HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,rec.humor,talk.bizarre,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
Date: 12 Sep 92 00:22:23 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: na
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Sep11.164109.10581@walter.cray.com> toma@romulus.cray.com (Thomas Arneberg) writes:
>Furthermore, what Rush usually focuses on in the house banking scandal is
>the callous attitude -- that all the expenses were paid for the taxpayers.
>If the depositor doesn't have to pay for adminstration of the bank with the
>"float" of his money, then that float can be used by other depositors
>writing bad checks.

 Rush devotes a chapter in his new book to this topic. He states that
legally all money in the bank was tax payers money until the money was
withdrawn from the bank. 1 million of taxpayers money was used to pay
the operating expenses. Also, the federal reserve bank was forced to re-
cognize the checks in their check computer sorters. The main issue deals 
with the way Congress handled the entire affair.
 By the way, the first Inditement was recently issued concerning the house
post office scandle. More are sure to follow according to insiders.

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Date: 14 Sep 92 05:45:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <mykes.0doi@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:

>Prayer is not relitious indoctrination.  Nor is permitting prayer by choice of
>the participants in any way promoting a singular religion.

Oh bullshit.   When I was young we had prayer in the school.  And we kids
used to beat the crap out of the Jewish kids who didn't pray to Jesus
with us.   Social pressure, condoned by the teachers, forced those kids to
have to decide to sin against their religion or get pummeled.
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:59:37 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.

In article <xxsn2lp.mvp@netcom.com> mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.094108.690@hemlock.cray.com>
    rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>>> would like. Last week Wiley was sitting by a tree writing a poem about
>>> how when the Supreme Court Justices find themselves in Heaven trying 
>>> to explain their rulings against prayer and such they'd look in the 
>>> Constitution and find nothing there to support them.
>>
>>I guess it takes someone that can't find the first amendment to
>>truly appreciate the humor.
>
>I can not only find it, I've got it online.
>
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
> religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
> the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the
> people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for
> a redress of grievances.
>
>I thought that BC strip was a hoot.  I guess its humor is beyond those
>people who can't comprehend the words "free exercise".

The strip dealt with the phrase "separation of church and state" which
is not found in the Constitution.  What the strip doesn't say is that
the phrase is found in the Federalist Papers (I think) which describes
the thought processes of the Framers in creating the Constitution and
the Bill of Rights.

The "separation of church and state" was clearly the intent of the
Framers when they wrote the establishment clause of the First
Amendment.

The humor was simplistic at best.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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"
From: kmitche@eis.calstate.edu (Kenneth Mitchell)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Rush in DC?
Date: 15 Sep 92 05:17:53 GMT
Organization: Calif State Univ/Electronic Information Services


>Is the Rush show to air in the Washington DC area?
 
>THX
>ELB
Apparently not; Rush was saying on tday's show that Washington was the
only "major market" where his TV show will not be on the air.  Initially. 

Ken Mitchell
kmitche@eis.calstate.edu
From: bm562@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard L. Trionfo)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Rush in Philly
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:15:39 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


   I don't know what the deal is with the show in the 
Philadelphia market.  It is on at 1:30 AM on channel 29 (FOX).
I don't admit to being a huge fan of his, but it will be more
interesting than most other talk shows.
                     Rich
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,rec.humor,talk.bizarre,talk.politics.misc
From: das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A)
Subject: Re: Bush Campaign TV Ad
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 05:48:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.085452.3350@walter.cray.com> toma@romulus.cray.com (Thomas Arneberg) writes:
>>: Could you give an example of the Congress putting itself above the law?
>
>I'm pretty sure that Congress exempts itself from all quota legislation
>("Affirmative Action"f  you prefer euphemisms). Why would they force
>businesses to do things that they themselves can't abide by?

And what an awful thing it is.  Take the House of Representatives:

There are fewer registered Republicans than Democrats - I think
things should be 'equalized' so that Republicans always get at least
HALF of the seats.  That would only be FAIR. :-)

>;-) I'd rather be ____  Thomas R. Arneberg   | Inet: toma@cray.com
--
Dan Stephenson                                           das9674@usl.edu
" BERLIN WALL FALLS.  3 BORDER GUARDS LOSE JOBS.  CLINTON BLAMES BUSH! "
        -George Bush, '92 Republican nomination acceptance speech
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: lyford@dagny.webo.dg.com (Lyford Beverage)
Subject: Re: Military service...
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 12:46:50 GMT
Distribution: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC


|> >Since military service is apparently so relevant and so admired by all
|> >Dittoheads everywhere, would anyone care to comment on the Rush Limbaugh's
|> >own record on this issue? Did Rush see combat in Vietnam? How did he serve
|> >his country? Was he every 1A? 4F? ROTC? What then?
|> 
|> 	I seem to recall that he was 4F, courtesy of a pylenidal (sp?) cyst.

