true, no it's not."
You guys reduce any discussion done to a child's level of debate and it's
a real waste of bandwidth.
-- 
John Switzer               | "Don't mess with me, man!
                           | I'm a higher mammal!"
74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | 
jrs@netcom.com             | 
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: Vileness in Amerikkka--Anarchists are Democrats
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 23:17:32 GMT

While reading article <1992Aug17.215636.7266@ils.nwu.edu>, I noticed that
comegys@eci.bbb.cal (Fred Comegys) said the following:

[ No need to repeat this stuff... ]

Boy, Macintosh NNTP programs can be dangerous, can't they? (eci.bbb.cal?)
-- 
| William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed above
| Internet: kucharsk@solbourne.com   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, not those
| Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Longmont, CO"
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: Media Bias at Republican Convention
Organization: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 16:27:24 GMT

jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>Fact:  The producer for NBC news (and possibly others) held a shot of
>Vice President Quayle during a lengthy section of Pat Buchanan's speech
>regarding Gov Clinton's alleged draft dodging.  It can't be explained 
>away as coincidence.  It can't be explained away as whining or paranoia
>on the part of all who noticed it.  And listen carefully here.  It can't
>be explained away by saying that you agree with the producer and that
>Quayle's own military record is suspect--THAT IS NOT THE SUBJECT.  The 
>subject is whether the producer shared his own opinions with us, not 
>whether you agree with the producer's opinions.  

    Well, I'm obviously biased myself, but I would think that Mr Quayle's 
reaction during Buchanan's "draft dodging" charges would be at least mildly 
interesting even to conservative viewers. If anyone is likely to have 
developed an allergy to discussions about draft dodging, I would think 
that Dan Quayle would be right up there in the top 10. Yet for all the 
complaints I'm reading about the cameras focusing on Quayle, I haven't 
read a single post which said anything like "Boy, did you see him squirm?"

    Sure, the NBC producers were hoping to catch Quayle fidgeting or 
acting like he had a guilty conscience, but I would say that Quayle's 
poise made their scheme backfire. Since it worked out in his favor, I 
wouldn't think you'd have much to beef about. If your candidates ever 
do squirm you can be sure that the press will love to catch them in the 
act, but that can't be a surprise to you.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu      nengle@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
From: rnlee@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Profess'nal Agitator)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: California Senate races
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:39:04 GMT
Organization: MAWL - Mudd Alums Without Lives

In article <1992Aug19.082542.13899@genie.slhs.udel.edu> starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
>In article <36965@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> rnlee@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Profess'nal Agitator) writes:
>}Economically, Bruce's views *are* more compatible with Boxer's.  Since
>}this election will largely be based on the economy, this will matter
>}more than his less popular social stance on abortion.  However, the
>}radical feminist views espoused by Bouncer aren't exactly suburbia either.

>Huh?  What do you mean?  "More compatible with Boxer's"?  I don't get it.
>This sentence doesn't make any sense.

Ouch!  Did I really accidentally type that?  Well, forty lashes with a
wet noodle.

What it should have said is "Economically, Bruce's views *are* more
compatible with suburban voters as opposed to Boxer's which definitely
are not."

>}Well, I do.  Allen was making a campaign appearance at, of all places,
>}Berserkeley.  A student asked him if he thought that Christians should
>}be in charge of a free economy and Allen replied, "Yes."  It is
>}logical fallacy to conclude that he therefore believes that
>}non-Christians have no place in a free economy.  And my personal
>}experience tells me he would never say that, nor does he believe that.

>This doesn't make any sense either.  In charge of a free economy?  What does
>that mean?  In a free economy, consumers are in charge.  What does Christianity
>have to do with this?  Grammar, please :-).

Hey, I didn't ask the question.

And if you read what I was responding to (which you deleted), it would
make sense.  Earlier, I said my top two candidates for the Senate race
were Bill Allen and Bruce Herschensohn.  Someone then said that he
thought if Allen had his way, Bruce wouldn't be eligible to run, in
effect trying to trap me.

But, he didn't have the full background and I did (above).  As for the
question, I suspect Allen interpreted it to mean who should be in
charge of a political system that features a free economy.  And any
attempt to use the same argument against me will run into the same
logical fallacy as above.

Agitator
  #->

"A political deadend."                  Bruce Herschensohn for U.S. Senate!!!
    --Gore on the Vice Presidency when    Not the ten-year       //  The REAL
      asked about a Dukakis-Gore ticket   Congress insider      //   outsider
--------------- R E M E M B E R   B E I J I N G ------------\\ //------------
IBM PC - Who wants a politically correct computer?           \X/  Only AMIGA!
========================================== Bring Back the Caltech Cannon!! ==
Roderick Lee, HMC '91      "The Professional Agitator"      agitator@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d,alt.news-media
From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Actual quote: balance and ditto
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:59:13 GMT
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

Today the Washington _Post_ <gasp!> has an article concerning Rush!
Check out the Aug2092 paper, "Style" section. << Crack your own opinions
about Rush's "Style" on your own time. >>

From the _Post_ article by Henry Allen:
"Many people say I need to be balanced with equal time. I don't need to
be balanced with equal time because I _AM_ equal time."
	and
"Ditto" is what callers to the show say to demonstrate their total
agreement with The Word [RL].
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
August 31, 1992 - May 16, 1993	Duke football? What's that?
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: California Senate races  (was Re: the Keating 5)
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 08:25:42 GMT

In article <36965@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> rnlee@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Profess'nal Agitator) writes:
}Economically, Bruce's views *are* more compatible with Boxer's.  Since
}this election will largely be based on the economy, this will matter
}more than his less popular social stance on abortion.  However, the
}radical feminist views espoused by Bouncer aren't exactly suburbia either.

Huh?  What do you mean?  "More compatible with Boxer's"?  I don't get it.
This sentence doesn't make any sense.

}Well, I do.  Allen was making a campaign appearance at, of all places,
}Berserkeley.  A student asked him if he thought that Christians should
}be in charge of a free economy and Allen replied, "Yes."  It is
}logical fallacy to conclude that he therefore believes that
}non-Christians have no place in a free economy.  And my personal
}experience tells me he would never say that, nor does he believe that.

This doesn't make any sense either.  In charge of a free economy?  What does
that mean?  In a free economy, consumers are in charge.  What does Christianity
have to do with this?  Grammar, please :-).


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Subject: Re: Clinton & Taxes: 7% for health
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:51:59 GMT

krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
> hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey) writes:
>>
>>  Conservatives talk about a level playing field.  I believe a national
>>health care system would help level the field.
>>
>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I have a better idea.  Let's split up into two countries, liberals and 
>conservatives.  You liberals can have whatever you want, we conservatives 
>just will not pay for it.
>
>The only problem is that within 10 years, you folks will have taxed 
>yourselves out of existence and will be begging at our door for food.
>

Have you ever thought about starting a business?  Have you thought about
what would happen if your business would fail, and you would be left with
no health insurance?  What if you developed an expensive medical condition
while you were trying a new business, and no employer would let you onto
their health plan?

What I was saying was that the current health care system makes
entrepreneurship even more risky, and that small businesses and
individuals pay more for health insurance because the big companies
get deals.  National health insurance would help level *this* field.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hulsey%dbsun.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Jim Hulsey)   TBDBITL '84 ('85 Rose Bowl)
An Ohioan living in Misery (Missouri, same difference)

Watch what you say!                Won't you sign up your name
They'll be calling you a radical   So you can be their dependable
A liberal, fanatical criminal      Respectable, presentable vegetable
--  Supertramp "The Logical Song"
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:3851 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:4755