From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #327 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, November 13 2000 Volume 09 : Number 327 Today's Subjects: ----------------- 0% Bush, 0% Gore, 0% Nader, 100% Robyn yay! ["Daniel Gackle" ] Re: needing meat, not meeting needs [lj lindhurst ] Re: needing meat, not meeting needs [Capuchin ] I tot I had all the tuckin' answers ["jbranscombe@compuserve.com" ] hope he doesn't pull a Charles Schultz [Eb ] Re: I Tot I Taw A Puddy Tat! [great offwhite dude ] Re: underwater moonlight ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Billy Elliot & T rex [Ethyl Ketone ] Re: shoveling your own coal [GSS ] Re: I Tot I Taw A Puddy Tat! [steve ] Re: J5 ["brian nupp" ] Re: Our next President is... ["brian nupp" ] Re: erection/election, you decide [GSS ] Re: the Soft Boys' psycho blues ["brian nupp" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 13:45:55 -0600 From: "Daniel Gackle" Subject: 0% Bush, 0% Gore, 0% Nader, 100% Robyn yay! Think I'll just delurk for a bit and throw my hat in with those of you with a declared preference for fruitless discussion about obscure English eccentrics who spell their names with at least one Y. Hm, but I don't have anything to say about those either... okay, I know. What in sam hell does the following mean? *** If I was man enough I'd come on your stump *** Doubtless this has graced the list more than once already, but that's not the point! Clue me in and save me from my depraved imagination! Daniel dulling what little style I have ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 12:55:21 -0800 (PST) From: Viv Lyon Subject: Re: 0% Bush, 0% Gore, 0% Nader, 100% Robyn yay! On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Daniel Gackle wrote: > *** If I was man enough I'd come on your stump *** > > Doubtless this has graced the list more than once already, but that's not > the point! Clue me in and save me from my depraved imagination! Yup. The general consensus was that "stump" is english slang for "walk" or "hike." So, he's saying that he's too lazy and weak to come along on this little stroll. That's all. Vivien ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 13:44:57 -0800 (PST) From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: needing meat, not meeting needs > From: "Brian Huddell" > As you can imagine, there is a lot of popular support for a move to a > national election system. It may be our only hope for breaking out of > the > third world. By "our" do you mean "Louisiana's"? I'm confused. > From: BLATZMAN@aol.com > Being successful is a lifestyle. It is a path that takes dedication. > It is > not handed to you. It may not have been handed to _you_, but it is certainly handed to some people. I didn't start with the privileges of a Bush or a Kennedy but I don't really feel that my present "success" (absurdly high dotcom salary, absurdly overpriced apartment, absurd credit card debt I'm not too worried about, decent car, etc.) was part of a "lifestyle" I earned through "dedication" or sacrifice. I didn't work particularly hard in school and got excellent grades without really trying. My parents and student loans helped me go to an absurdly overpriced private university, and I've been leapfrogging over various personal contacts to get the job I have today, which I do partly on experience at my previous job and partly on instinct. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. There's no special reason why I should have the success I have right now, apart from a modicum of natural aptitude and a heaping dollop of luck. Many people I know are in the same position. On the other hand, I think there are people who sacrifice and work hard all their lives and never reap the kinds of rewards you have. Maybe they lack natural aptitude. Maybe they lack luck. Maybe they have handicaps of one kind or another that slow them down. But they're not slackers, or people who have lots of kids for fun (?!) or because of "poor decisions" (??!!). > Successful people shouldn't have to pick up the > pieces of > other people's lives. You don't. You just have to pay taxes, like (just about) everybody else. Whether they're used for domestic welfare or corporate welfare or military spending, I don't see why "successful people" deserve any more of a break than anybody else. > From: lj lindhurst > And while we're on the subject, the whole notion of maternity leave > pisses me off, too. Why should an employer have to pay for someone > to take leave from their job to have a baby? It was their decision, > they should be prepared to use up some vacation time for that > activity, or take an unpaid leave of absence or something. I'm not > saying they shouldn't be allowed time off, I'm just saying that the > employer shouldn't end up paying for it. The employer would "pay" for it either way, either through lost work hours or lost work hours plus salary. As a non-heterosexual guy who's not planning to get married and whose motto is "cats not kids"*, I feel a certain amount of sympathy for your stance against privileging procreation in the workplace. On the other hand, all this talk about poppin' out babies as a "lifestyle decision" makes it sound like they're going on safari or requesting paid vacation while they hit the White Party or Fire Island. I haven't had any babies personally, but something tells me it's not quite like that. And while I think the planet probably has more than enough humans at this stage, I can't really bring myself to view maternity leave as equivalent to a few months in Tahiti. The other event in a woman's life that's generally thought of as some kind of fun and games "decision" is an abortion. Pro-lifers who believe they have sovereignty over clusters of cells in women's bodies are under the impression that abortions are convenient forms of birth control, perhaps scheduled monthly by liberal sluts. The reality is, I think -- again, never having had an abortion personally -- not QUITE like that. I've never made a "decision" like having a baby or having an abortion, so I'm not really prepared to consider it on par with, say, buying a PlayStation 2 or getting plastic surgery. Or even adopting the cutest cats in the world (there are 2 and they live in my apartment :p). I'm guessing that if you've never made that decision, or been in a position to make it, you have no idea what it's like either. > And why are concessions made only for people having children? What > if the rest of us have an equally important Life Event that we need > time off for? Like what? A death in the family would qualify. Not every employer gives time off for that, but mine have so far. Most of them are willing to be flexible about honeymoons also. Of course, in neither case are you really biologically compelled to take time off the way you are if you're a new mommy. What other major Life Events do you have in mind, and how would you suggest they be codified into law? Drew ===== Andrew D. Simchik: drew at stormgreen dot com http://www.stormgreen.com/ Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 17:05:32 -0500 From: lj lindhurst Subject: Re: needing meat, not meeting needs >> And why are concessions made only for people having children? What >> if the rest of us have an equally important Life Event that we need >> time off for? > >Like what? Sure, there are plenty of major Life Events that could easily be put on par with having a child. Now, people who WANT to have children and think it is the end-all-be-all event of their life would certainly whine that NOTHING compares to having a baby, but here are a few: 1.) You've wanted to climb Mt. Everest your whole life, you've been planning and saving, and finally you get to do it. 2.)What if you were "transgendered" and finally had the resources together to get a sex change? 3.) Like you said: Getting married and going on a honeymoon! 4.) Running in a marathon. Or being in the Olympics! 5.) Buying a new home and moving into it. Ridiculous as these may sound, they all take a great deal of planning and preparation--like, hopefully, having a child--and they are all things that require some time off, and they are all things that are extremely important to the individual. They are also--like having a child--things you *elect* to do, and not something that you HAVE to do. - -- ******************************** LJ Lindhurst White Rabbit Graphic Design http://www.w-rabbit.com NYC ljl@w-rabbit.com ******************************** Adieu, adieu, to you and you and you. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:47:47 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: needing meat, not meeting needs On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, lj lindhurst wrote: > Sure, there are plenty of major Life Events that could easily be put > on par with having a child. [snip] > but here are a few: > 2.)What if you were "transgendered" and finally had the resources > together to get a sex change? > 3.) Like you said: Getting married and going on a honeymoon! > 4.) Running in a marathon. Or being in the Olympics! > 5.) Buying a new home and moving into it. > Ridiculous as these may sound, they all take a great deal of planning > and preparation--like, hopefully, having a child--and they are all > things that require some time off, and they are all things that are > extremely important to the individual. They are also--like having a > child--things you *elect* to do, and not something that you HAVE to > do. Well, I, for one, have a job that would let me take paid time off for all of these things and most of them are codified in the employment agreement. The second (by your numbers) is medical, regardless of how "elective" it is. I get time off for medical... they're not allowed to ask what sort of surgery I'm having. That's a privacy issue protected by state law. The third and fifth are also directly mentioned in my employment agreement. I can take paid time in addition to my vacation and floating holidays (if they're used up for the year) for either of those things and there's actually a slot on my electronic timesheet for it (so they can tell you're not moving four times a year or getting married too often, I guess). I'm also paid when I'm away from work for jury duty, family deaths, mental health troubles (as part of medical leave) and several other things. The Olympics, I think, would be something like jury duty or flying off to accept an award for something. It is considered good PR to have folks who do that sort of thing on staff. > 1.) You've wanted to climb Mt. Everest your whole life, you've been > planning and saving, and finally you get to do it. This one I can't buy, though. My job in particular would let me take an unpaid leave of absence for this, but it's not the sort of thing I should expect pay to do. As for the legal standing of maternity leave, I think of it this way: It is the role of government to benefit the state (the people, as well as the will and works the people). If you get pregnant, cannot continue to work because of your physical condition, and are fired or unpaid in your time off, your position becomes less stable for that child. You may be forced to cut corners in your expenses... vitamins, prenatal care, etc. or work longer than is really safe. These hardships could adversely affect the child and produce a new person that is disabled and a burden on the state. A guarantee of paid maternity leave assures a healthier future population. And without it, you'd have two kinds of people: Rich folks who can afford proper prenatal care (including the time and rest necessary for proper fetal development) and poor folks with fucked-up kids. Talk about reinforcing the class structure. Phew. I guess I wonder what about it pisses you off so much... the fact that somebody's getting something you don't get (paid time off) or the miniscule raise in prices of already cheap consumer goods caused by companies compensating women for their time not productive to the company? The option is open to anybody. If you choose not to take it, fine. You don't need it. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 19:49:57 -0500 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: I tot I had all the tuckin' answers I remember once upon a time a go being pulled up by a couple of people on this list for making some points that people seemed to think were a little insulting...or a bit raw..as far as other members....are/were concerned. I feel that there are more than a few arguments that contributors here have recently adduced that would make the subject of our adulation/admiration MR ROBYN HITCHCOCK gag... I know that for a fucking fact...Maybe that doesn't worry you, and maybe it shouldn't... Maybe it's just * the music* that matters. I've heard a lot of people here say that . But lets get down to the nitty-gritty... Robyn isn't often explicit politically, but he is very left of centre... When people here talk about wishing newly qualified doctors good luck in getting "stinking rich" rather than wishing them luck in treating their patients properly it makes my blood run cold. When people here don't seem to understand that people are born into different circumstances and occasionally can't help calling upon the welfare state safety net it makes me want to puke. When people here don't understand that women aren't murderers if they chose abortion, it really does make me wonder if you are listening to the same artist I am. I don't know every socio-political stance that Robyn takes, but I do know a few...and, a question I've asked before but never got any answers - Why do you like Robyn? GSS? Blatzman? I mean, I fuckin' hate Rush and Ted Nugent! Maybe that's rather shallow of me :-) (or maybe that's just because they're fuckin' shite...). jmbc. Perhaps a little overwrought, but do me a fucking favour - nobody's perfect, Tweety-Pie. Signed Sylvester.... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 20:12:59 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: I tot I had all the tuckin' answers jbranscombe@compuserve.com: >I don't know every socio-political stance that Robyn takes, but I do know a >few...and, a question I've asked before but never got any answers - Why do >you like Robyn? GSS? Blatzman? I mean, I fuckin' hate Rush and Ted Nugent! >Maybe that's rather shallow of me :-) (or maybe that's just because they're >fuckin' shite...). Hey, do the Rush guys just do dumbass Randian lyrics, or are they out doing the Ted thing in public? - - Steve - ---------- If they know our secrets, why can't we know theirs? - Dana Scully ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 01:50:50 -0700 From: Eb Subject: hope he doesn't pull a Charles Schultz By TIM MOLLOY Associated Press Writer PITTSBURGH (AP) -- It's a sad day in the neighborhood. Longtime children's TV host Fred Rogers plans to introduce his last new neighbor next year, his production company announced Saturday. The 71-year-old host and creator of "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" will shoot the final episode of the show in 2001, but he won't be hanging up his cardigan just yet. After 50 years in television and 33 years as the show's host, Rogers is turning his attention to his Web sites, publications and special museum programs. And he'll still provide gentle advice in reruns. "Fred is not retiring," said his production company, Family Communications. Rogers has produced almost 1,000 programs and averaged about 10 new episodes in each of the last few years. Most shows now broadcast on Public Broadcasting Service stations are repeats, said George Miles, president of WQED in Pittsburgh, the station where the show is taped. "Many of the programs go back many number of years, but the messages are the same," Miles said. The show has gained a wide audience among children and parents who appreciate its simple lessons and Rogers' soothing manner. Rogers has taught children how to share, how to deal with anger and even how not to fear the bathtub by assuring them they'll never go down the drain. David Newell, who plays "Speedy Delivery" man Mr. McFeely on the show, said Rogers always wrote new episodes hoping future audiences could continue to learn from them. "He would take subjects such as a new baby or sibling rivalry or dealing with angry feelings -- subjects that are timeless. Every generation can use help with those subjects," Newell said. "We did a week on divorce. We did a week on going to school which we repeat every year." During the Persian Gulf War, Rogers told youngsters that "all children shall be well taken care of in this neighborhood and beyond -- in times of war and in times of peace," and he asked parents to promise their children they would always be safe. Rogers' television career began in 1951 when he was hired as an assistant producer for NBC. He worked in Pittsburgh television as a puppeteer and producer on "The Children's Corner," which introduced many of the characters that would become Neighborhood regulars, including Daniel Striped Tiger, King Friday XIII, X the Owl and Lady Elaine Fairchilde. "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" first aired on WQED in 1967, and PBS began distributing it nationally the following year. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 21:39:34 +1030 From: great offwhite dude Subject: Re: I Tot I Taw A Puddy Tat! the odious blaztman vomited thus , > Successful people shouldn't have to pick up the pieces of > other people's lives. which had me shaking my sage head in wonderment at this degree of pomposity Well Blatzy baby , haven't you ever heard of down sizing , illness, stress , bankruptcy, bad moves on the share market, embezzlement and all the other ills that can inflict " successful people " too. It depends on your job, but there are legions of "successful people "who end up fucked over by the system as much as the battlers do. Australia is full of middle and upper echelon managers who at the ripe old age of 50 get the push and never work again . These guys thought they were ' successful people ' they worked hard and toed the line for the company and what did they get- ten minutes notice to clear out of their office on many occasions . Ok if you are a' successful person ' in certain professions , such as medicine or law , then you are probably on the gravy train for life , as long as you play your cards right . But lets just consider this, just who in merry hell helped contribute to your education costs when you were in high school, the roads you drove on to get to college ,or the buses you rode in, your local library and all the other infrastructure you "successful people "take for granted and which helped you to get to the pinnacle of your "successful profession" ? . Working stiffs pay taxes too mate .as well as the " successful " in the community and even those on social security pay sales tax- we all contribute, big or small.- even that drunk sleeping in the gutter who lost his house and family after being down sized from his blue collar job might have paid taxes when he was working that helped get some "successful people " through college -or do you believe the education system is only paid for by the 'successful people' in your society ? . We live in communities , in case you never noticed ( although I guess from your rhetoric that you subscribe to the Thatcher nonsense - " there are no communities only individuals ") and we should all be prepared to support the weak in those communities as well as the strong. Why,? well its for the good of all. That guy who rips off your microwave or shoots you in the head as you wait at the lights , might just have been prevented from doing so if the govt had been able to direct a little bit of help his way before he went off the rails. They do this in Scandinavia and their youth crime rate is very low. Here in oz and in the states we wait until they become an uncontrollable problem and then throw them in jail, very wise !. Many people never really get a chance to drag themselves out of the mire. I teach , so I see the parents of some of the students . They are fucking AWFUL , some are drunks, abusers, fourth generation unemployed who put down their kids if they try to better themselves . There's also peer pressure that makes it hard to be different from the other underachievers. I feel sorry for those kids, in many cases it is a struggle just for them to live from day to day. Your philosophy, is not only completely selfish ( I'm amazed you have the audacity to come out with it in a public forum ) but also displays a complete lack of empathy or understanding of the conditions that some people live in from day to day. What are we supposed to do for kids of the poor. Let them starve ? Is it THEIR fault their parents have fallen on hard times or are feckless? .Or should only the unsuccessful have to support them ? Your statement is total NONSENSE ! Its most interesting that in the main, since the 1970s we have been ruled by conservative leaning govts who preached the blatzman formula . They have cut back welfare, cut public govt jobs , thrust the user pays principle down our throats , cut taxes to largely benefit the rich , run down public education /health, said they would improve law and order and education outcomes . And in the main, prison populations are soaring, public education standards have fallen and the poor are getting poorer, and poorer and poorer........... And people like the noble Blatzman don't give a fuck- honestly B, you DESERVE a cretin like Bush as your president . You are made for each other, why don't you go move in with him for chrissake. ? Of course, " successful ' people need not worry about the underclass because they can go live in walled estates with rottweilers and goons guarding their every move, drive armour plated cars and live secure in the knowledge that they are in complete control of their torrid little lives. That is of course until something happens to them in life that they cannot foresee, that might take away their "success ' and which would force them to rely on the public purse for support. Blatzy, I don't wish anyone ill, but with your attitude, if it did happen , it would be absolute poetic justice................. Commander - "fucking pissed off at bloody selfish conservatives who only think of themselves and don't give a toss about anybody else"- Lang ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:45:24 +0000 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: underwater moonlight Bayard wrote: > > There is talk of a *triple* album vinyl release!! I trust they'll be sensible and have a CD release, too? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:50:32 +0000 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Billy Elliot & T rex Michael R Godwin wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Eleanore Adams wrote: > > Well, my hubby and I went and saw Billy Elliot last weekend. Very good > > film. Go see it. But the soundtrack!!!! I, for some insane reason, had > > never bought a T Rex album. I have cured that fault today. > > But why, oh why, is a boy in 1984 listening to 1972 pop music? 'cos his brother's a sometime stoner. They are his brother's records. I have my bro to thank for getting me into Robyn. Sadly, nothing more taxing than Phil Collins is allowed on his Rega Planar 3 these days... Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:57:29 +0000 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: New Date for Sandowitz Show drop the holupki wrote: > > >Subject: New Date for Sandowitz Show htf did that 'n' get in there? It's 'Sadowitz'; one of finest close-up magicians and gleefully offensive* comedians of our time. Deserves to be better known, tho' we all have to forgive him for being in a Shamen video. Stewart *: offensive to everyone. No-one is excluded or victimised. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 12:07:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: I Tot I Taw A Puddy Tat! > blatzman: > > Successful people shouldn't have to pick up the pieces of > > other people's lives. Well, no-one ever accused me of being religious, but see Luke 10:29-36 (King James Bible) - - Mike Godwin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 08:06:04 -0500 From: Ethyl Ketone Subject: Re: Billy Elliot & T rex >At 11:50 AM +0000 11/13/00, Stewart C. Russell wrote: >I have my bro to thank for getting me into Robyn. Sadly, nothing more >taxing than Phil Collins is allowed on his Rega Planar 3 these days... My brother gave me my first Doors album when I was 11. All my friends were listening to the Monkees and I was nuts about Jim Morrison. I still thank him, even if he seems to only listen to the greatest hits of the 1700s these daze. - -- "Questions are a burden for others. Answers are a prison for oneself." **************************************************************************** C. J. Galbraith Ketone Press meketone@ix.netcom.com www.bogdescu.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 08:49:44 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: Re: shoveling your own coal On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Andrew D. Simchik wrote: > It may not have been handed to _you_, but it is certainly handed to some > people. I didn't start with the privileges of a Bush or a Kennedy but I What the hell does the Kennedy farcicality have to do with any of this? You just could not get yourself to type Gore, could you? We are talking about the privileged elite in regard to THIS situtation, right? gss ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 08:50:24 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: I Tot I Taw A Puddy Tat! great offwhite dude: >Commander - "fucking pissed off at bloody selfish conservatives who only >think of themselves and don't give a toss about anybody else"- Lang Don't forget how conservatives make policy. They've got this coin - on one side is "I've got mine, fuck you" and on the other is "Be more like me." - - Steve - ---------- If they know our secrets, why can't we know theirs? - Dana Scully ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:07:59 EST From: "brian nupp" Subject: Re: J5 Brian: J5,Worth getting? Eb: >Sure. An unusually consistent album, for the hip-hop realm... Thanks, I think I'm gonna get this one. Your review and my curiousity is enough to justify this purchase. I just listened to the new U2 album last night. From what I've heard. I like. I'm egar to hear more. Might be a classic? Hmmm? Brian Nupp _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:27:11 EST From: "brian nupp" Subject: Re: Our next President is... >Lex Luthor! > >LUTHOR WINS! - 11-08-00 >Official Press Release > >November 8, 2000 -- METROPOLIS. The votes have been tallied across the >nation... That was fun! If it were only that simple. Now it looks like our next President will be determined by who has the best lawyer. I know, I'm a hypocrite 'cause now I'm talkin' politics. Brian _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:28:03 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: Re: erection/election, you decide > Why is it that I find many of the people who are afraid of losing their > rights to have an abortion don't believe in the death penalty? What crime The death penalty is 100% percent wrong, period. There is absolutly no arguement in support of this ludicrously barbaric practice. If not for the single reason that we have executed innocent people and we will execute innocent people again. There are lots of other reasons why it should be outlawed, but this is reason enough. The simple percentage variance between upper and lower classes should convince left leaning free spirits as well as bible toting god-fearing right wingers, but it doesn't. That is another thing that really 'cinches my truss' about this election. Both support the death penalty. Both support a large army. FUCK'EM. Let's dance and make music and get high and drink wine and have sex and stuff, jeez... Against the grain the other way, I think abortion is utterly wicked and should not be allowed. But, I am not a woman and I will never be left with that decision, therefore it is not for me to decide, only to state my opinion. gss ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:48:49 EST From: "brian nupp" Subject: Re: the Soft Boys' psycho blues >the Nupp: I really hope the far > > superior "skin it back" version of Old Pervert is included. Also >Innocent > > Boy. Bayard: >there are people on the list who are in touch with Robyn, Kimberley etc so >feel free to make track suggestions. Yeah, Also "Which of us is me." I always loved this song. I was a bit disappointed when this didn't make the 76-81 cd. And we can't forget Vegetable Girl can we? Psychedelic Love is a good one. >There is a strong possibility that The Soft Boys will be on a compilation >of 'Psycho Blues' tracks in the New Year. Thoughts on tracks that might >fit that description? I've got my faves: Give It To The Soft Boys, Mystery >Train, Old Pervert, Fatman's Son but it would be interesting to hear other >suggestions - also from Robyn and Kim's solo careers. They'll be sitting >alongside artists such as Alabama 3, Nick Cave, Screaming Blue Messiahs, >Gun Club etc. > >"Blues in A" might not make it on ;) What about: I watch the cars, or Trash (is this the blues?). B.N. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #327 *******************************