Pilonidal.  Also, I believe, a bum knee.
From: tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re:  Clinton, draft dodger.  YUP!
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:44:48 GMT
Distribution: usa, na
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

In article <1898@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:

> You shouldnt compare a person who has financed his entire life through
>taxing the common people with a man who has worked hard his entire life
>in the private sector. He received no inheritance from his grandfather
>and only has stock from his mother.

1) Entire life in the private sector?   The US Senate is the private sector?
The Veep is the private sector?  Or are you saying he wasn't alive during
those years?   Well, I guess I could agree with that.

2) grandfather  -gives stock->  mom  -gives stock->  Danno
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: fusco@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Andrew Fusco)
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:22:47 GMT

tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) writes:

>>Prayer is not relitious indoctrination.  Nor is permitting prayer by choice of
>>the participants in any way promoting a singular religion.

>Oh bullshit.   When I was young we had prayer in the school.  And we kids
>used to beat the crap out of the Jewish kids who didn't pray to Jesus
>with us.   Social pressure, condoned by the teachers, forced those kids to
>have to decide to sin against their religion or get pummeled.

Maybe you kids should have listened to the prayers your teachers were 
leading in the classroom.

-ACF
From: msm@mse.cmu.edu (Mark S McWhinney)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:50:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: CMU/SEI Master of Software Engineering Program

In article <BuBJJM.9Es@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mwbg9715@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Wayne
 Blunier) writes:
>>Now, of course, I haven't heard of one paper in the evil, liberal media
>>pulling B.C. or the Wizard of Id lately, but plenty of them yank
>>Doonesbury for daring to have an opinion. Go on. Tell me about
>>the liberal media.
>Ok you asked for it.  How come when Mr. Quail makes a mistake such as
>mispelling a word, its all over the news for days, but when Bill 'I lied
>to the draft board' Clinton says Patriot missiles can go through cracks
>and down chimney, like we all saw on TV, the national news does not say
>it.
>(And he thinks he should be in charge of the military!?)

Good old Dan heard this and just couldn't help but rush in to say
something stupid too. He said that they weren't Patriot missiles, they
were cruise missiles. (The correct answer is smart bombs.)

By the way, "mispelling" has two "s".

Instead of listening to Rush (aka Mr. 4F) talk about the need to cut
down the Godless forests or why we should cut off food to Africa until
they learn their lesson, you could attend some classes.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mxa2677@usl.edu (Axelrod Michael)
Subject: TV Show
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 10:28:27 GMT

How does one go about getting tickets to be in Rush's audience?


--
Michael J. Axelrod
mikey@usl.edu
--
From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Summary Mon 8/31/92
Distribution: world,usa,na
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (beta) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 4 Sep 92 19:11:28 PST
Organization: Amiga makes it possible

In article <1992Sep3.144741.20093@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
> In article <1883@celia.UUCP>, steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree) writes:
>
> |> ->	Dog racing is not a government owned monopoly, it is a private concern
> |> ->that is taxed by the government. The governer made two changes to the rules,
> |> ->he lowered the percentage of the governments take by 1% (ie: reduced the tax)
> |> ->but expanded the number of hours the tracks were allowed to operate
> |> ->(ie: reduced the restrictions). The net result was an increase in state
> |> ->revenue from increased track profits.
> |>
> |> ->	Sounds a whole bunch like capital gans cuts to me.
> |>
> |>  Please someone explain why
> |>
> |>    "Sounds a whole bunch like a capital gains tax cut to me"
>
>
> 	Ok, Reeeeel slow, just for steve. Ready?
>
> 	Clinton cut the taxes on dog racing, like bush would cut capital
> 	gains.

That much sounds like a tax cut, period.

>
> 	Clinton then relaxed regulations, so that more dog racing happened.
> 	This is what happens with a capital gains tax, more investment is
> 	made.
>

That much sounds like deregulation, period.

> 	The state picked up revenue from the increased betting at a lower
> 	tax rate, just a increased investment would result in higher revenue.
>

Wow, you submit TWO factors and decide that only one of them resulted in
the increased revenues...

> 	Are we there yet, steve? Think real hard ...
>

Your turn to think real hard.

> --
>                                Alex Crain::UMBC Academic Computing Services
> The feminist agenda is a socialist, anti-family political movement that
> encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice
> witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians. - Pat Robertson 1992

--
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

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: larry@peak.psl.nmsu.edu (Evil Engineer doin' it the Cowboy Way)
Subject: Re: T.V. show title?
Organization: New Mexico State University, MetaPhysical Science Laboratory
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 01:17:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.125411.6683@iscsvax.uni.edu> snyder3338@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
   Quick question:  What is Rush calling his new T.V. show???

   Jeff Snyder

Would you believe:

	"Rush Limbaugh" ?

At least that's the way it is listed in the free TV guide in our Las
Cruces Sun News. It is available to us at midnight and later at 12:35 AM
(to we who have *cable*).

I predict a rapid demise, followed by allegations from the Whinin' Right
that the Liberal Media conspired to kill the program by airing it at 
the worst possible times. (Get ready, Chuck.)

Personally, I hope the show stays on awhile. I don't agree with much of
what Rush says, but I enjoy him (just like a good preacher) and I
think it is great to have his viewpoints and philosophies presented, in
their purest form. [He's got to be at least as good as Howard Stern.]

I'll probably buy his book for the same reason. (I bought Joseph Newman's
book about his perpetual motion machine too..)

L.
"Yeh, Buddy..            | larry@psl.nmsu.edu (Larry Cunningham)|  _~~_
 I've got your COMPUTER! | % Physical Science Laboratory        | (O)(-)
 Right HERE!!"           | New Mexico State University          |  /..\ 
 (computer THIS!)        | Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA 88003    |   <> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are CORRECT, mine, and not PSLs or NMSUs..
Hey Mister! Your organ's stopped playing, and your monkey's on fire!
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page)
Subject: Re: A few quotes from a few years ago
Organization: Texas Instruments
Distribution: world, usa, na
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:20:19 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.202659.29378@pmafire.inel.gov>, cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep8.175152.15724@csc.ti.com> dpage@ra.csc.ti.com (Doug Page) writes:
|> >current statutes.  There are some "mainline" Christian denominations that view
|> >that stealing is OK if your need is great enough; even if it is against the
|> >law.
|> 
|> I was always taught that one of the Ten Commandments was "thou shalt not
|> steal", not "thou shalt not steal, unless your need is great enough".  
|> Not to pick on you, Doug.  This just brings up the problems associated
|> with basing government on religious principles.  You say there are
|> "mainline Christians" who believe that stealing is OK in certain 
|> circumstances.  So which Christian principle is it going to be?

This actually points out the problem with changing what text means to fit a
given situation.  I placed the word mainline in quotes to point up the fact
that they have actually added to (actually, subtracted from) the original
meaning of steal.  You are quite correct that this points up the problem with
founding a government upon religious principles, but it does not mean that
that is not what our founding fathers did.  (Not to mention that in their time
the interpretation of "thou shalt not steal" meant just that.)

The concept of a written Constitution had as one of its ideals the concept
that the rights set aside by it could not be readily changed.  Yes, they could
be changed by, but only by the procedures described within itself - by the
Congress or by Constitutional convention, only.  This is not what has been
going on this century.  For example, there is no right to privacey specifically
written about in the Constitution, and yet one of the arguments behind the Roe
V. Wade decision was a woman's fundamental right to privacey.  In fact, the
Constitution actually specifies the government's right to appropriate search
(i.e., with due cause).  This meaning was redefined by the Supreme Court and
thus changed the meaning of the Constitution.  Likewise, the federal court
system has "defined" that employers have the "right" to collect urine samples
for drug tests, with no restrictions as to what else those same companies can
test for in those samples.  Perhaps screening for employees with high risk
medical conditions so that they can be lid-off, perhaps even before the
employee knows that they have a health problem.  Where is the right to
privacey here?  What the courts now consider to be "cruel and unusual
punishment" would not have been that bad of a life two hundred years ago.

Doug Page

***  The opinions are mine and do not represent those of my employer.  ***
From: steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Summary Mon 8/31/92
Keywords: Unofficial Summary Rush Limbaugh
Date: 4 Sep 92 21:48:48 GMT
Reply-To: celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree)
Distribution: world,usa,na
Organization: Rhythm & Hues, Inc., Hollywood

In article <1992Sep4.150320.21468@umbc3.umbc.edu> alex@engr3.umbc.edu (alex) writes:
>In article <1891@celia.UUCP>, steve@celia.UUCP (Steve Tyree) writes:
>
>|>					 Taxation and regula-
>|> tion is theft. They must justify the crime, not justify the sentence.

>	Bush not only raised taxes and presided over a masive increase in
>goverenment regulation, but he gave us a set of law that allow the government
>to confiscate property simply by proving that the property was involved
>in a crime (drug kingpins and all that). with 97% of the currency in
>circulation containing tracable amounts of cocaine, he in effect said that
>the government could confiscate *any* large amount of cash, without due
>process of any kind.

 I remember the days when liberals use to say the War on Drugs was unfair
to poor people because they didnt go after the rich. Now that they have tar-
keted rich people, they are accused of stealing. I have been all over the
spectrum on the drug issue during my life. My current philosophy is that
cocaine use inhibits the minds of the Free Market operators and thus harms
the operation of the Free Market. I could change my perspective again
though. I will be in favor of legalizing all smart drugs. Cocaine is a
dumb drug.  
 Also, concerning the regulations that have been enacted by Bush. I dont
like them, but Bush actively worked to take a lot of the strength out of
these regulations. Also, the counsel on competitiveness has done some 
good work unregulating the regulations. All regulations where drafted by
the Congress, right ? If the choice is between Bush and Clinton, you know
I will pick the lesser of two evils. Conservatives can take advantage of
the fact that with bush we had half a democrate, this should give us a
rallying point against increased liberalism without having to give total
control of the executive branch to the liberals.

>	furthurmore, Race tracks are regulated because gambling is *sinful* 
>and *immoral* - a bush presidency would (and has) *increase* this kind of
>regulation, not decrease it.

 Alex, you know very little about me. I do frequent the craps tables at 
Las Vegas quite often. I love to roll the dice.  

 Steve Tyree - These opinions are mine and mine alone.
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro)
Subject: Rush on TV in Eastern MA
Organisation: SKS Computer Consulting, Inc.
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Date: 11 SEP 92 10:13:55 EST


I saw that the Rush Limbaugh TV show will be airing on 9/14 on WMUR (New
Hampshire). I didn't catch the air time, but at least now I know WHERE it will
be. 

Regards,
Steve.

/*********************************************************************
*                               *                                    *
* Steve Shapiro                 * All views and opinions expressed   *
* SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and do not neccessarily *
* Specializing in: HP/SUN/UNIX  * reflect those of my clients,       *
* DEC/VAX/VMS/ULTRIX, IBM PC    * employers, employees, children,    *
* C, FORTRAN, PASCAL, PL/1      * parents, spouse or even myself!    *
*                               *                                    *
**********************************************************************
* The Contract Professional BBS, North Reading, MA                   *
* FidoNet 1:101/440 (508) 664-6354                                   *
* Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org                             *
*********************************************************************/
From: shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: At last, a conservative comic strip!
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:49:52 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Organisation: SKS Computer Consulting, Inc.


In article <BuC4wA.Gqo.2@cs.cmu.edu>, msm@mse.cmu.edu (Mark S McWhinney)
writes...

>Good old Dan heard this and just couldn't help but rush in to say
>something stupid too. He said that they weren't Patriot missiles, they
>were cruise missiles. (The correct answer is smart bombs.)

Ah, so you're an expert in military ballistic systems.

I worked for many years developing guidance and seeker systems for the DoD and
worked on both 'smart' bombs and cruise type missiles (we also called them
terrain following missiles).

So you tell me, upon what do you base your assertion of a 'correct' answer?

While it definitely WAS NOT patriot missile, it WAS a combination of smart
bombs AND cruise missiles AND non-cruise missiles. This is the correct answer.

Now, for some info to educate some of you (for those of you who care):

Each of these devices have seeker systems which allow them to identify a
specific target. The bomb is merely dropped and by 'wiggling' its fins, directs
itself to the target as tracked by the seeker. If it is a moving target, it is
possible that the bomb doesn't have enough impetus to keep up with the target.
It has no propulsion, so it can really just fall on top of the target. The
cruise missile is self-propelled, so it can also target things from a
horizontal trajectory. The guidance system is sophisticated enough so that it
can follow terrain to the target identified by the seeker. The non-cruise
missiles which have seeker systems are pretty much launched 'line of sight' and
has no capability to follow terrain. They identify the target and go get it.

Depending on the target, the appropriate device would be utilized.

Regards,
Steve.

/*********************************************************************
*                               *                                    *
* Steve Shapiro                 * All views and opinions expressed   *
* SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and do not neccessarily *
* Specializing in: HP/SUN/UNIX  * reflect those of my clients,       *
* DEC/VAX/VMS/ULTRIX, IBM PC    * employers, employees, children,    *
* C, FORTRAN, PASCAL, PL/1      * parents, spouse or even myself!    *
*                               *                                    *
**********************************************************************
* The Contract Professional BBS, North Reading, MA                   *
* FidoNet 1:101/440 (508) 664-6354                                   *
* Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org                             *
*********************************************************************/
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh