From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #303 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, September 26 2002 Volume 11 : Number 303 Today's Subjects: ----------------- another jewel in my geek crown, please [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] nextdoorland some more [drew ] The Nader Way [Ken Ostrander ] Re: cheesey geekie shit [Ken Weingold ] RE: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... ["Brian H] Re: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... [Jeff Dwa] Re: The German Way [gSs ] Re: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... [Christop] Re: Robyn on left, Kimberly on right? [Brian ] Fruhling, Sommer, Herbst, Winter [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: The German Way [steve ] Re: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... [Jeffrey ] Re: a series of short knee-jerk responses [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: another jewel in my geek crown, please On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Stewart Russell wrote: > gSs wrote: > > > > ... all the voting systems in the rest of country? > > but the very respectable RISKS digest is worried about voting > procedures: http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/22.25.html#subj1.1 May I chime in here in support of instant run-off voting - in which voters allocate their preferences amongst the candidates and eliminate in one step both useless "primary" elections and the pernicious "lesser of two evils" approach to ballot-casting? Some details at www.instantrunoff.com - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::"Shut up, you truculent lout, and let the cute little pixie sing!":: ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:26:46 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... Quail: >>I was wondering, however, if some of those Naderites still think that Bush and >>Gore would have identical presidencies, or at the least, what would be different. Thing is, I don't think there are that many Naderites who really thought/think that. But if there are/were, nobody-- and I mean nobody-- will cop to it now. Oh, and apology accepted. Like I said, it had been seething within me for a long time. ____ ChrisG: >>You, personally, as a Californian voter, did not help Gore lose; but the >>Nader candidacy certainly did. But still, can you blame any voter (and I mean anyone) for voting for the campaign that puts forth the vision that's more compelling to them? IST dimly R something called voting your conscience. Extending the record store metaphor... yesterday I go into the record store, manage to avoid the pickpockets with my $17, and there before me in the just-released rack are the new Beck album and the debut album by American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson. Now, I only have $17 and I want to encourage adventurous music over prefab crap, so I should choose the Beck album as it's more likely to be purchased by a larger number of people and make a chart showing for Vaguely Folk-Like Alternative Rock. But if I can find it (which I couldn't), why not pass them both by and pick up Nextdoorland, which is the record whose "vision" speaks to me? I mean, who died and made Beck, or Gore, my spokesperson? (I actually did buy the Beck album, but if I only had $17, as I only have one vote, it woulda gone to the SB's, of course.) I actually kind of hoped that if Gore, abetted or not by Nader-- and again, if it hadn't been Nader, someone else would have caught the fancy of those of us so deeply disenfranchised by Gore-- lost as he deserved to, Bush would prove to be such an embarassment the the Democrats would have to get their act together in a big way. Almost seemed like a well-deserved kick in the pants/call to arms. But all bets are off now, for many obvious reasons. - ------ Okay, if one more review, even a lukewarm one, compares the guitar setup on Nextdoorland to Television, I'll... I dunno what I'll do, but I gotta get that record, dammit!!! BTW, there are rumblings of a new Television record after they complete their European tour. These rumors come and go all the time, but the band has hung together a lot longer this go-round, and they do have new songs... - -Rex, hoping to book Television, the SB's, and Wire together on the "Monsters of Music Which Has Confused Punks For Two & A Half Decades Tour" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:34:04 -0400 From: Ry Subject: Robyn & Rhett Miller Fegs, Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Robyn plays electric guitar and sings backing vocals on a track called "Point Shirley" off of Rhett Miller's (of Old 97's fame) new release "The Instigator". So if you are off to the record store to buy "Nextdoorland" maybe you should pick up Rhett's new CD as well. hope to see you all at the Soft Boys shows, ry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:48:36 -0700 From: drew Subject: nextdoorland some more >From: Brian > >I Love Lucy, Unprotected Love, and Strings are gems! I wanted to like "Unprotected Love" and "Strings" but they just haven't grabbed me yet. Eb's descriptions of them seem so much more exciting than the songs. >Drew: what Egyptians album does this remind you of? It doesn't, really, because I like most of the Egyptians albums. I was mainly thinking of the fact that it has a full band. Even _Perspex Island_ seems more dynamic than this album. >Mr. Kennedy, to me, is a very powerful song. I just don't get it. The lyrics do nothing for me (except that I like the way Robyn sings "Sebadoh") and the melody's dull. The first time I heard this recording of it, I actually yelled "stop it!" toward the end (and I like Television). >One thing that I will have to get used to is how Unprotected ends. >The near end of the song puts me in a trance, then I'm suddenly >woke with "YOU ARE AS HARD AS A DIAMOND!" I would prefer a fade out. Agreed. In general I would agree with Eb that songs were ended badly on this album. >The reason this has less variety than Jewels/Bram is because it's >a band this time. The same people rehersing day in and out on everysong. >There's much less variety in the personel. Yeah, but you'd think the songs themselves would be a little more varied. >Over all I'm happy with this release. I expect it will grow on me >more with time and I can't wait to get my hands on side 3. Well, I traditionally learn to love things I initially say I hate, so who knows...but I don't hate this. I just don't like it. I'll be buying side 3, natch, just to see if there's anything I like better on it, but...sigh. Drew ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:54:08 -0400 From: Ken Ostrander Subject: The Nader Way >So, by the way -- not to start a flame war -- but where are all the List >Naderites? The one who said that a Gore and Bush presidency would be >identical? I am curious what you think now, one year into this farce of a >presidency.... ah yes, the green pariah. i was lucky enough to live in massachusetts where nader even beat bush in some districts! the idea that anyone takes a vote from someone else is a smokescreen. they're lucky if someone turns out to vote at all; and the last time i checked, my vote belonged to me, not some politician. the real bullshit issue is that democrats are still trying to condemn green party candidates across the country for being "spoilers". if they really want to do something about this issue, then they should be inacting instant runoff voting. now that's a solution! maybe they need to lose a few more elections before they get the idea. http://www.fairvote.org/contents.htm#irv that said, i had reached a point where i could no longer in conscience vote for the republicrats. for me, it was the issue of corporate influence. now, of course, the two presidencies would not have been identical; but their campaigns were way too close for comfort. and that's very telling. what if things turned out differently? i do think that we may have avoided 9/11 if there was no white house white wash of the bin laden family in their stifling of investigations. who knows? it's been a standing policy for a long time to protect our relationship with the saudis. under the democrats, we certainly wouldn't have herr ashcroft wrapping himself in the flag whilst shredding the constitution. yes, bush is a hypocrital, know-nothing, papa's boy. he is pushing for military action when it is impractical and expensive and pre-emptive. we're pushing for "regime change" when we don't have any proof about the weapons of mass destruction in a country where they have the largest infant mortality rate (thanks to the sanctions) in the world. they condemn violence but act unilaterally with bombings that kill innocents and destroy their water supply. shrub himself got out of serving, as did cheney (both of whom are tangled up in corporate scandals and perhaps looking for some kind of levensonesque distration). they are using "the crisis" as the latest lame excuse for his backward energy policy that continues (as the clinton administration did) to neglect renewable sources. hail to the thief and his daddy's judges. let's hear it for those corporate sponsors (not that republicans have cornered that market - how many large corporate donors contributed to both campaigns?); a! nd w hile we're at it, let's thank the president for cowtowing to the religious right. is there anyone that thinks this guy is really running things? http://www.textism.com/bucket/reading.html the fact that gore lost (if he lost) to this dufus is almost funny. almost. he lost his lead after waffling in the debates. bush did suprisingly well, highlighting the value of being underestimated. it was only then that the campaign even acknowledged the green menace. imagine what kind of threat nader would have been if he'd been allowed to debate, let alone attend. in the election gore lost his home state!!! and when there was evidence of impropriety, he didn't pursue a statewide recount in florida. i'm still not sure what an "uncounted undervote" is. i keep thinking of how much of a laughing stock we must be in the eyes of the rest of the world. kind of like the obnoxious bully in the schoolyard...you don't laugh to their face. i do think that nader didn't have much of a chance with no exposure; but his campaign paved the way for the many greens running across the country this november. i had hoped to be one of them; but things didn't work out. the greens are going to have to get some people elected in local races and start a groundswell. we have a green candidate for governor here in massachusetts; but (suprise!) most people don't even know it because the papers ignore her. the media is complicit in the status quo. some news just doesn't seem "fit to print". ken "it's not easy being green" the kenster np jerusalem steve earle ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:05:35 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: cheesey geekie shit On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Stewart Russell wrote: > Tom Clark wrote: > > > >So this is new? Timbuktu has done this on the Mac (and Windows too?) for > >almost a decade. > > likewise vnc, cross-platform and free. And refreshing slow as molasses. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:19:33 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... > Quail: > >>I was wondering, however, if some of those Naderites still > think that Bush > and >>Gore would have identical presidencies, or at the > least, what would be > different. Rex: > Thing is, I don't think there are that many Naderites who really > thought/think that. But if there are/were, nobody-- and I > mean nobody--will cop to it now. I wonder if this is true. I think the discussion would have a different trajectory if Jeme were still here, as I imagine he was one of "the ones who" that Quail had in mind when he asked his question. +brian in New Orleans ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:59:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... "Rex.Broome" wrote: > ChrisG: > >>You, personally, as a Californian voter, did not help Gore lose; > >>but the Nader candidacy certainly did. > > But still, can you blame any voter (and I mean anyone) for voting for > the campaign that puts forth the vision that's more compelling to > them? IST dimly R something called voting your conscience. > > Extending the record store metaphor... yesterday I go into the record > store, manage to avoid the pickpockets with my $17, and there before > me in the