HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 16:48:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.150925.15882@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
}m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
}>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
}>}I certainly don't object to troops firing on a suspicious vehicle.  In
}>}a war zone, they should be able to take measures to defend themselves
}>}(including pre-emptive action, if the political context warrents it).
}>}That the Pentagon decided to fudge the press-release, however, doesn't
}>}sit well with me.
}>
}>Then perhaps you recall what might have been termed "fog of war"?
}>(Not greatest terminology, but it might stick)  Might it be the case
}>that what they said WAS what they believed to be the truth, and that there
}>was no (deliberate) misinformation?
}
}Other than the fact that you have to strain credulity to the limit to
}believe that the misinformation is not deliberate, John Poindexter's
}"disinformation memo" shows that it's government policy to lie. I also
}thank the Reagan Administration for bringing "plausible deniability"
}into popular use, although they certainly didn't invent it. In my
}memory, government whoppers start with the Tonkin incident and it goes
}downhill from there.

Thank you for demonstrating what Elizabeth called "off the subject".

Don't know how to break this to you, but Reagan had little to do with Somalia...


Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65954 soc.motss:54478 alt.sex:40696
From: woodard@figment.tmc.edu (Chris Woodard)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex
Subject: Clayton's 10% Silence  
	 (Subtitle:  Where does he get those figures?)
Date: 30 Dec 92 00:48:13 GMT
Organization: University of South Florida, Department of Computer Science and Engineering



Clayton, you still haven't listed your sources.  If listing sources is not a
requirement for this thread, then have I got some statistics for you
concerning the relative proportion of Fundamentalist Baptist ministers
convicted of child molestation!
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:65348 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10708 alt.politics.bush:14927
From: dos@major.panix.com (Dave O'Shea)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Space program necessary
Date: 25 Dec 92 03:48:02 GMT
Organization: Spaceley Sprockets, Inc.

pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) writes:

> >Also, seeing what Japanese management is doing over here makes me wonder if
> >they are all that good at manufacturing or just as good at browbeating Ameri
> >workers as they are their own.  Perhaps they are just sending management 
> >trainees over here.
> 
> Japanese management doesn't have to browbeat their workers. In Japan,
> people enter the workforce already prepared to sacrifice most aspects
> of their personal well-being for the benefit of the company.

I think I've got at least part of the reason the Japanese do so well in
commercial manufacturing: Quality of work and design. I drive a lot of
different cars - have to rent one practically every week to go
somewhere. These are all low-mileage, high-end American cars; and many
of them have serious flaws. Some of it is just poor design; the steering
on front-wheel drive Fords is a world-class disaster. The brand-new
Chevy Lumina APV I rented two weeks ago (by brand-new I mean it still
had the factory stickers on it and 8.0 miles on the odometer) burst into
flames due to improper installation of a battery cable. General
workmanship is very spotty, with ill-fitting parts, loose panels, and
misaligned components. Ask any dealership mechanic about the bag of
"whoops" parts in the trunk of virtually every brand new American car:
These are parts that they simply didn't get around to installing at the
factory.

I just bought the first non-American-made car I've ever owned - a Nissan
4x4. Best-built car I've ever owned. Looks like one of my anal-retentive
cabling techs got loose under the hood with a bag of cable ties; every
wire and vacuum tube is neatly lined up and attached to it's neighbor,
every hand-cut wire and connector was trimmed and dressed, the throttle
and cruise-control cables were matched and the cut ends soldered and
sanded.

I think it's just an American trait to say "Yeah, that's close enough",
I know I've done it myself, but I don't think the Japanese go along with
that theory - they're a nation of compulsive perfectionists; which
explains why they don't seem to come up with the radical leaps in
technology that characterize American industry, but they can
mass-produce goods of a quality unmatched in the world.


