From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest)
To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org
Subject: fegmaniax-digest V10 #190
Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org
Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org
Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org
Precedence: bulk


fegmaniax-digest        Wednesday, May 9 2001        Volume 10 : Number 190



                               Today's Subjects:
                               -----------------
  Re: Non-voting Floridians mean less trouble for everyone...  [Capuchin <ca]
  Re: hidden tracks                     [Tom Clark <tclark@reardensteel.com>]
  argh                            ["Andrew D. Simchik" <drew@stormgreen.com>]
  Re: a dreaded "me too" post    ["victorian squid" <v.squid@eudoramail.com>]
  Re: 1984 vs. 1987                         [Ken Ostrander <kenster@MIT.EDU>]
  Re: hidden tracks                              [HAL <hbrandt@milehigh.net>]
  Re: hidden tracks                         [Ken Ostrander <kenster@MIT.EDU>]
  Re: 1984 vs. 2001                [Stephen Mahoney <stephenm@multcolib.org>]
  Re: the replaceable brain                       [GSS <gshell@metronet.com>]
  Re: The Only Living Boy in New York  [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)]
  Re: Non-voting Floridians mean less trouble for everyone...  [Ken Ostrande]
  gay? let us help!                    [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)]
  alarms, indigo, and politics         [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)]
  Re: argh                         [Brett Cooper <coopercollections@gci.net>]
  Leppo?                               [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)]
  Re: alarms, indigo, and politics          [Capuchin <capuchin@bitmine.net>]
  Re: argh                              [Tom Clark <tclark@reardensteel.com>]
  Re: hidden tracks                             [Glen Uber <uberg@sonic.net>]
  Re: hidden tracks             [Miles Goosens <outdoorminer@mindspring.com>]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 15:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Capuchin <capuchin@bitmine.net>
Subject: Re: Non-voting Floridians mean less trouble for everyone...

On Tue, 8 May 2001, Rob Gronotte wrote:
> Maybe starting another political thread here...

Oh, you wish!

> I'm not really a Bush supporter in anything, but I think this is
> certainly a very sensible rule...

Very curious:  On what grounds?  What makes it "sensible"?

> anyway, I think this is true for most states

In many states one cannot vote while incarcerated and in others one cannot
vote at all if one is a "convicted felon" (meaning that at one point in
the past one was convicted of a felony).

> and almost certainly preceeded anyone by the name of Bush being in any
> political office.

Well, "anyone by the name of Bush being in any political office" is pretty
broad.  I would imagine people by the name of Bush have held political
offices in the Western World for hundreds of years.

But anyway, this idea that felons can be denied the right to vote comes
from the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of
America (against which [the 14th Amendment, I mean] I've preached
on this list before).

The Amendment was passed in a closed session of the US Congress while the
delegates of the ten southern states were quite literally locked out of
the proceedings and uncounted in the final percentage.  This was
immedately following resolution to the Civil War.

It is, I believe, at this point in US history where we really went wrong.

In an attempt to thwart further "revolution", several rules were passed at
the national level taking unprecedented rights from the people and their
local representatives at the county and state level into the hands of the
federal government and creating a kind of fiefdom that had never existed
in the history of this country.

It is roughly at this point where federal documents move from phrases like
"The United States of America are pledged..." to "The United States of
America is pledged..."  We ceased to be a collection of states with local
authority and became a behemoth of One Will.

The portion of the Constitution that allows a state to remove voting
privilege from those convicted of any felony comes from the following
phrasing:

"But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for
President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in
Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members
of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of
such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United
States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or
other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole
number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."

It's a ridiculous sentence.  The previous sentence says that electors are
appointed in proportion to the total number of PEOPLE in the state
(excluding "untaxed Indians").  And this sentence goes on to say that if a
state denies a male citizen whois twenty-one and has not participated in
rebellion "or other high crime", then the proportion of their delegates
will be reduced to just the over-21 males.

It's interesting to see that it doesn't decrease the number of delegates
to the number of legally eligible voters (which is the sensible thing).

Note that this would still have full force today because even though the
voting age has changed, it's still legal to discriminate based on age and
sex (except for voting rights specifically, but this rule doesn't talk
about voting rights, just counting for the proportioning of delegates and
electors).

The rule was clearly passed in order to keep people who participated in
the revolution attempt that was the Civil War from voting, but the "other
high crime" (which was clearly inteneded to mean treason or bribery of a
public official) is now broadly interpreted to mean any felony.  This
basically states that the federal government will not come down on a state
that restricts the right to vote of folks who committed felonies.

The first section of this same amendment deals with a concept mentioned
previously in the Constitution, but never clearly defined.

A "citizen" generally means a resident... one who spends their time in a
place and considers it their home, especially one entitled to the rights
and privileges of a free person in that locale.  The 14th Amendment
narrows that definition so that really nobody alive at the time counts as
a citizen, but all new people born into the country DO count as
citizens... oh, and foreigners don't automatically get citizenship for
showing up and being productive members of society, they have to jump
through some hoops first.

But this is also the "equal protection clause" that was the basis for
decisions like Roe v. Wade.

Oh, and it's also an interpretation of the "equal protection clause" that
was used in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad to rule that a
private corporation was a "natural person" under the Constitution.

Ahem... *coughbullshitcough*...

It was payday, I'm sure.

Oh, and Southern Pacific Railroad became SPRint.  Hee hee.

Anyway, i'm all for the complete repeal of the 14th amendment and the
institution of a broad and concise (you really can have both... most of
the Bill of Rights is as such, just badly interpreted by lazy, biased
judges) Equal Rights Amendment that protects all residents of the United
States individually from violation of rights explicitly protected in the
Constitution (by preventing Congress or the several States from passing
laws that infringe rights based on gender, sexual orientation, age, or
physical condition).


I'm sure you all wanted to know that.
J.
- -- 
_______________________________________________

Capuchin   capuchin@bitmine.net   Jeme A Brelin

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 15:32:26 -0700
From: Tom Clark <tclark@reardensteel.com>
Subject: Re: hidden tracks

on 5/9/01 3:17 PM, Ken Ostrander at kenster@MIT.EDU wrote:

> on the pixies _surfer rose/come on pilgrim_ disk i have, there's a hidden
> track
> of studio banter somewhere in the middle.  "you fuckin' die!"

Is that a hidden track?  I never bothered to look, but I thought it was just
a preamble to the next song.  Hmmm.
Now that you bring it up, is there a backstory to that exchange?  I've
assumed it to be Black Francis explaining to Albini that he was joking with
Kim when he said "You Fucking Die!", but Albini was all pissed because he
thought it was addressed to him for some reason.

- -tom "he was into field hockey players..." the tomster

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 15:39:34 -0700
From: "Andrew D. Simchik" <drew@stormgreen.com>
Subject: argh

Randy Newman, Tom Waits, and Heart don't want you to listen
to their music even if you've paid for it.

http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2001/05/09/mp3_com_suit/index.html

- --
Andrew D. Simchik, drew at stormgreen dot com
http://www.stormgreen.com/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 15:37:46 -0700
From: "victorian squid" <v.squid@eudoramail.com>
Subject: Re: a dreaded "me too" post

On Wed, 9 May 2001 13:33:49    The Great Quail wrote:

>day. I think he overproduced them and drained them of life with too 
>much honey and sugar, but the melodies were ok.

I also have always thought he was a pretty good singer, pleasant enough 
voice and good phrasing. I can think of many indie darlings a lot less 
gifted in this department than George O'Dowd.

>simple, but full of some great energy and enthusiasm, backed up by 
>fairly solid playing. They were, well, *fun.* It's only during and 

And I agree with this assessment of Duran Duran tho I like "Rio" a lot more than 
the first album. I think John Taylor deserves special mention as a really solid bass 
player. Generally the tunes are fun and catchy and I like them quite a lot. They would 
be greatly improved by a less whiny vocalist but I still don't see what's so awful about them. This is not an ironical opinion. 

However, I cannot quite agree with Drew when he says:

>for Duran Duran...they are in a category of one, and splendid in their
>glammy tastelessness.  

Someday I must lend you my copy of ABC's "Lexicon of Love". You will relish 
it greatly.

loveonya,
susan





Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 18:43:53 -0400
From: Ken Ostrander <kenster@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: 1984 vs. 1987

i guess it's too easy to pick on the wide sargasso sea of forgettable music
that was on the radio back then.  at some point between these two years i
stopped paying attention to casey casem's american top fourty jerkoff and
stopped listening to the radio almost completely.  my record collection is
still heavy on the eighties music.  

i did listen a bit in the early ninties; but just because it was played at the
workplace.  the only radio i can really stomach now is of the non-corporate
community and college ilk:

http://www.abfreeradio.org/
(of course, i'm a little biased.  my show's sundays from noon-three.)

by 1987 i had discovered the smiths, r.e.m., the cure , echo and all of that
stuff.  they were actually on the radio by then as i was tuning out.  i also
started getting into the minutemen, husker du, mr bragg, the muses, the pixies,
and a nifty little trio called the egyptians...

>> Yes!! Yes!!  Hey, irony-hounds - Culture Club and Duran Duran sucked then, 
>> and THEY STILL SUCK!!!

didn't know i was an irony hound; but i have to chime in to defend juran
juran.  their first two albums are fantastic.  _rio_ especially.  _notorious_,
_the wedding album_,  and _thank you_ are all very good as well.   warren
cuccurullo was a welcome addition to the lineup.  the newer material doesn't
compare however.  you can see them playing these days at a casino near you.

culture club's first two albums (i've always been of the opinion that artists
that can carry you for an entire album are vastly superior to those singles
artists) are better than the vast majority of crap that was on the radio back
then.  'church of the poisoned mind' still makes me smile.

>if someone comes to the defense of Howard Jones, I think the apocalypse is
nigh.

well, when i sent my fundamentalist mom a bunch of stuff about the FTAA she
thought it was reflective of the end times...anyhow, one of my friends back
then was big into mr jones.  though he dipped into musak for a while,
his...guess what...first two albums are pretty cool.  

my vote for worst eighties band?  way too many one-hit wonder-why type bands. 
i think no band typifies the uglyness of the decade quite like milli vanilli. 
can we at least agree on that?

ken  "sing blue silver"  the kenster

np       passion           peter gabriel "the messiah" 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 16:50:54 -0600
From: HAL <hbrandt@milehigh.net>
Subject: Re: hidden tracks

> >The Beatles -- "Her Majesty" from _Abbey Road_

Ken O wrote:
 
> not hidden. 

As I mentioned earlier, hidden *originally* by The Beatles on the first
pressings of the LP (remember those?) Not much point in hiding it now on
the CD. The intended "SURPRISE!!" is now a little long in the tooth.
It sure made me jump! the first time I heard it, though. (<--trying not
to wax nostalgic)

> what's that goofy bit at the end of _sgt pepper_ ?

It was created for the run-off groove on pressings of the Sgt. Pepper LP
(remember those?) For demonstration purposes (and for completists), it
was "looped" on the CD version to approximate what it sounded like in
1967 as the "inner groove" played repeatedly (early turntables didn't
automatically stop), babbling Beatle inanity to Those With A Psychedelic
Gleam In Their Eyes At All Times until the tonearm was manually lifted,
breaking "the spell". [Weenie Trivia: There was actually a legend that
if you played that bit backwards, it said "We'll fuck you like
Supermen", but the Threetles eventually refuted that absurd claim.] 

/hal

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 18:59:10 -0400
From: Ken Ostrander <kenster@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: hidden tracks

>> on the pixies _surfer rose/come on pilgrim_ disk i have, there's a hidden
>> track
>> of studio banter somewhere in the middle.  "you fuckin' die!"
>
>Is that a hidden track?  I never bothered to look, but I thought it was just
>a preamble to the next song.  Hmmm.
>Now that you bring it up, is there a backstory to that exchange?  I've
>assumed it to be Black Francis explaining to Albini that he was joking with
>Kim when he said "You Fucking Die!", but Albini was all pissed because he
>thought it was addressed to him for some reason.
>
>-tom "he was into field hockey players..." the tomster

well, it's not on the track listing and it caused some confusion because it's
its own track and so all of the track numbers afterward are screwed up.  not
the case with the with the "field hockey players" bit.

on a starfucker note, i used to live next door to jason lowenstein of sebadoh
in northampton back in the early ninties.  i was very happy when asshole eric
gaffney left the band/was kicked out.

ken  "you complete me"  the kenster 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 15:59:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stephen Mahoney <stephenm@multcolib.org>
Subject: Re: 1984 vs. 2001

and since we now know that drunk NATIVE OR NON-NATIVE americans who are
men( or women) arent allowed to vote( or engage in bestial sexual acts) 
before (or after) they have recieved their D.U.I. in this country, I
wanted to pass this public DIservice announcement, courtesy of harpers
magazine,
the folks that used to put chemicals in your cigs who now really want you
to believe that they care about you, and the number 7.



   Gallons by which daily U.S. oil consumption would drop if SUV's average
fuel efficiency increased by 3 mpg : 49,000,000

                                      Source: Sierra Club (Washington)


    Gallons per day that the proposed drilling of Alaskas Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge is projected to yield : 42,000,000

                                         Source: The White House

Stephen Mahoney                                   
Multnomah County Library at Rockwood branch clerk 
stephenm@nethost.multnomah.lib.or.us              
503-988-5396                                      
fax 503-988-5178                                      

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 18:00:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: GSS <gshell@metronet.com>
Subject: Re: the replaceable brain

On Tue, 8 May 2001, steve wrote:
> > http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/science/05/08/brains.robots/index.html
> 
> > Mixing and matching parts of everything from fish with robots and 
> > bacteria with microchips, scientists hope their creations someday lead to 
> > advances in medicine, warfare and environmental protection.
> 
> Which thing doesn't fit in the above sentence?

The only thing I can see that seems out of place would be the 'advances in
warfare', unless this is somehow trying to infer that these developments
might somehow eliminate warfare, but that doesn't make much sense. 

"Our schools of cyborg fish defeated your swarms of robo-salamanders
so you can no longer occupy our country" said the Palestinian to the Isreali

gSs

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 11:11:02 +1200
From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)
Subject: Re: The Only Living Boy in New York

>>> The tunefulness of all vocalist seemed suspect to me last night... with
>>> the exception, of course, of Martin Leper (or however that is spelled)
>>> and his wife Rebecca, who absolutely nailed Art's harmonies in their
>>> cover of The Only Living Boy in New York (which I'm listening to right
>>> now, well, not their cover).
>>
>> ooo. possibly my favourite Simon and Garfunkel song - and it has made so
>> much more sense since discovering what it's about.
>
>Which is? That's also a song that tends to bring tears to my eyes - along
>with "For Emily..." and "The Dangling Conversation".

"For Emily" has got me blubbing in the past, too.

two things:
1) When they first started performing together as schoolboys, they called
themselves Tom and Jerry - Art was Tom, Paul was Jerry.

2) When Paul Simon wrote TOLBINY he knew that Simon and Garfunkel were
about to split up. Art was far more interested in the movie he was working
on (Catch 22) than in music. Catch 22 was being filmed in Mexico, Paul was
back in the states waiting for him to finish so they could start recording.


"Tom, get your plane right on time, I know your part will go fine, fly down
to Mexico..."

Another of my favourite S&G songs from that period, "So long Frank Lloyd
Wright" is also about the band's split - Garfunkel had been training to be
an architect before their music took off.

James

   James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=
   -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-
   .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance
   -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time
   =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River")

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 19:16:32 -0400
From: Ken Ostrander <kenster@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Non-voting Floridians mean less trouble for everyone...

>> <I'm not really a Bush supporter in anything, but I think this is certainly
>> a very sensible rule...>
>> 
>> i cannot think of a single reason why inmates should not be allowed to vote.

well...if you want to keep a huge portion of the population disenfranchised,
then it makes perfect sense.  if you consider that laws exist by virtue of the
fact that a bunch of lawyers that are elected by fewer and fewer members of the
population made them up, and that these laws could be overturned at a future
time, and further, that...well, corporate criminals get more say in what goes
on on capital hill than the rabble; then you can see that this just makes it a
lot easier for everybody.

>Oh, and it's also an interpretation of the "equal protection clause" that
>was used in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad to rule that a
>private corporation was a "natural person" under the Constitution.

this may be the single most evil development in human history.

ken  "give the anarchist a cigarette"  the kenster

np       something from napster 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 11:44:41 +1200
From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)
Subject: gay? let us help!

>> Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, the professor of psychiatry at
>> Columbia University who led the study, said he can't
>> estimate what percentage of highly motivated gay people
>> can change their sexual orientation,

and it's perfectly possible to train left-handers to write with their right
hand, too. Causes only mild psychological scarring, so it's fine to do it,
and being right-handed means they're "normal" then. Right? Sigh.

>If a gay man can't get a date for a
>while, or chooses to be celibate, is he "straight" for that time period?

in the natural world (that is, not just humans), homosexuality is far more
widely practiced than celibacy, but you try telling 'practicing celibates'
that they are engaging in a perverse sexual practice, and see how far it
gets you [1]

James

[1] no offence intended to any 'practicing celibates' on the list

   James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=
   -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-
   .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance
   -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time
   =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River")

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 11:47:04 +1200
From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)
Subject: alarms, indigo, and politics

>and features a sampled beep from a motorola pager. the exact beep i used
>to use for an alarm clock. freaked me out like you wouldn't believe the
>first time i heard that. you're right about that song being the most
>catchy, though these rest of the album is pretty damn ohrwurm-ish as well.

I have trouble listening to this track for exactly that reason. It is the
sound of my alarm clock, and it gets under my skin and attacks my CNS like
you wouldn't believe.

>(i haven't really liked ani's most recent albums and i've never really
>liked the indigo girls either, so there you go -- anyone shocked?)

a little surprised, maybe. Personally, I think the Indigo Girls are great.

>1)"Bonnie and Clyde" Luna, Penthouse

oo yeh! Imagine my surprise when I bought this album and one by Soho on the
same day, and discovered that they had both covered this track, one of them
as a bonus hidden track. Must track down the Gainsbourg (sp?) original
someday

>More than 1 in 24 [525,000 out of 12million] people are already in prison at
>this point alone

you're joking, right? four percent of the population??? I thought we were
doing badly with one and a half percent!

>But apparently there's evidence (widely reported in Europe but not in
>the USA) that the Florida election commission paid a company called
>Data Base Technologies (visit their web site! http://www.dbtonline.com )
>to supply them with a list of "possible felons" to be "investigated" with an
>eye towards dropping them from the voter registration rolls shortly before
>the election. Most of the officials involved have denied everything, but it
>looked like the state dropped practically everyone on the list, or at least
>all the black people, without any investigation whatsoever; roughly 90%
>of these "listees" were non-felons, most were black, and some had been
>convicted (in other states) of nothing more than minor traffic violations.

by reports here, it was a company that had been employed extensively by the
Republican party in Florida in the past. I tell ya, if you're going to rig
your elections in the US, you should at least be a bit more subtle about
it.

I think people here figure that if ex-cons have served their time, they've
served their time. Here in NZ, we've had at least one ex-con in government.


I think the same is true in South Africa.

Then again (hoping that you-know-who's rule works!) the same is also true
in Germany. YMMV, it seems.

James

   James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=
   -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-
   .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance
   -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time
   =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River")

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 15:55:20 -0800
From: Brett Cooper <coopercollections@gci.net>
Subject: Re: argh

on 5/9/01 2:39 PM, Andrew D. Simchik at drew@stormgreen.com wrote:

> Randy Newman, Tom Waits, and Heart don't want you to listen
> to their music even if you've paid for it.
> 
> http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2001/05/09/mp3_com_suit/index.html

Where is this insanity going to stop?!?!  Here's my take on MP3 and
Napster-ish stuff:

The older generation of performers are the ones who seem to be having a lot
of trouble and heartburn over MP3 technology and the way that it is applied.
It is the newer and even the future generations of performers who are
embracing what, when used properly, is a great marketing tool and a way to
gain exposure.  Those who are not used to millions of dollars flowing in and
the ones who are trying to get exposure for their music see the validity of
this technology.

Brett

********************************************
Cooper Collections
http://home.gci.net/~coopercollections

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 12:01:59 +1200
From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)
Subject: Leppo?

I know this song has come up for discussion in the past as to its origins,
but here's something I don't know whether anyone has mentioned. Leppo was
apparently the name of the fifth Rutle!

James (who watched "All you need is cash" last night)

   James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=
   -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-
   .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- You talk to me as if from a distance
   -.-=-.- And I reply with impressions chosen from another time
   =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. (Brian Eno - "By this River")

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:21:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Capuchin <capuchin@bitmine.net>
Subject: Re: alarms, indigo, and politics

On Thu, 10 May 2001, James Dignan wrote:
> I think people here figure that if ex-cons have served their time, they've
> served their time. Here in NZ, we've had at least one ex-con in government.
> I think the same is true in South Africa.

I can't think of any law that says a convicted felon can't hold office...

They just can't vote in some states.

OH!  And I forgot to mention:

The 14th Amendment is also the one that PROHIBITS any questioning of the
validity of any debt of the United States of America.  Oh, and if any
State incurs debt while trying to get out of the United States of America,
that debt is illegal and void (as soon as the US stomps the shit out of
the insurrection).

Talk about taxation without representation... ask the future generations
that have to pay for the spending we do today.

J.
- -- 
_______________________________________________

Capuchin   capuchin@bitmine.net   Jeme A Brelin

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 17:11:29 -0700
From: Tom Clark <tclark@reardensteel.com>
Subject: Re: argh

on 5/9/01 4:55 PM, Brett Cooper at coopercollections@gci.net wrote:

> on 5/9/01 2:39 PM, Andrew D. Simchik at drew@stormgreen.com wrote:
> 
>> Randy Newman, Tom Waits, and Heart don't want you to listen
>> to their music even if you've paid for it.
>> 
>> http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2001/05/09/mp3_com_suit/index.html
> 
> Where is this insanity going to stop?!?!  Here's my take on MP3 and
> Napster-ish stuff:
> 
> The older generation of performers are the ones who seem to be having a lot
> of trouble and heartburn over MP3 technology and the way that it is applied.
> It is the newer and even the future generations of performers who are
> embracing what, when used properly, is a great marketing tool and a way to
> gain exposure.  Those who are not used to millions of dollars flowing in and
> the ones who are trying to get exposure for their music see the validity of
> this technology.
> 

Exactly. And you only hear complaints from "artists" who have a decent
amount of control over their own catalog.  The bands who are still beholden
to a recording contract bitch-goddess don't give a lick about it because
they're not seeing a penny to begin with.

- -tc

p.s. Either the Roxy Music tour isn't selling well or I just got lucky, cuz
I scored front row seats today.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Glen Uber <uberg@sonic.net>
Subject: Re: hidden tracks

On Wed, 9 May 2001, Ken Ostrander wrote:

>>The Beatles -- "Her Majesty" from _Abbey Road_
>
>not hidden.  what's that goofy bit at the end of _sgt pepper_ though?

On the first run of the vinyl pressing of _Abbey Road_, "Her Majesty" was
listed on neither the jacket nor the label. It appeared on all pressings
that followed, however.

The close out groove of Sgt. Pepper was intended to be a light-hearted
reaction to the final, 45-second long E-Major chord of "A Day In The
Life". It was supposed to be go on and on forever, or at least until the
people listening to the record broke out of their marijuana-induced
slumber and shut the record player off. There is also a high-frequency
tone overdubbed on the aforementioned final chord that is outside the
audible range of humans. It was added as a joke to make the listeners'
dogs go crazy while their humans tripped.

>>The Clash -- "Train In Vain" from _London Calling_
>
>isn't it on the label on the actual record?  what are those thingies called
>anyhow?  i think the story was that it was recorded very late in the sessions,
>after the sleeve was already printed.

I didn't think it's listed anywhere on the album. I'll look when I get
home. Again, it may be different on later pressings or reissues.

I've got my eyes on some other sky,
- -g-

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 20:12:31 -0500
From: Miles Goosens <outdoorminer@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: hidden tracks

At 05:27 PM 5/9/2001 -0700, Glen Uber wrote:
 >>>The Clash -- "Train In Vain" from _London Calling_
 >>
 >>isn't it on the label on the actual record?  what are those thingies called
 >>anyhow?  i think the story was that it was recorded very late in the 
sessions,
 >>after the sleeve was already printed.
 >
 >I didn't think it's listed anywhere on the album. I'll look when I get
 >home. Again, it may be different on later pressings or reissues.

It wasn't on my 1980 vinyl, nor on the 1987 U.S. CD.  However, the 2000 US 
reissue lists it, dammit!

let's hide away,

Miles

------------------------------

End of fegmaniax-digest V10 #190
********************************