From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #224 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, August 8 2000 Volume 09 : Number 224 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Gored, Bushwhacked, or Nader of the above? [Vivien Lyon ] skylarking [Jim Davies ] Re: eb all over the world ["Proctology Now" ] Re: I hope I don't regret answering this, but ... [Eb ] Re: eb all over the world [Tom Clark ] Re: here's the exact quote [Tom Clark ] Re: here's the exact quote ["Proctology Now" ] where's wangbo? hell, where's the democracy? [Ken Ostrander ] Proctology Now ["brian nupp" ] Re: Broxbourne-Waltham [digja611@student.otago.ac.nz] christ, you make us look like we've got a democracy ["jbranscombe@compuse] Re: where's wangbo? hell, where's the democracy? [Capuchin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:10:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Vivien Lyon Subject: Re: Gored, Bushwhacked, or Nader of the above? Sorry to keep this rolling, everyone. Maybe we should start a fegmaniax.us.politics list. - --- Bayard wrote: > But there are only so many of "us," Viv. About 280 million of us, at last count. Can you really see any Republican voting > for Nader, > given how he wants to reduce the military? (Yes I am > generalizing. As I > recall, GSS is a Republican and does not seem to be voting for > Bush.) Bingo. Let us not forget that republicans are not one and all crazy evil bastards. There are many republicans who are nothing but appalled and embarrassed by Bush's bid for presidency. He reflects badly on them, don't you think? > My other Republican friend insists that she has to vote for > Bush or she > "won't be allowed to come home." That's just pathetic. > It seems the Democrats are evil and insincere and the > Republicans are evil > and crazy. Nader, I fear, is just not cut out for the job. > What is Joe Voter to do? Explain why you fear Nader is not 'cut out' for the job, please- and why Gore or Bush is (presumably). But then, I > think Jeme has > stated that he knows what will happen. (And you said we > weren't omniscient!) Jeme certainly isn't omniscient. Why, just the other day he repeated that old chesnut about Mt. Erebus being responsible for the ozone hole, when that has long been proven to be industry-sponsored bullshit. > most simply think of him as the man who killed the Corvair, > no? > Simplistic - but most people are simpletons when it comes to > politics. Actually, although Unsafe at Any Speed is quite famous, I'm sure more people know him now from PIRG (Public Interest Research Group), which does fantastic work all over the country. > But bunches of people voted for Perot and nothing changed. > Did it? I think it did. It made people hungry for a real third party in this nation. The Reform Party doesn't fit the bill, but it shows that people are truly sick of the duopoly. > People looked back a few years later and said, "man, that was > crazy." I would argue that it wasn't the third party idea that seemed crazy, but that Perot himself was hard to take seriously after awhile (or almost immediately, in some cases). > Nader is > not Perot, but how will/would Nader getting 15% change > anything? Matching funds for the Green Party? I know that doesn't thrill many of you, but I would be ecstatic to see that happen. Remember- success draws you closer to the center. If the Greens came just a bit closer in, I think they'd have a platform that even Chris G might find compelling. Maybe > he'll get more next time? Maybe people will wake up and see > that they > don't have to vote for one of two lousy candidates? That > would be > wonderful - and I hope it happens - but I fear the "good guys" > just don't > have enough money. The key word in that last fragment is 'fear.' Fear WILL prevent change. Fear will keep us right where we are- trapped in a system that we know can't lead to any good, hoping against hope that it doesn't lead to too much more harm. It is time to break out of the cycle of fear. Vote your hopes, not your fears- Vivien __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 12:28:06 -0400 From: ~twofangs / randi~ & ~tjf / tim~ Subject: technology and randi it seems tim downloaded icq while i was gone, which is fine except, i don't want to share ... yes i'm a suck ... so here is the number ... remember i don't know how to use this yet ... ............. 65085748 ............. fading back into yesterday before tomorrow comes ... randi *what scares you most will set you free* ~ robyn hitchcock ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 10:40:05 -0700 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: I hope I don't regret answering this, but ... At 03:54 PM 8/7/00 -0700, Capuchin wrote: >Wow! Look everybody, I agree with Jason! I agree with Jason! >WOW! Hmmmm. I don't really find this all that odd. Based on past conversations, your recent political posts and these numbers: >I believe in about 75% of what McCain said, 60% of >Nader's words, 6% of what comes out of Gore's mouth and maybe 3% from >Bush... ...I'd say we agree somewhere between 2% and 98%(*) of the time. Not to re-open discussion on any of these issues, but I know we disagree on LA, Napster, guns (I think) and whether or not Christina Applegate is a hotty, but beyond that I bet there are probably a lot of areas where our opinions are quite similar. >Wait... he didn't say "because Nixon's dead"? Jesus Christ. Exactly. Much of the Comedy Central convention "coverage" that I saw centered around catching people off guard by purposefully asking extremely stupid questions - for example, asking Newt Gingrich if he was voting for Bush or Gore, or asking Ralph Nader which state he was a delegate from. But back to the real issues - I am also one of those that easily tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi, but I rarely drink either. I prefer unsweetened ice tea. And speaking of sugar, according to www.algore.com, Jewel is performing at the historic official announcement of Gore's running mate in Tennessee. - --Jason "the unexcitable extremist" Thornton (*)+/- 3% "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:24:12 -0400 From: nyquilathotep Subject: upcoming on wfmu fegs.... a few interesting things coming up on wfmu this month. if you can't tune it in on your radio (91.1 fm in northern new jersey and new york city, 90.1 in the lower hudson valley), there's realaudio at or windows media at . first, for the quail and chris: >Friday, August 11th, 3-6pm >ST37 >Neo-Hawkwind-ish loud psych-lords from Texas. On Scott Williams' show. >http://www.wfmu.org/Playlists/Scott/ for doug and me: >Thursday, August 17, 9 AM-noon >ELIZABETH ELMORE >The Chicago singer/songwriter has gone solo, but not quiet--she'll be >fierce, personal and electric, and trying out some new songs. On Rhubarb >Cake with Douglas. http://www.wfmu.org/Playlists/Douglas for me: >Friday, August 18th, 3-6pm >SKYWAVE >Chainsaw guitars, crashing waves of feedback with driving drums taking you >for the ride of your >life. Huge soundscapes in the vein of My Bloody Valentine and the Jesus and >Mary Chain. Harmonies that seem like you've been singing them all of your >life. Caught in a dream that you will not want to wake up from. On Scott >Williams's show. http://www.wfmu.org/Playlists/Scott/ for jbj: >Friday, August 25th, 6-7pm >JACK RABID AND RON RANCID >Jack Rabid (music writer, Editor and Publisher "The Big Takeover", former >member "Even Worse", current member, "Springhouse" and"Last Burning Embers") >and Ron Rancid (The Nihilistics) discuss the lasting impact of Punk Rock, >specifically the "Second Wave" of New York Punk and Hardcore. They'll also >take your calls promise not to puke on you. On Aerial View with Chris T. >http://www.wfmu.org/~christ/ all times EDT (+5). enjoy! woj ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:31:01 +0100 (BST) From: Jim Davies Subject: skylarking Absolutely wonderful. Well-organised. A lot of work by Robyn and co. - climbing over locks, running alongside playing (not so easy with a double bass: run, put it down, play, run, put it down, play). Some of the best fades I've ever heard. Beautiful moment with butterfly. The second boat had more songs on the way down, so the first boat got the lock treatment on the way back. We were satiated. The cream teas were great, but we couldn't eat them all. The blazing sunshine picnic left us full to the brim. Neat picnic. Tony Blackman. Amazing. Only word for him. We open some chilled champagne, thinking a little over the top. He hands us suitable glasses. And drops in strawberries. Many other wonderful people. A grand day out. Favourite songs: Ride, on the towpath, many did - Robyn dodging bicycles. Chinese Bones with fingers. Bass, in your face. Guitarists dancing about. Low volume. Made it rather magical, actually. Lots of people really grateful. Robyn apologised about cost, but seen by everyone as a complete bargain. Cheaper than flying to San Francisco (but you don't get to meet Viv and Jeme). About the same price as an ordinary London gig, with booking fee. For those of you who weren't there, I could recommend a trip down the Lea Valley. So pretty. So calm. But you'd be asking: where are the musicians at the locks? where are the people stretched out on the grass? where is the sunshine? They're gone. Yeah, only the scones remain. Subject: Re: eb all over the world you're really out to lunch, dude. big business couldn't even clean up its own ass without the protection of the state. all this "meddling" by "pointy-headed" bureaucrats you purport to detest was actively *sought* by big business. from the creation of the ftc and the fed, right up to the new deal itself -- big business come crying to the taxpayers to bail them out of trouble. fuck, what do you think the british raj was, for chrissakes? british textiles couldn't compete with indian textiles, so the british *state* goes in, takes over the country, places all sorts of crazy restrictions on indian industry, and david ricardo nods his approval. doublethink city, baby. happens all the time. hell, it's happening as we speak. i'm sure you read about it in the papers on the weekend. california's electricity was deregulated a few years back, and everything's now totally, totally fucked up. the papers are calling it "the biggest crisis in [gray davis'] tenure". and guess who's supposed to sort it all out? the *federal* government, of course. here in washington, it's a little more subtle. the same fucking pipsqueak who got i-695 passed has a new one on the ballot which would mandate 90% of all transportation funds be spent on roads. he won't rest, it seems, until the entire state is paved over (at taxpayer expense, natch). you couldn't *dream* of a bigger corporate welfare boondoggle -- yet it's being couched as *relief* from government. i'm actually thinking of sending an op-ed to the Seattle Times (which they'd never print, of course) proposing that we take eyman (that's the pipsqueak) at his word and privatise the whole lot. tot up all the billions of dollars spent by the taxpayers on road, parking lot, and parking garage construction through the years, and sell the entire works to him. with this windfall; and with the annual savings not having to pay for road maintenance, state patrol/enforcement, emergency services (this may sound cruel, but it couldn't be a bigger health hazard than cigarettes -- maybe we'd have to put a billboard on each on-ramp stating that so-and-so had determined that "driving is hazardous to your health"), licensing/bureaucracy, etc.; it seems the state could easily enact any number of incredibly efficient public transportation schemes. couple that with the astronomical "user fees" (aka tolls) that pipsqueakco. would be forced to charge once "liberated" from state subsidisation, and we'd quickly see how "convenient" and how "inalienable" a right operating a motor-car is. maybe not, but they do have a bully pulpit -- should they choose to use it (for something other than blaming saddam hussein for all the world's ills). steeper erosion during the clinton years than during the reagan/bush years. i just think we should look at it practically. many republicans may desire total prohibition, but they're not going to get it -- even steve doesn't think they will (except in the worst case scenario). meanwhile, even though it's nominally legal, it's getting much more difficult to obtain during a democratic administration. chomsky's cited it, but i can't recall in which book. here's a kind of interesting link: . but if costs aren't measured accurately (or if artificial methods of reducing costs are sought), then isn't it just a charade? <"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" kind of system. But that system isn't socialism...> it's not how *marx* defined socialism. i used to call myself a communist, uisng marx's definition of communism. but i just got so sick of having to explain that just because the soviet union *claimed* to be communist didn't mean they really *were* that i grudgingly backed off. but i still don't accept marx's definition of socialism -- are we confused yet? i do agree with you, actually: we can skip the "dictatorship of the proletariat" bit. "capitalism" isn't about free markets, really -- it's about exploiting your (stolen) capital and (stolen) labour to make a profit. a violation of market principles? centralisation. ah, but the *sphinx* stinks! KEN "Even uncle Eddie thinks that's funny" THE KENSTER ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 13:22:56 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: I hope I don't regret answering this, but ... >>I believe in about 75% of what McCain said, 60% of >>Nader's words, 6% of what comes out of Gore's mouth and maybe 3% from >>Bush... Maybe we should draw up similar pie charts, for how we feel about various Feglist subscribers. ;) I'm seeing that "Girls Room" tour tonight -- maybe I'll get a free pin at the door, if I flash a Stayfree product. I'm going solely to see Amy Correia, of course, so I may not stay for the full show. She goes on first. Speaking of shows, it looks like I'm seeing *The Who* on the 14th, at the Hollywood Bowl (my first trip to the Bowl, ever!) and I'm pretty darn excited. Sure, it'll be retro, but.... Eb, 62% believable ;) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:09:08 -0700 From: "Randy R." Subject: Politics, shmolitics First off, I used to work in politics. I lived in DC for 6 weeks and worked on Peter Franchots campaign for Senate. I was young and idealistic. It took many years after that for reality to set in. He promised me a job in the Senate once he was elected, but after he lost, he treated me like a stranger. Politicians suck, dood. I wearied about Minneapolis many years after that, trying to figure out what "politicians" really want. Some are sincere. Some are power hungry. Some just want to wear a suit and tie and make "important" decisions. My beliefs are from waaaay out in right field. I believe in Pat Buchanen for his stance on immigration and his "America first" belief. That's it. Otherwise, he's a racist idiot. I believe in Ralph Nader for his stance on corporate welfare. I believe in John McCains love for his country. Can you imagine being bayonetted in the groin? THE GROIN people! He could have went home from that POW camp, but he refused. And then they broke his shoulder, and threw him in solitary for around, ohhh, 4 years. Though I don't appreciate some of his racial slurs, I appreciate his love for this fukked up America. Someone has to do it, right? I like Jesse "The Mind" Ventura. Not the brightest bulb in the closet (certainly no intellectual) but wants things done, and somehow manages to do it. He hates red tape. I think we need that in government. Someone who doesn't mince words and knows exactly where he's coming from. Again, I have problems with some of his policies, but I can appreciate his candor. Hmmm, lets see here. If we can combine the mental toughness of Jesse Ventura, the love of country of John McCain, the sound fiscal policies of Ralph Nader, the libido of Bill Clinton, and the good looks of Al Gore-Hey, we've got a candidate. Politics shmolotics. I'll just watch The West Wing. I get too worked up over "real" politics, if there ever was such a thing. Vince "Geddy Lee for President" The Vincester ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:03:49 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: eb all over the world On 8/7/2000 6:42 PM, Proctology Now wrote: >--In the U.S., 84% of all counties have no abortion services; of rural >counties, 95% have no services. Specifically: - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:08:06 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: here's the exact quote On 8/7/2000 6:56 PM, Proctology Now wrote: >You know, it was like television: Kimberley went >into overkill. Does he really mean "Television" - the Lloyd/Verlaine interaction? - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:26:46 PDT From: "Proctology Now" Subject: Re: here's the exact quote < >You know, it was like television: Kimberley went >into overkill. Does he really mean "Television" - the Lloyd/Verlaine interaction?> ah, the sentence suddenly makes sense! (exposing my ignorance of musical history yet again....) ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 17:32:50 -0400 From: Ken Ostrander Subject: where's wangbo? hell, where's the democracy? >What happened to Wangbo? ok, where's wangbo now? >Is no one excited about ending the war on drugs? all the romance will be drained away...but at least we'll have all that money to buy more useless stealth bombers. why shouldn't the CIA have it's own sources of income anyhow? >And its not the corporations fault. It >didn't happen overnight, but the companies are trying to do what >nearly everyone else is - survive, comfortably. oh yeah, the poor, misunderstood corporations. just trying to survive with their huge profit margins and corporate non-accountablity. "comfortably"? i think i'm gonna be sick. >Environmentalism isn't "lefty" as much as it's realistic and >practical and just being sensible about resources (a very capitalistic >thing, if you ask me) capitalistic environmentalism? i don't see this. i see companies squandering resources for a profit with no thought for the long term effects or even the short term. >assuming you blame Clinton and Gore for everything listed above, what I >don't understand is why you said the Republicans would be better. Where's >the evidence for that? if the fact that rowe vs. wade was drafted by a nixon supreme court nominee isn't enough; there's the fact that several republican nominees have turned out to be 'closet liberals' while democratic nominees have been very conservative. perhaps an opposing congress might have a lot to do with this; but it is well established trend. >as long as abortion is still sometimes legal there is always something >worse, namely, total prohibition. then there's the fact that most large hospitals these days are being run by religious organizations, shuting out planned parenthood programs and forcing women (and doctors) to go to clinics where they become easy targets of anti-abortion protesters. everytime i go by the local clinic here in boston, where there was a shooting a few years back, there are a bunch of old people milling around the entrance toting their ugly fetus photos. >Expect a further erosion of your basic freedoms, whatever the outcome of >this election... as long as serious menaces like Hillary Clinton (who has >been a major threat to the rights of the accused) have a chance of >obtaining Senate seats, I wouldn't really expect much along the lines of >protection of personal liberties. judging from the reaction of police in philadelphia, there isn't much to protect. COINTELPRO by any other name... >>I dunno about that -- the President (to say nothing of the Vice "pitcher of >>warm piss" President) doesn't haven't infinite power. > >maybe not, but they do have a bully pulpit -- should they choose to use it >(for something other than blaming saddam hussein for all the world's ills). like, maybe, preventing the south africans from getting much-needed emergency medication cheaply to help stem the overwhelming AIDS epidemic; making sure that american pharmaceutical companies make their big-ass profits? this is unconscionable. ken "everybody knows the fight was fixed" the kenster np. gung ho patti smith ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:39:35 -0700 (PDT) From: "J. Brown" Subject: Re: eb all over the world On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Proctology Now wrote: > above, what I don't understand is why you said the Republicans would be > better.> > > steeper erosion during the clinton years than during the reagan/bush years. Which has far more to do with a Republican congress the last 6 years than anything else! Congress really does have more effect on things, as it should! Jason Wilson Brown - University of Washington - Seattle, WA USA BA History '99 - BA Canadian Studies '99 - MLIS Library Science '01 "I Don't Speak Fascist" -Grant Morrison ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:17:59 EDT From: "brian nupp" Subject: Proctology Now Proctology Now to the tune of Victorian Squid. That's what I hear every time I see the words: Proctology Now. I think I'm insane. Brian ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 11:13:21 +1200 From: digja611@student.otago.ac.nz Subject: Re: Broxbourne-Waltham > Local stations all had signposts to the "Lea (sic) River >Walk". "Aha!" I thought "I'm right about it being River Lea". must've missed the posts mentioning this - as an ex-Barnetite I could have stated that yes, it is quite definitely the Lea. With this sort of thing going on at Broxbourne, I kinda wish I still lived there... James ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:29:37 -0400 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: christ, you make us look like we've got a democracy Vince For President... jmbc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 17:07:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: where's wangbo? hell, where's the democracy? On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Ken Ostrander wrote: > capitalistic environmentalism? i don't see this. i see companies > squandering resources for a profit with no thought for the long term > effects or even the short term. Well, yes... that's what happens and I think I mentioned why I think it does: The companies don't consider natural resources on their balance sheet. Try reading Natural Capitalism by Paul Hawkins (co-founder of the U.S. branch of The Natural Step). Also, read this nifty Pat Buchanan - Ralph Nader transcript about the WTO. No, it's not a debate. They're on the same side of the issue(!): I think it is a correctable flaw, but it, unfortunately, has to be corrected by each individual business voluntarily. You can regulate and regulate, but business will just see the regulation as the bar they must squeak, rather than the bare, criminal minimum that it is. You won't have a real change until business people and consumers alike are thinking in terms of natural capital... until they're thinking about the REAL long-term value of the resources they use. > if the fact that rowe vs. wade was drafted by a nixon supreme court > nominee isn't enough; there's the fact that several republican > nominees have turned out to be 'closet liberals' while democratic > nominees have been very conservative. perhaps an opposing congress > might have a lot to do with this; but it is well established trend. I see the "social conservatism" of the Republicans as a facade carried to maintain popular support from the uncultured masses. I think the vast majority of the under 60 set of Republican congresspeople are much more liberally minded in personal affairs. That is to say, I think they know the difference between the goal of "family values" and the futility of legislating them. This is where we have to draw the line. And I think most Republicans do a reasonable job of this. There are exceptions. Whereas the Democrats don't know when to stop legislating morality... hence the civil rights losses of the past eight years. The general idea is that if you keep the people free and educated, the "right thing" will get done by itself. > then there's the fact that most large hospitals these days are being > run by religious organizations, shuting out planned parenthood > programs and forcing women (and doctors) to go to clinics where they > become easy targets of anti-abortion protesters. everytime i go by > the local clinic here in boston, where there was a shooting a few > years back, there are a bunch of old people milling around the > entrance toting their ugly fetus photos. I did a tmp job for Sisters of Providence medical insurance a while back... and I was appalled. I left after the third day when I found that many of their policies were religiously motivated. I read some things that just disgusted me. I can't think of a local hospital not affiliated with a religious organization (except the University Hospital where Viv works). It reminds me of that Hunter S. Thompson letter(essay?) where he talks about how, in times gone by, the Man of God in a community was probably the most educated and wise, but today being a Man of God (in most of the traditional institutions) means rejecting much of the thinking of the most learned. It creates a terrible contradiction of authority. > judging from the reaction of police in philadelphia, there isn't much to > protect. COINTELPRO by any other name... You said it. So I'll stop. Je. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin _______________________________________________ [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 20:48:25 -0400 From: nyquilathotep Subject: Re: eb all over the world when we last left our heroes, J. Brown exclaimed: >On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Proctology Now wrote: >> steeper erosion during the clinton years than during the reagan/bush years. > >Which has far more to do with a Republican congress the last 6 years than >anything else! i was going to embarrass myself by pointing out the fallacy of inductive reasoning (since a republican administration from 1980-1992 wasn't as bad the democratic administration from 1992-2000, a republican administration in 2000+ wouldn't be as bad too) but jason saved me from myself by pointing out that the executive branch isn't the only factor here. sure, the administration sets the tone, but the congress and judiciary have to be accounted for as well. +w p.s. a hearty "hear hear!" to the other jason's comments about liebermann. we don't need a smarmy moralist in the veep's office. ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #224 *******************************