--
Socialized medicine: Health care with the compassion of an IRS auditor, the
intelligence of a DMV employee, and the cost control of the Pentagon.
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: HERE IT IS! (from ..YOU ARE CLUELESS.
Date: 29 Dec 92 20:57:15 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM (Bob Deguc) writes:
: In article 16291@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu, pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
: > In article <merlyn.724871258@digibd>, merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) wr
: > ites:
: > >pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
: > >Could it be that Clueless Boy is confusing Clinton's demonstrations against
: > >US involvement in Viet Nam while in college in England with Clinton's tourist
: > >trip to the USSR around the same time?  Naaa...
: > >
: > 
: >    Aw, come off it. He was demonstrating in the U.S.S.R. and it's DOCUMENTED.
: > 
: 
: 
: I don't suppose that you would be willing to prove the above statement?  (I'd
: like some proof, not the garbage that Rush spews out).
: 
: 
: 
: 
: Bob De Guc        

He can't prove it, because it never happened.  I doubt even ol' Mr.
Bazbo would be stupid and reckless enough to make this particular
claim.

Bill    
: I vote, therefore I am!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM (Bob Deguc)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: HERE IT IS! (from ..YOU ARE CLUELESS.
Date: 24 Dec 1992 16:11:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: deguc@holein1.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: holein1.corp.sun.com

In article 21504@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu, pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) writes:
> In article <bill.725138038@castor>, bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge) w
> rites:
> >>In article 16291@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu, pnr0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PAUL N. RITTER) wr
> ites:
> >>>    Aw, come off it. He was demonstrating in the U.S.S.R. and it's DOCUMENTED
> ..
> >>>
> >
> >Bullshit.  You're a liar.
> >
> 
>    I take this as intelligence at its best....


It's better than your response.  William made a direct response to your statement.
You on the otherhand, attack his intelligence.  I suppose you could have backed
up your original statement with facts (and therefore responded to his statement)
But I don't see that at all.  In fact, I don't see you contesting that "you're a 
liar".  :^D  Rush would be proud of you!!
 



Still waiting for "proof",


Bob De Guc
I vote, therefore I am!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy)
Subject: Re: Department of Energy nominee
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 22:42:08 GMT

James Meritt writes:
#Not quite.  I stated that the candidate appeared to be chosen for reasons
#other than expertise in the position in which she was selected.  And you
#have managed to say such yourself.  See?

I'm not sure I agree with this summary. Your origional article, which
has expired on my system, seemed to imply that the head of DoE needs
to be qualified in nuclear weapons, as does your summary above
("expertise in the position she was selected"). I disagree with the
fact that the DoE *needs* to be headed by such a person, and I don't
think that Clinton's appointee is unqualified to be head of DoE. 

Query:
I got the impression from your first post that you thought that
Clinton's appointee was unqualified to head DoE. Is that what you
wanted to imply?

#}#Neither your,
#}#nor my, opinion counts.
#}
#}Gee, and I thought that the USA was a democracy. Silly me.
#

#For FUTURE events, not what has already happened.

As far as I am aware of, the topic is basically "what should the DoE
be doing under the Clinton administration?" Is that not what you think
we are discussing? 

#}If the DoD isn't in charge of purchacing battleships, who is? (or
#}substitute "destroyers" if that makes you feel happy.)
#
#Is this suppose to be a topic change?

Nope. You seemed to disagree with my statement that the DoE should get
out of the nuke weapons building game by implying that the DoE was
better than DoD for this purpose. I am trying to show that the DoD
takes care of all the other weapons systems, and imho, should do the
same with the nukes. Do we disagree with this? 

#}It is a bit of rhetoric, but Reagan basically gutted the DoE of most
#}non-nuke activities. I'd like to see it return to something non
#}defense department related. Let the DoD take care of it self.
#
#Ah, I see.  What you wish, not what is or even what you think is.

Yea. What I wish for the DoE to do in the future, as I thought I was
discussing. Why don't you SAY what YOU think we are discussing? It
gets a lot easier that way.





--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Boycotts, Boycotts, Boycotts....
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 06:40:18 GMT

Michael Doel (doel@bae.bellcore.com) wrote:
:
: In article <1ha5ioINNdgs@spim.mti.sgi.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike P
olen) writes:
:
: > There is no such thing as a stupid boycott, nor is there any suggestion
: > that you should support every idea that you decide is "crack-pot."  After
: > all, Edison and Alexander Graham Bell were considered crack-pots.  You have
: > every right to encourage others to join or not to join a boycott, but
: > arguing against the boycott itself demonstrates the lack of faith that
: > BOB HOOKER refers to.
:
: To illustrate the absurdity of this point, I hereby call the following
: boycott:
:
: Product: M&Ms
:
: Reason: For years, M&Ms have come in light brown, dark brown, yellow, green,
: orange, and red.  How dare they leave out blue!  Many people consider blue
: to be their favorite color and not making blue M&Ms surely shows a lack of
: sensitivity on the part of the M&M/Mars company.  We cannot allow this kind
: of mind control to continue!  Therefore, until M&Ms produces candies in the
: colors I (or my PC buddies) deem acceptable, I call for all self-respecting
: liberals to throw down their M&M wrappers at once.
:
:
: No such thing as a stupid boycott indeed...

It's a free market.  Go ahead and boycott until there are blue M&Ms.  If you 
believe strongly enough in this cause, then it is your right, in fact it is 
your duty, to correct this injustice.
-- 
Mike McAngus 			 | As if I needed Another time consuming hobby.
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | 
The Truth is still the Truth	 | This Post exploits illiterates.
Even if you choose to ignore it. | 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: What is Clay's real motivation?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 14:44:05 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.025057.21605@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy) writes:
>In article <13744@optilink.COM> walsh@optilink.COM (Mark Walsh) writes:
>#Sadly, Greg, it is not a free speech issue.
>
>Err, the people involved say it IS a free speach issue. What right
>does anyone have to PREVENT them from marching? The parade is on a
>public street. 


	No, it's not.

	If I set up a Nice Guys Of America rally/march in the district
	on Jan 31 1993, I have to talk to DC and clear it.  Get licenses,
	set upthe parade path, police attention, etc.

	In doing this, I am establishing that parade as solely representitive
	of the group that I am associating with.  If anyone else wants to march,
	they had better clear themselves--and mostly, these things are exclusive
	--only one particular group at a time.

	By allowing NAMBLA and others to march, they are saying that they
	are part of the "We're just like you" gay community, which it
	completely self-defeating and stupid.  If people go seethe
	parade and see a bunch of perverts who molest little boys marching,
	is it their fault that they associate the two?  No.  Not at all.


-- 
	Blaming society for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
	         ---  Boycott == censorship == cowardice  ---
	Do I even need to point out that my views do not represent
	those of my employer, institution or relations?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: guru@halcyon.com (Dennis Wicks)
Subject: Re: Libertarianism...
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 04:19:28 GMT

Interesting observations, but it doesn't belong where it wound
up.
Please edit the news groups line!

In article <1992Dec30.030847.25154@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr) writes:
>In article <1hqjouINN49c@spim.mti.sgi.com> mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen) writes:
>>|> 
>>|> I disagree.  A society can make no promises or take any acts, only 
>>|> individuals can.  Problems can only be caused or resolved by individual 
>>|> action, or by individuals acting collectively.  To say that "society made me 
>>|> a criminal" is inaccrurate, dishonest, and demeaning to the individual.  
>>|> Only the criminal can choose to commit crimes.
>>|> 
>>So Ted, by your reasoning slavery is a perfectly valid activity for a
>>society that choses it.  If you are a slave, and you want freedom, and
>>society defines any act of taking freedom a crime, then that society
>>has certainly created the criminal.  Of course you can decide to accept
>>being a slave to avoid trouble, but that would be a crime against
>>yourself that society would also have caused.
>>
>>I find it humorous that libertarians can believe that complete
>>individual freedom is possible without infringing on
>>anyone elses freedom.
>
>It really is amusing how the libertarian philosophy has individuality
>springing from the womb, with no social intervention or conditioning
>involved at all.  It sounds like a simple case of denial.
>
>>-- 
>>These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
>>occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
>
>	-Phil
>-- 
>PHIL SCARR        \      We are Microsoft...     /          (o) 804.243.0229
> University of    /     OS/2 is irrelevant.      \          (f) 804.243.0290
> Virginia,        \     UNIX is irrelevant.      /        prs9k@Virginia.EDU
> Neurosurgery     /     Openness is futile.      \     prs9k@Virginia.BITNET
> HP-UX is my life!\ Prepare to be assimilated... /   ...uunet!virginia!prs9k
>


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.motss,alt.sex
Subject: Re: pounding the "10%" figure into the ground: Nature, 12/3/92
Date: 28 Dec 92 19:17:00 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <Bzrn5n.rx@exnet.co.uk>, s0xjg@exnet.co.uk (Xavier Gallagher) writes:
> In article <13710@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> >In article <BzMEHL.46t@exnet.co.uk>, s0xjg@exnet.co.uk (Xavier Gallagher) writes:
# ## Come on, be fair!  97% of reported child molestation is done by hetro
# ## men.  The rest is made up of gay men and women.  Given these statitics
# #
# #FALSE.  Depending on which study you read, at least 21% of molestation
# #is by exclusive homosexuals, or about 30% is done by homosexuals or
# #bisexuals.
# #
# ## ** Xavier Gallagher                        ***********************************
# #
# #If you don't even have the basic facts right, there's no point
# #in arguing with you.
# 
# 
# Name your sources cramer.  Mine is the 1989 British Home office report
# on child abuse.  The *vast* majority of sexual abuse if *male adult*
# on *female child*
# 
# Xavier Gallagher.

I've already posted, repeatedly, a number of sources that show
that men molesting boys are somewhere between 20% and 26% of
child molestation.  That's about 5x the number of homosexuals
in the population.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
C++ is to C, as lung cancer is to lung.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey)
Subject: Re: ...Psst. Ya wanta Merry Christmas??  Just ignore Washington DC!
Organization: Rice University, Houston, Texas
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:06:03 GMT

In article <23DEC199205384755@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Ignorance) writes:

   There is only one true reality.

   (hint: tain't media)

Could well be, Mr. Tice.  Let us know if you ever find it.

--PLH, it ain't on N. Collins, either
--
Patrick L. Humphrey  (patrick@is.rice.edu)  Rice Networking & Computing Systems
     +1 713 528-3626 at Rice. 776-1541 at home. 667-6554 at Palace Lanes. 
         What will our "leaders" do once the Constitution is gone --
                   and we STILL have a drug problem???
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 00:27:55 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: Space program necessary
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: usa
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <1992Dec22.190905.13966@kadsma.kodak.com> pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.024947.4840@news.stolaf.edu> kamilewi@lars.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Alex Kamilewicz) writes:
>>
>>It's a well-documented fact that most of Japanese technology originated in 
>>the U.S.  They just produced it better.
>>
>
>Is that why Japanese companies are now the leading applicants for U.S.
>patents?
>
>Your statement was true at one time, but not anymore. We are being beaten
>in every phase of the game, from research to development to production.
>Only in retail distribution are we still better than Japan.
>

