Re: CLIPPER CHIP ON LIMBAUGH

On Mar 22,  7:31pm, Bruce Fancher wrote:
} You obviously don't understand much of the "loud-mouthed ass's psychology."  
} Limbaugh is very anti-statist and if he had a position on the issue 
} there's a good change it would be anti-clipper.  Last time I checked, 
} the clipper's biggest supporters were Clinton and Gore, who aren't exactly
} Rush's favorite people.

This is what would concern me.  Limbaugh seems to be big on knee-jerk
reactions.  Has he got some intelligent insights on the Clipper issue,
or is it simply another case of "Bill's fer it so I'm agin it!"  A
well-constructed argument might convince people on both sides, crying
"Hey, it's a LIBERAL idea, it MUST be bad!" is likely to lose more
support than it gains.

           -rocker

What worries me is the people who should be on our side who might say;"hey
If Rush is against it it must be good!"  Here's to hoping they have more 
sense than that, but Ihave to admit that if I hear Rush come out on one 
side of an issue I know nothing about, I look at the other side first.

BTW, is there a way to make this whole list anonymous, like having the 
reflector strip the headers or something?  Just curious.



On Wed, 23 Mar 1994, rocker - accept no substitutes wrote:
> 
> This is what would concern me.  Limbaugh seems to be big on knee-jerk
> reactions.  Has he got some intelligent insights on the Clipper issue,
> or is it simply another case of "Bill's fer it so I'm agin it!"  A
> well-constructed argument might convince people on both sides, crying
> "Hey, it's a LIBERAL idea, it MUST be bad!" is likely to lose more
> support than it gains.
> 
>            -rocker
>

Just to make sure you all know, good 'ol rush can be contacted at:
70277.2502@compuserve.com
I've written him a couple letters capping on clipper, and although I 
don't know weather he really learned from what I said, but he did mention 
the next day that he 'recently learned' that the majority of the 
net-users themselves oppose clipper... just a note.

70277.2502@compuserve.com  (rush limbaugh)

On Thu, 24 Mar 1994, paul braunbehrens wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> What worries me is the people who should be on our side who might say;"hey
> If Rush is against it it must be good!"  Here's to hoping they have more 
> sense than that, but Ihave to admit that if I hear Rush come out on one 
> side of an issue I know nothing about, I look at the other side first.
> 
> BTW, is there a way to make this whole list anonymous, like having the 
> reflector strip the headers or something?  Just curious.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 23 Mar 1994, rocker - accept no substitutes wrote:
> > 
> > This is what would concern me.  Limbaugh seems to be big on knee-jerk
> > reactions.  Has he got some intelligent insights on the Clipper issue,
> > or is it simply another case of "Bill's fer it so I'm agin it!"  A
> > well-constructed argument might convince people on both sides, crying
> > "Hey, it's a LIBERAL idea, it MUST be bad!" is likely to lose more
> > support than it gains.
> > 
> >            -rocker
> > 
> 
>

On Thu, 24 Mar 1994, Colin Orion Chandler wrote:

> Just to make sure you all know, good 'ol rush can be contacted at:
> 70277.2502@compuserve.com

	But Rush does not read mail from Internet users - at least he has 
stated that on his show before.  Did it bounce?  Or maybe it just went 
into his C$serve kill file.

-----
  Professor Terry Begley   '...just another face in a red jumpsuit...'
        Creighton University College of Business Administration
          2500 California Plaza   Omaha, NE  68178  USA, Earth
  Office: BA 225 (402) 280-2619  Office Fax: 280-2172  Home Fax: 556-5215

C'punks,

On Thu, 24 Mar 1994, Terrence M. Begley wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Mar 1994, Colin Orion Chandler wrote:
> 
> > Just to make sure you all know, good 'ol rush can be contacted at:
> > 70277.2502@compuserve.com
> 
> 	But Rush does not read mail from Internet users - at least he has 
> stated that on his show before. . .

I think you have this wrong.  What I believe he has said is that he has 
blocked some specific newsgroup or mail list.  It was something like:

			alt.rush.somethingorother

He blocked it because it wasn't personal e-mail, just the postings of some
anti-Limbaugh listeners who bitched about each show after it aired.

 S a n d y

C'punks,

On Wed, 23 Mar 1994, rocker wrote:

> On Mar 22,  7:31pm, Bruce Fancher wrote:
> } . . .  Last time I checked, 
> } the clipper's biggest supporters were Clinton and Gore, who aren't exactly
> } Rush's favorite people.
> 
> This is what would concern me.  Limbaugh seems to be big on knee-jerk
> reactions.  Has he got some intelligent insights on the Clipper issue,
> or is it simply another case of "Bill's fer it so I'm agin it!"  A
> well-constructed argument might convince people on both sides, crying
> "Hey, it's a LIBERAL idea, it MUST be bad!" is likely to lose more
> support than it gains. . .

The reason I posted the Rush/Clipper post was because I do listen to 
him.  Three things need to be noted about subsequent posts:

1)  It is clear that the knee jerks reactions are coming from folks who 
have never listened to Limbaugh for long enough to know what the hell 
they are talking about.  I think they are reacting to the untrue flames 
uttered by his detractors.

2)  He doesn't just disagree with Bill and Hillary.  He strongly 
supported the Prez on NAFTA, for example.  He is very clever and does 
some excellent original thinking on important issues--like Clipper.

3)  All of this back biting is truly irrelevant to this list.  Who cares 
if Rush practices "hate radio" or not?  The germain facts are these:
	a)  Rush is against Clipper
	b)  A huge number of people listen to him
	c)  His listeners tend to give his opinions great weight

Do we really need to "qualify" Mr. Limbaugh as enemy of our enemy?

 S a n d y