--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00010 Date: 01/27/98 From: JOHN SAMPSON Time: 08:38pm \/To: JUSTIN BAUSTERT (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: [1/2] Smoking Costs TE> So, instead of going through life with blinders on you have chosen TE> blindfold. Why does that not surprise me? JB>You're the one refusing to listen (read) to a word I say (type).. I'm JB>finding it less and less worth my time to respond since all I receive i JB>personal attacks as of late.. The question that comes to mind is "Why do you think you are receiving personal attacks?" John "To find reasonable doubt, one must first be capable of reason." ___ * WR 1.33 [NR] * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: Wildcard BBS - Thornton, CO 1-303-252-0491 (1:104/725) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00011 Date: 01/28/98 From: ROBERT PLETT Time: 09:01am \/To: DAVID HARTUNG (Read 0 times) Subj: G. Warming & Population On 01-27-98, DAVID HARTUNG declared to ROBERT PLETT: DH> RP> Besides, one would think the idiots would know that higher carbon DH> RP> dioxide levels make for better and faster plant growth. Want more DH> RP> trees? - exhale, and stomp on the gas. DH> Cool! I'm reminded of something else enviro-wackos are silent about in their zeal to return man to the stone age, an example being the Smokey Mountains, and why it is they are called that. The Smokies are named for the thick form of smog they are so frequently enveloped in. That smog is not generated by man, but by trees. Bob /\-/\ - proud Ilk homebody@galstar.com C.A.T. ( o o ) Chapter Ilks == ^ == Green Country - Oklahoma http://www.galstar.com/~homebody/ * SLMR 2.1a * Some people are willfully ignorant! - Enyart * Origin: Shadow of The Cat (1:170/1701.10) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00012 Date: 01/28/98 From: ROBERT PLETT Time: 09:11am \/To: DAVID HARTUNG (Read 0 times) Subj: Dufus Waterloo? On 01-27-98, DAVID HARTUNG declared to ROBERT PLETT: DH> RP> Oh my. Now we got Leon Panetta sayin' out loud that it'd be best to DH> RP> replace Dufus with OwlGore soon as possible. ::chortle:: DH> RP> Lessee... seems there wuz sumpin' about rats and sinkin' ships.... DH> RP> DH> I saw a headline today which says that Gore believes Clinton, as far as DH> I am concerned, this proves that Gore isn't smart enough to be DH> president! Yeah, all Clinton's apologists and cabinet were saying the same thing. It's truly a stupid thing to do to say Clinton is innocent because he says so, when *everybody* *knows* he's a pathological liar. I don't have the quote, but remember the one that Kerry (think it was Kerry) came up with? - Something like, "He's an unusually good liar. Unusually good." Albright is one that, considering the job she has, should've kept her mouth shut rather than embrace such stupidity. Bob /\-/\ - proud Ilk homebody@galstar.com C.A.T. ( o o ) Chapter Ilks == ^ == Green Country - Oklahoma http://www.galstar.com/~homebody/ * SLMR 2.1a * Marvel not ... Ye must be born again. - John 3:7 * Origin: Shadow of The Cat (1:170/1701.10) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00013 Date: 01/28/98 From: ROBERT PLETT Time: 01:28pm \/To: MARK HOLLAND (Read 0 times) Subj: hello On 01-27-98, MARK HOLLAND declared to ALL: MH>Are any of my messages getting out? I haven' seen any replies, and have bee MH>wondering. MH>Hello ............. hello.....................lo............lo Did anybody else hear something? Can't quite make it out - sounds kinda like somebody calling. |-) Bob /\-/\ - proud Ilk homebody@galstar.com C.A.T. ( o o ) Chapter Ilks == ^ == Green Country - Oklahoma http://www.galstar.com/~homebody/ * SLMR 2.1a * Careful what you ask for, you might get it. * Origin: Shadow of The Cat (1:170/1701.10) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00014 Date: 01/28/98 From: ZACKERY LANPHERE Time: 11:11pm \/To: ROBERT PLETT (Read 0 times) Subj: Resignation? -=> In a message to Jim Jeffcoat, Robert Plett said... <=- RP> On 01-25-98, JIM JEFFCOAT declared to ALL: JJ>My question is this: if there is strong evidence that he is guilty of JJ>obstruction of justice, witness tampering, suborning of perjury, etc., JJ>and does in fact resign.... are those charges for which he could be JJ>prosecuted criminally after he leaves office? RP> Yes! Correct, however the fact that he *could* be prosecuted is overshadowed by the almost certain Presidential pardon he'll receive from Gore. Taking a trip down Nixon lane so to speak. -Zack ... Clinton - America, your Constitution was just cancelled. --- * Origin: Joe's TV BBS - Whitehall, Ny - 518-499-0532 (1:267/90) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00015 Date: 01/28/98 From: ZACKERY LANPHERE Time: 11:19pm \/To: DAVID HARTUNG (Read 0 times) Subj: FREE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL -=> In a message to DOUGLAS ANDERSON, DAVID HARTUNG said... <=- -=> Quoting Douglas Anderson to Mark Logsdon <=- DH>> IOW, the Feds already control the healthcare industry. ML> I thought about Clinton's recent proposal to reduce the age ML> for Medicare from age 65 to age 55. Once it is 55, then why ML> not reduce it to age 45? Then we can reduce it to age 35. ML> Why not make it age 25? Get the picture? Shazam, Hillary, ML> it's FREE healthcare for everyone! DA> Lower the medicare age enough and we can all go broke tomorrow! Heck, DA> why wait 7 years! DH> Ah but if everybody is on Medicare, they will be more willing to DH> raise the taxes to support the "free" medical care. Actually, Clinton's plan is to make the newly eligible persons pay quite a high price for the coverage they get so as to not create an additional burden to the Medicare program. The rates are so high that no one who actually needs them could pay for them anyway, so what's the use? No where in any speech or proposal have I seen the word "free" given in connection with the expanded coverage. -Zack --- * Origin: Joe's TV BBS - Whitehall, Ny - 518-499-0532 (1:267/90) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00016 Date: 01/28/98 From: KEITH KNAPP Time: 08:25pm \/To: MARK FORNOFF (Read 0 times) Subj: Echo Rules = 1/23/98 MF> Regardless, the following subjects are not permitted without MF> consent of the moderators. Other echoes exist for discussion MF> of the following topics: MF> Religion Gun control MF> Abortion Homosexuality I have a quick question. A thread about the separation of church and state has been ongoing, with a subtopic of science and creationism. I'm therefore presuming that you regard these as political and scientific discussions rather than being specifically religious. However, I have a few messages here awaiting replies on those topics, so I'm angling for an opinion from you. MF> 14. The moderators recognize that hard-and-fast rules may not MF> be completely appropriate in all circumstances. Therefore, MF> they reserve the right to enforce the "spirit" of the MF> rules as deemed appropriate by their determination, while MF> closely approximating the intent of the "letter" of the rules MF> in their efforts. Going by this, I would assume we can continue unless we hear from you. * SLMR 2.1a * . Wisdom consists in knowing when to avoid perfection. --- PCBoard (R) v15.4/M 5 Beta * Origin: * Binary illusions BBS * Albuquerque, NM * 505.897.8282 * (1:301/45) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00017 Date: 01/28/98 From: KEITH KNAPP Time: 08:25pm \/To: LARRY GAULT (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Religious costs. LG>LG>KK> Interestingly, one way the creationists have been trying to get LG>LG>KK> creationism taught in science classes is by arguing that scientism' LG>LG>KK> and 'humanism' are religions and therefore on a par with creationism. LG>LG>KK> If you are planning on using the above dictionary definition as an LG>LG>KK> authority, you might want to note that according to it, nothing in LG>LG>KK> science or humanism is religion. LG>LG> And interestingly enough, in Funk and Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary, LG>LG> humanism is defined as "a system or attitude in thought, religion, etc., LG>LG> in which human ideals and the perfection of personality are made central" LG>KK> It could be argued that the development of human political thought LG>KK> over the last 10,000 years is the development of the concept of LG>KK> the individual. People in many Stone-Age tribes of today do not LG>KK> feel themselves to be individuals but rather fractions of the tribe. LG>KK> In that sense, the US Constitution is the greatest and also the LG>KK> most radical document in human history, becuase it defines LG>KK> government as the consent of the governed, or the will of the LG> KK> people. AFAIK it is the first document in history to state that LG>KK> Government does not inhere in a father-figure or an alpha male. LG>We now at least know that you know how to keep your rope lighted and drawing LG>well. LG>You posted that "nothing in...humanism is religion". I merely pointed out LG>to you before you went into *this* rambling piece of work that the LG>dictionary definition of humnanism is a "system of...religion". See it ent LG>quite over your head. You might want to read your Funk and Wagnall's again. Humanism was there defined as a system or attitude that may be held by some within a religion. It does not follow that humanism is a system of religion. If you had followed the thred just one post earlier, you would have seen that Mr Plett posted a dictionary definition of religion from the year 1828 or '29. That definition stated that if a system of thought does not involve God, it is not religion. I pointed out to Mr Plett that if he intended to use that quote as an authority, he might want to know that it directly disagrees with the religious right's claim that humanism is a religion. LG>KK> Disoportunadamente, we humans seem to have the ability to make LG>KK> an ideology (religion) out of whatever belief we absorbed at LG>KK> the age of about 4 or 5. After that, we don't think it's LG>KK> 'religion' or 'belief,' we think it's 'reality.' LG>And I think you took yet another toke on the rope. The above was (though LG>admittedly of a mild nature) sarcasm. Guess it was lost on you. You have just implied that because I do not agree with your beliefs, therefore I must be consuming an illegal substance. If I am not mistaken, the correct term for this is arguing 'ad hominem.' * SLMR 2.1a * If crytography is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl --- PCBoard (R) v15.4/M 5 Beta * Origin: * Binary illusions BBS * Albuquerque, NM * 505.897.8282 * (1:301/45) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00018 Date: 01/28/98 From: KEITH KNAPP Time: 08:25pm \/To: ROBERT PLETT (Read 0 times) Subj: Religious costs. RP>KK>I'm afraid Mr Jefferson might disagree with you there. Here he was RP>KK>writing in the context of the Enlightenment, in which it was RP>KK>acknowledged that such thinkers as Galileo and Newton had produced RP>KK>ideas that outraged the orthodox Christianity of their time, yet RP>KK>actual observation had borne them out: RP>They outraged, not Christianity, but their scientist peers and RP>academics, who then used the power the Church had at the time in RP>attempts to discredit them and their discoveries. I'm reading an article here in the March 1993 issue of Sky and Telescope magazine. It's written by Owen Gingerich, who teaches the history of astronomy at the Harvard/Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Below, he quotes Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, who he refers to as Rome's leading theologian in those days: "For to say that assuming the Earth moves and the Sun stands still saves all the appearances better than eccentrics and epicycles is to speak well. This has no danger in it, and suffices for the mathematicians. But to affirm that the Sun is really fixed in the center of the heavens and that the Earth revolves very swiftly around the Sun is a dangerous thing, not only irritating the theologians and the philosophers, but injuring our holy faith and making the sacred scripture false." The Church didn't RP>think up charges against Galileo on its own, scientists and academia RP>brought those charges to the Church and the willing actors in it who RP>then ran with with them, Gingerich shows quite clearly that G's opposition were theologians, as did the Pope in a 1992 statement, referred to "....Galileo's judges, incapable of dissociating faith from an age-old cosmology...." RP>aided by Galileo's abrasive approach. You're certainly right about that. Had they RP>a Supreme Court like ours at their disposal they would've used it to the RP>same end in much the same way. We see similar being done today to RP>insure ideas contrary to evolution, and anyone who dares espouse such RP>ideas, are discredited and scorned, During the Arkansas 'Balanced Treatment' case, the creationists claimed that scientists were suppressing their work. When asked to provide evidence of papers rejected by peer-reviewed journals, they could not produce a single one. RP> and most certainly never, ever, RP>taught to anyone in public schools. If you want creationism taught in public-school science classes, the best approach would be to find some actual science to support it. Right now, it's just Genesis with the religious words removed. RP>Neither Galileo or Newton believed their discoveries contradicted RP>scripture, and in fact, their discoveries were not a contradiction of RP>them. The idea that the earth was the center of the universe is NOT in RP>scripture, Gingerich mentions Psalm 104 and that part in Joshua where the sun is made to stand still, as being used by Galileo's opposition. RP> nor was heliocentrism ever declared a heresy. That idea came RP>from the likes of Aristotle, "Master of Those Who Know", whose ideas RP>were accepted by the scientists of the time, and they in turn corrupted RP>the Church with those same ideas. We suffer similar in our time. Gingerich again: "In the end the pope's conservative advisers won out, and Galileo received an unexpectedly harsh sentence. He was forced to abjure a 'vehement suspicion of heresy' and to recite a humiliating confession. But in essence the verdict was imposed for disobeying orders, not heresy. One of the Vatican's leading apologists, Giambattista Riccioli, later wrote that the Copernican opinion had, as a result, become heretical, or at least erroneous...." * SLMR 2.1a * "... Mr. Reagan's plan is voodoo economics." George Bush --- PCBoard (R) v15.4/M 5 Beta * Origin: * Binary illusions BBS * Albuquerque, NM * 505.897.8282 * (1:301/45) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F1Y00019 Date: 01/28/98 From: MIKE ANGWIN Time: 08:20am \/To: ROBERT PLETT (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Dufus' Waterloo? RP>That so many could so easily overlook adultery, unrepentant, habitual RP>adultery at that, by the President of The United States, and I agree RP>that's the case, illustrates the selfish, degenerate condition of our RP>society. Adultery is a corrupting and evil thing. It is the breaking RP>of a vow, one sworn before God, and inevitably leads to the multiplying RP>of lies. Just as once one murders the next murder is easier, so too RP>does the breaking of marriage vows make breaking them again and breakin RP>all other vows easier, and the lies to cover the broken marriage vow RP>make the lies covering the breaking of public trust easier as well. RP>Criminal lies of purgery and obstruction of justice almost become a RP>given for the habitual adulterer who has great power and wishes to keep RP>it. They may become a given and a direct relationship may very well be able to the drawn between the two, but once the line between unacceptable and illegal behavior is crossed, termination of his position of public trust shifts from being morally mandated to a requirement of law. Private acts of sexual behavior between consenting adults while in many cases reprehensible, and most certianly not the standard a President of the United Sates ought provide as an example to others, do remain in the realm of personal conduct. I would hope an individual who assumes the presidency would recognize and accept both the legal and moral responsibilities of his office, but there is no compelling law to force him to do so. However, the commission of felonies, if these allegations have the merit I tend to believe they do, goes far beyond personal interpretations of acceptable personal behavior. These are allegations of crimes, high crimes, and acts, if they took place, that leave no question as to whether this individual ought be allowed to continue as President or expected to resign from the office with which he has been entrusted. RP>The plain fact of the matter is that Clinton's infidelity revealed by RP>Jennifer Flowers, and the quite obvious lie of Clinton's denial, was a RP>clear indicator of what was to come, and should have immediately RP>disqualified him in the eyes of the American voter from becoming RP>President. The mere existence of a task force to handle "bimbo RP>eruptions" in Clinton's campaign should have been enough. That it RP>didn't matter, and that so many continue insisting it's nobody's RP>business, speaks to a profound lack of moral character on the part of RP>the American voter, and I'm confident speaks to the desire of some that RP>their own infidelity, or propensity for it, be acceptable by society at RP>large. I am amazed at the public reation to that point. In 1992 Clinton went before the American people and made a passionate and emotional plea to believe him when he said that the acusations of Gennifer Flowers were false. Despite the taped evidence she provided, he was apparantly believed by the vast majority of Americans. Now, a few short years later, admist new pleas he be believed int he face of damning charges of infidelity, he himself admites he lied in 1992. Dole frequently used a phrase that ought be revived..."Where's the outrage?" Personally I could care less if Clinton slept with every man and woman in Arkansas. It might affect my vote, though he would have never had it to begin with based only on his political positions, but to stand in front of the American people and lie. I can't accept that and it amazes me how anyone, anywhere, can continue to defend a man's integrity after he has lied to them. Where's the outrage? RP>All this is a reminder that nations usually get the leaders they RP>deserve. That is a horrible thought... /\/\ike --- RBBSMail/386 v0.997 * Origin: (713) 664-0002 Lightspeed Systems - 24hrs (1:106/7.0)