An interesting footnote:  a colleague of mine was replacing the CPU board
on our SGI system last night.  He just mentioned to me a few minutes ago
that there were more chips on the board from US companies than from
anywhere else.  The fat lady hasn't sung yet.  (Of course, this does
NOT mean that the chips were *manufactured* in the US).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Dale Cook    "I don't much care how a man prays -- there's plenty of
                 room in hell for all of us."  --- "Mad Jack" Duncan
The opinions are mine only (i.e., they are NOT my employer's)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: Welfare vs. Workfare
Reply-To: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:08:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.222319.8702@news.acns.nwu.edu> dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier) writes:
>In article <4103@master.CNA.TEK.COM> mikeq@freddy.CNA.TEK.COM writes:
>>>There are a lot of people making a decent living
>>>mooching off of the hard-working Americans, and they're likely going to want
>>>to eliminate anyone who tells them there is no more free pie.
>>
>>Yup. Millionaire cattle ranchers, wheat ranchers, logging company owners, 
>>land developers, corporate CEOs...  Just to name a few.
>>
>>FIRST, wean the rich off the welfare rolls, THEN work on the poor.
>>MUCH more efficient way to go.
>>
>I can't think of any instances where the people you just described are
>receiving welfare.  Some may be cheats, to be sure, but that is not quite what
>I was talking about.  Very few if any rich people are "on the welfare rolls",
>as it were.
>

You have missed the point entirely. Much more of the taxpayers' money is
handed out in government subsidies to the already-affluent than to
poor welfare recipients. For a couple of hair-curling examples, you
should read George Will's account of the mohair subsidy.

And let's not forget the billions that were handed out to defense
contractors during the 1980's under non-competitive contracts.


>Oh, OK, I get it now!  You suggest that we don't let entrepreneurs keep what
>they stick their necks out for.  They pay the checks, and they take the risks,
>but they shouldn't be allowed to keep the profits if their endeavor is
>successful.  Gotcha.
>

No, that's not what was suggested. You don't 'gotcha'.


>Somehow equating Commie-Liberal Pinko Bolshie Socialism with efficiency
>doesn't seem to quite add up.  Rewarding laziness is more efficient than
>punishing it?  Come now!  You must be joking.
>
>This was a joke, right?
>
>Right?

No, your inability to see through the powerful distorting lens of
your own prejudice is the joke.

'Commie Liberal Pinko'? Put this man in amber, he's a fossil from the 1950's.


>-- 
>Douglas C. Meier		|  I have a trig midterm tomorrow and I'm


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Ignorance)
Subject: Re: ...Psst. Ya wanta Merry Christmas??  Just ignore Washington DC!
Summary: Look into a child's eyes...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: and the world is dispelled.  
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:51:00 GMT

In article <PATRICK.92Dec23090603@rio-grande.is.rice.edu>, 
patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes...

Thus taking us beyond-the-bubble.

>In article <23DEC199205384755@utarlg.uta.edu> 
>b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Ignorance) writes:
> 
>   There is only one true reality.
> 
>   (hint: tain't media)
> 
>Could well be, Mr. Tice.  Let us know if you ever find it.
> 
>--PLH, it ain't on N. Collins, either


Simple Mr. Humphrey: I-Thou.
                     ^^^

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: kamilewi@lars.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Alex Kamilewicz)
Subject: Re: Space program necessary
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:56:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.183252.22477@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:
>In article <1992Dec21.164657.9526@ryn.mro4.dec.com> shapiro@cfsctc.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes:
>
>A recent German study of patent citations shows that space R&D is very
>inefficient at generating spinoffs, compared to commercial R&D.

And boy, those Germans have done a lot in space recently...

Alex

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
From: jpsb@NeoSoft.com (Jim Shirreffs)
Subject: Re: Your own words, of course != bigot
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Distribution: usa, world
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:23:25 GMT

>                          ...
>The short version is being black is not embraced by most americans.
>It is outside of our shared values. Continued erosion of our shared 
>values will harm society. There fore it should not be given the same 
>status as being white.
>
the above had no signature

I'm tired of arguments, so I will not bore you with things you have 
probably already heard. But I do have a question. Do you *really* 
believe that the civil rights analogy holds in the case of homosexuals?
I want to know this so I tell can if you are simply being argumentitive or
we you are stating beliefs you hold.  I don't think the analogy is
100% valid. But I am willing to listen. My major problem is that the 
difference between hets and gays is behavioral, not racial as is 
the difference between blacks and whites.

jim shirreffs


Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh