From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #219 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Sunday, August 6 2000 Volume 09 : Number 219 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Brazil (0% Robyn Content) ["Paul Christian Glenn" ] Re: spare time [Eb ] Re: Politics Pinheads and Frank Zappa [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: spare time ["Noe Shalev" ] Re: Weenie-ism (A scenario - I need help) [Jeff Dwarf ] VH1's top 100 rock 'n' roll moments [selected] [Eb ] Re: Weenie-ism (A scenario - I need help) ["Proctology Now" ] Re: Weenie-ism (A scenario - I need help) [steve ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 19:29:04 -0500 From: "Paul Christian Glenn" Subject: Re: Brazil (0% Robyn Content) > "Brazil" a Sci-Fi movie? I dunno, I would probably call it a twisted comedy, but it was in the sci-fi section at the video store. But, yeah, the tired sci-fi cliches are definitely present. > I can't think of any elements of the film that > would qualify it as such... besides that it takes place in the future, but > it's a future that isn't "futuristic" in typical Sci-Fi fashion, no cool > flying cars, lasers and technology. Where are the Sci-Fi cliches? 1. The oppressive totalitarian government (as you noted) 2. A society where everyone and everything is reduced to Information 3. A subversive rebellion working against the OTG. 4. A clueless "hero" who, more or less accidentally, gets mixed up in it all Okay, so that's not a hundred cliches , but it was enough to make me yawn. > I guess > the opressive, totalitarian government could qualify as one, but overall I'd > say "Brazil" is an extremely unconventional movie to have come out of a > Hollywood studio. Certainly. But "unconventional" doesn't = "good". > I think it's a very good movie, especially if you like > black humor and you hate happy endings - and that should apply to anyone on > a Robyn Hitchcock list!!!! :). Heh. I don't have a problem with happy endings per se. I just hate inappropriate or contrived resolutions, and a lot of happy endings tend to be exhibit those traits. _Brazil_ wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but it *did* feel contrived and it *was* boring. Paul Christian Glenn pcg@mailandnews.com Eon Chamber http://eonchamber.port5.com Currently Reading: "The Pillars of the Earth" by Ken Follett "And now, for my climactic act, look yonder! I will first make a death-defying leap from the Loop-de-Loop Ramp, spinning and hurtling my body through the flaming Circle of Doom, and landing comfortably in the imitation-leather easy chair, while my chickens do their impression of Tony Bennett singing the _William Tell Overture_! Please, I must have silence!" - The Great Gonzo ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:56:36 -0700 From: "Russ Reynolds" Subject: Re: Klaatu > Of course, we now know that the only > real Klaatu/Fabs connection is with the movie "The Day The Earth Stood > Still" (see Ringo's "Goodnight Vienna" album cover photo) and not with > the Canadian band. I remember reading at the time a whole list of clues that made a connection. One was the mention in "Sub Rosa Subway" (not to be confused with Red Rose Speedway?) of thunder shaking the earth in Washington, which is where the Beatles played their US concert. The other one that sticks out is the line "Jonesy Turned the Tide" in the supposed Harrison Song (which I've forgotten the name of but which sounds so much like "You Showed Me" by the Turtles that it was not entirely inconceivable that it could have been Harrison plagiarizing again)...as the story goes the 12 year old boy who walked into Brian Epstien's record shop and asked for a copy of "My Bonnie", thereby changing the course of history, was named Raymond Jones. And supposedly in the movie "The Day The Earth Stands Still" (which of course the name Klaatu is taken from) the alien guy says he is from "Venus and Mars". OOOOH! That's it--I'm convinced all over again. - -rUss ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 17:57:44 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: spare time >http://www.egroups.com/files/billybragg/Announcements/ruling080200.html Yeesh. They need an official committee ruling on whether someone can call another "childish"?? If you want see more niggling weenies with too much time on their hands, try checking the Egroups archive of the *Badfinger* list, sometime. Paaaathetic. Eb Superfluous plugs for two fascinating websites I recently found: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/wilkens/Index.html http://www.awn.com/heaven_and_hell/index.htm (possibly of interest to comic-book weenies ;)) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:47:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Politics Pinheads and Frank Zappa Noe Shalev wrote: >>I know this isn't directly Gore's responsibility but I'll never >>forget Tippers crusade to put warning labels on records. > Is it not? "On september 19, 1985, the Senate Commerce, Technology > and Transportation Committee held a day of highly publicized hearings > to discuss the PMRC's proposal [i.e. ID records] (a kangaroo court-- > five of the committee's members had wives in the PMRC" (The Real > Frank Zappa Book, 267). > >>The only good thing about that episode was Frank Zappa's testimony at >>the congressional hearings. i don't know, i kinda liked John Denver showing up, and the committee's faces going alabaster when he started defending all the "dirty" artists, by reminding them of the controversy about "rocky Mountain High," etc. > and for a little bitching: Don't you all feel strange bout Gail Zappa > becoming Tippers close friend? > > As for my self I'm in favour of Tipper's two 12 year old neices ;-))) > > > All the best (and so is music) > NOE > ===== "Life is just a series of dogs." -- George Carlin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 09:00:53 +0200 From: "Noe Shalev" Subject: Re: spare time >If you want see more niggling weenies with too much time on their hands, >try checking the Egroups archive of the *Badfinger* list, sometime. >Paaaathetic. > Y can't you respect other people codes of behaviour? this is very untolorente. they have theyr'e rules they won't to apply and enforce them' nobody is forced into those set of rules. I was expecting a feg to respect other sub-culturesand not to be abbusive offencive towards them. this time I'll just warn you, next time I won't be so easy, I'll offocialy warn you. swear to god I will - don't try me. GOTCHA!! ;-))) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 23:09:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Weenie-ism (A scenario - I need help) steve wrote: >etews sed: >> and NOT because he "fucked up" or "sold out" or "got pushed >> around" by those big, mean republicans. actually, he was more duped. from day one, they screeched "liberal" at him, as if that was necessarily a bad thing, and he has gone out of his way to prove it false (not that it was ever true). and even though he was right to do so, announcing day one that gays would no longer be discriminated against in the military only fed the republican flames. and clinton backing down on day two told them how easily he was going to be to manipulate; he was their bitch from day one, and they used him (and his two big flaws: his sluttiness, and his desparate need to please those he can never please whether it's the republicans or his alcoholic step-father or whoever) and made him their bitch. the fact that he wasn't a real liberal made it much easier, because he never felt the need to defend liberalism, and more importantly, how liberalism can be just as patriotic as conservatism. not because it was him, but because it's important to have a broad spectrum of ideas flying around. > The simple fact is that Clinton has been working against a Republican > congress for the last six years. In that context, he probably did a > little selling out, but he didn't get pushed around. In fact, he did > a good bit of pushing around himself. But he did fuck up - he > couldn't resist getting a blowjob from an idiot bimbo - and that gave > power to his enemies *and* created a political climate in which an > empty suit like George W. Bush is considered to be a viable candidate > for President. of course, he had to deal with a republican congress because he spent two years trying to prove he wasn't a liberal rather than governing, so that's his own fucking fault too. and he sent his political attack dogs after the wrong enemies; instead of impugning Paula Jones, they should have gone after the American Spectator and the AK trooper who claimed he and Jones had an affair. he should have settled that case immediately, with the condition that jones sue the AS for libel (as she would have had she not hired lawyers who were more interested bringing down the president than in representing their client. in fact, didn't the AS refer her to her lawyer when she called them to ask for a retraction?). as for monica, the boy is a ho. > >do you really want to line up for four more years? > > Vs. a Bush administration? FUCK yes! > > Not letting the perfect be the enemy of the fairly good - here's to whoever successfully bombs the debates and maims them both sufficiently...... ===== "Life is just a series of dogs." -- George Carlin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:01:45 EDT From: BLATZMAN@aol.com Subject: Night Music Last night I wrote the best song ever written. Unfortunately, I was asleep, and promised myself I would remember it when I woke up. Heck, I don't even remember the dream in which it was written... Anyone ever remember those great tunes you write in your sleep? Dave ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 10:51:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: coldplay and gore > From: "Andrew D. Simchik" [...] > and fruitier. Coldplay don't impress me at all from what little I've > heard...yet another sub-Radiohead/sub-Manics flavorless New Britpop [...] So I bought Coldplay's _Parachutes_ for Margaret yesterday. Another listen in the car confirmed my Radiohead/Manics comparisons (and I'd throw in Jeff Buckley, if that's not redundant), but it sounded better this time around. I think I just dislike the lead single ("Yellow") but the other songs are pretty good, and the whole thing sounds classy if a bit dull. > From: "Proctology Now" [...] > bill clinton is the worst president in american history -- and NOT > because > he "fucked up" or "sold out" or "got pushed around" by those big, mean > republicans. do you really want to line up for four more years? [...] I don't quite understand how this works. First of all, there have been a lot of bad presidents in American history, and I guess I don't know what makes him worse than, say, Harding or Taft. Second of all, it sounds like you're ascribing Clinton's egregiousness to his personal failings (if it's not the Republicans) -- how does that translate into Gore being just as bad? Or is it the Democratic party itself that's beyond hope, and somehow worse (I don't buy that any more than Steve does) than the Republicans at this point? > perhaps not. robyn himself has declared on many an occasion that the > wangbo > era was when the soft boys was "at its best". What is the "wangbo era"? And, as long as I'm asking what should be stupid questions, what is "Raw Cuts"? [jbj cited:] > http://www.egroups.com/files/billybragg/Announcements/ruling080200.html That's a scream. It can't possibly be in earnest. Drew ===== Andrew D. Simchik: drew at stormgreen dot com http://www.stormgreen.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 13:41:12 -0700 From: Eb Subject: VH1's top 100 rock 'n' roll moments [selected] "Two, four, six, eight! Who does this list overrate?" Eb 5. MOTOWN 25 (Michael Jackson does "Billie Jean," etc.) 11. MICHAEL JACKSON'S "Thriller" video world premieres on MTV. 19. WE ARE THE WORLD is taped as an HBO special and MTV video immediately after the American Music Awards 24. THE JACKSON FIVE, led by brother Michael, make their national TV debut on HOLLYWOOD PALACE. 40. MICHAEL JACKSON and LISA MARIE PRESLEY appear on PRIMETIME LIVE 47. MICHAEL JACKSON'S "Black & White" video premieres simultaneously on 3 networks: FOX, MTV, BET. 63. MICHAEL JACKSON'S PEPSI COMMERCIAL -- Pyrotechnic mishap causes Jackson's hair to ignite and sends him to the hospital with severe burns. 8. THE MTV VIDEO MUSIC AWARDS launch; MADONNA rolls on stage singing "Like A Virgin." 27. MADONNA'S premiere of "Justify My Love" video -- MTV bans the racy video filmed at the Royal Monceau Hotel in Paris. 44. MADONNA'S PEPSI COMMERCIAL airs only once due to the controversial scene where she kisses a black saint. 69. MADONNA offends America swearing repeatedly on LATE NIGHT WITH DAVID LETTERMAN. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 14:14:24 PDT From: "Proctology Now" Subject: Re: Weenie-ism (A scenario - I need help) i've accepted (for the purposes of discussion) *your* "angle of attack" (viz., the sole determining factor in deciding who to vote for president is which will ensure the right to have an abortion). IF you're going to vote this way, then the record demonstrates that you should vote republican. if this is counterintuitive (or counter to the parties' rhetoric), then so be it. >as for "horseshit": i cannot think of a single issue -- MOST ESPECIALLY >including civil rights -- for which one could say greater damage to the >cause of justice was suffered in the reagan/bush years than the clinton >years. See the above.> what's that supposed to mean? i point out that civil liberties have suffered much greater erosion during the clinton years than they did during the reagan/bush years, and this argument is supposed to somehow be "so far out there" that it "lacks merit"? if the truth lacks merit, then which "angle" would you prefer? <>bill clinton is the worst president in american history - Maybe three percent of the American populace would agree with your analysis. A much larger percentage might think he's the worst president for other reasons.> you've taken that figure out of thin air, of course. i don't know what percentage would agree that he's the worst, but i *do* know that the american populace has in poll after poll exhibited a decided social democratic bent. yes, the scandinavian model that the american public favours is quite far to the right of *my* ideal; but it's also quite far to the *left* of the current american polity. despite fairly overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (even for your single issue.) meanwhile, in the real world, the democrats deliver the goods. < >do you really want to line up for four more years? Vs. a Bush administration? FUCK yes!> you're a flat-earther, steve. but i'll tell ya what. there's one person on this list (or so it seems to me) who stands head and shoulders above the rest in the "activism" category, and whose opinion i therefore respect immensely. if this person tells me to vote for gore, then i will. honest! so, mr. derosa, feel free to set me straight. bingo. i've no doubt that the republicans would *liked* to have passed nafta, or the salvage logging rider, or welfore "reform"; or have gutted the delaney clause; or what have you. but they didn't, and the democrats did. we can argue about *why* this is so. but that's kind of beside the point. alan "wangbo" davies was the original soft boys guitarist. asked later why he was replaced by kimberley, robyn attributed it to greed. as if (his analogy) the stones had recruited hendrix solely because of his pyrotechnical abilities, not paying attention to the chemistry of the band. a re-release of the Wading Through A Ventilator EP. . ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:08:44 -0400 From: The Great Quail Subject: Hat in the ring? I can't hold out any more -- I have to make a political post, and I'm sorry if this will offend Cappy, Viv, Mark, and the other List Greens & Naderites. I know a lot of you will violently disagree with me, and that's fine. I doubt we'll change our opinions, so I am not planning to descend into a political debate. I just want to make my own position clear. I DESPISE George W. Bush. I am not wild about Gore, nor do I do cartwheels over the Democrats or our two-party system. But I hate Bush, I despise the religious right, and I am afraid of the next few supreme court choices. (Additionally, I am not very wild about the Green party, either -- sorry, I agree the most with Chris gross on this one. Some sound ideas mixed with some overly-idealistic and impractical Marxism and political correct skylarking.) (I can *feel* Eddie wincing.) I think we all know, deep in our consciousness, Ralph Nader will not win. No third party candidate currently with his or her hat in the ring will win. Even Ross Perot didn't stand a chance, and he mounted the most successful third-party campaign in a long time. Do I like this? No. Do I think that if everyone got off their duff and voted for Candidate X, would Candidate X win? Sure. But that is not going to happen -- especially in a time like this, where the general feeling of American "contentment" is enough that the only two candidates to ooze to the surface and be selected are wonky jellyfish. There is no crises being perceived by the general populace of Americans to the extent that a third party candidate is viable. That's the way it is, Realpolitik and all. NADER WILL NOT WIN. Only Gore can beat Bush. So I will vote for Gore, Tipper and all. In fact, I do believe that anyone who votes for Nader is basically casting a vote for Bush. (Except people like Eddie, who not only *hates* the Democrats even more than he hates the Republicans, but also believes in the Green platform. But in my [very biased] opinion, anyone casting a vote for Nader as a mere protest; or merely because they aren't 'happy' with Gore, is essentially casting a vote for Bush. And lately I've had a few people tell me that they "know" Gore will get elected anyway, so their are just clearing their conscience with a symbolic vote, secretly "knowing" that Bush won't win. Well, that sort of angers me a bit, not just because it leaves people like me to do the dirty work, but because I think this election will be fairly close, and if Bush wins....!!! Eeek!) So, yes, I will vote the dreaded "lesser of two evils;*" in fact, I'd be happy just to cast a vote that will CANCEL a vote for that mindless, moronic, snide, shallow, silverspoonfed frat boy of a walking political void the GOP has selected to run for the presidency. And that's enough to put a Gore button on my coat.... Hell, if I voted my conscience only, I'd write in myself & Chris Gross on the Libertarian ticket. And Steve can be Secretary of State. And LJ can be a pizza-bearing intern. - --Quail *Note: Yes, I know Eddie thinks that the GOP is less evil than the Democrats; I disagree, and I make this statement knowingly, willingly; fingers crossed that Eddie will still let me be Minister of Concerts in Enola after his Revolution..... - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Great Quail, K.S.C. (riverrun Discordian Society, Kibroth-hattaavah Branch) http://www.w-rabbit.com/gerbils.html "People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history." --Vice President Dan Quayle ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:32:16 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: Weenie-ism (A scenario - I need help) Proctology Now: >.....i *do* know that the american populace has in poll after poll >exhibited a decided social democratic bent. yes, the scandinavian >model that the american public favours is quite far to the right >of *my* ideal; but it's also quite far to the *left* of the current >american polity. The "Contract With America" polled well. I would guess that these polls tested individual issues or policies without characterizing them in any way. Say the words Scandinavian Model or Social Democrat to a vast majority of Americans and they'll either shoot you or run away screaming. The polls right now show Gore at 40%. That's the Democratic base vote. He's got to figure out how to get 11% out of the middle. That's the people who think they might vote for Bush because he "seems like a nice guy" and will "bring honor back to the White House." Not exactly policy wonks. And not a group that votes for somebody that they think is a socialist. We can go back and forth, me calling Eddie a utopian and Eddie calling me a flat-earther. Bottom line, I think the Democrats are somewhat better than the Republicans and he doesn't. We both think the other's reasoning is lacking. Back in 1972, I though the American people would come to their senses and vote for McGovern. It didn't quite work out that way. There is no spoon - Steve _______________ We're all Jesus, Buddha, and the Wizard of Oz! - Andy Partridge ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #219 *******************************