just-released rack are the new Beck album and the debut > album by American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson. Now, I only have $17 > and I want to encourage adventurous music over prefab crap, so I > should choose the Beck album as it's more likely to be purchased by a > larger number of people and make a chart showing for Vaguely Folk- > Like Alternative Rock. But if I can find it (which I couldn't), why > not pass them both by and pick up Nextdoorland, which is the record > whose "vision" speaks to me? I mean, who died and made > Beck, or Gore, my spokesperson? the problem though with the whole record store/mugging analogy is that it assumes that everyone who voted for Nader would -- had their not been a Nader candidacy -- voted for Gore. While that is true of some Nader voters, it's probably truer than a vast majority of them, especially the younger ones, simply would not have voted at all. So really, they would have -- after seeing NDL not available, simply left the store to go buy some weed. It should also be noted that those Nader voters in Washington State, probably were the difference in swinging the senatorial race to the Democrat from whoever the Republican candidate was, helped put the Democrats in the position to retake the Senate when Jim Jeffords decided he was tired of the Christian Supremacist wing of the Republican party's bullshit and defected. So if Nader cost Gore the White House, he also gave the Dems the Senate at the same time. ===== "If we don't allow journalists, politicians, and every two-bit Joe Schmo with a cause to grandstand by using 9-11 as a lame rhetorical device, then the terrorists have already won." -- "Shredder" "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt . New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:32:46 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: The German Way On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, *FS Thomas* wrote: > > ...maybe Bush has Satan up his ass and the silly things phrophetic > > jews, christians and catholics say are true. > > Playing the Horned One's advocate, conversely, Bush could have God up his > ass. he probably does, but which sorta god is that? the same one the others have? a god is a god isn't it? gSs ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:47:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Rex.Broome wrote: > ChrisG: > >>You, personally, as a Californian voter, did not help Gore lose; but the > >>Nader candidacy certainly did. > > But still, can you blame any voter (and I mean anyone) for voting for the > campaign that puts forth the vision that's more compelling to them? IST > dimly R something called voting your conscience. I don't want to frame it as a question of "blame." Of course you should vote for whomever your conscience tells you to pick. If that was Nader, fine -- I respect that. Similarly, I can respect the 48% of the voters in 2000 who followed their consciences and voted for Bush. But I don't think either you or they made the best decision for the country. I really wish that a few thousand more Floridians had had their consciences tell them to vote for Gore instead of Nader; we'd be better off today if they had. On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > the problem though with the whole record store/mugging analogy is that > it assumes that everyone who voted for Nader would -- had their not > been a Nader candidacy -- voted for Gore. While that is true of some > Nader voters, it's probably truer than a vast majority of them, > especially the younger ones, simply would not have voted at all. So > really, they would have -- after seeing NDL not available, simply left > the store to go buy some weed. No, no, no. I'm not assuming that *every* Nader voter would have otherwise voted for Gore. But in polls at the time, about 40-50% -- yes, forty to fifty percent -- of Nader voters did say that they would have voted for Gore if Nader hadn't run. A similar number (about 40%) said they wouldn't have voted at all, and 15 or 20% would have chosen Bush (!), with the others picking other candidates. Of course polls aren't the word of God, but they're all that we have to go on here. Meanwhile, the margin of Bush's (apparent) victory in Florida was only like 500 votes, while Nader got over 90,000. So if Nader hadn't run, we can estimate that between 36,000 and 45,000 of his voters would have gone to Gore, 36,000 or so would have stayed home, and no more than 18,000 would have voted for Bush. Result: Florida goes to Gore, who thus wins the national election. Of course, the nuances of all this were hard to work into my record-store analogy.... - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 17:34:11 -0400 From: Brian Subject: Re: Robyn on left, Kimberly on right? At Wednesday, 25 September 2002, Ross "Headphone" Taylor wrote: >Enjoying NextDoorLand. I think I consistently >hear Robyn's guitar on the left (i.e. the >earphone that's in my left ear) and Kimberly's >on the right -- K w/ more choppy, syncopated >strumming & harsher, fatter tone, R w/ more >fingerpicking, or strumming that's more a >straight pulse, guitar maybe a bit chorused >from time to time? Of course there's some >multitracking, at least on Mr. Kennedy & >Strings, w/ recreational stereo panning (partic. >on Mr. K.) for the 3rd & 4th guitar or >"sitar," but w/ single-note stuff it's harder >for me to tell their styles apart. Great observations Ross. When I get phone I'm gonna reach for my head phones... >Guitar etc. sounds remind be not so much of U.M. >as Fegmania!, which is fine w/ me. I can hear this. I'm Only You is a jam song too. I Love Lucy sounds to me like it could be from UM. Drew: It's good you're giving yourself the opportunity to grow into it. I hope it works! You've been listening to lots of Bowie lately. Does Lions and Tigers remind you at all of Scary Monsters? Review: http://www.fakejazz.com/reviews/2002/softboys.shtml - -Nuppy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:09:47 +1200 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Fruhling, Sommer, Herbst, Winter >1. The implication that Hitler's goal was not to conquer Europe and to >create a greater Germanic state but to get the volk off his back until the >economy picked up. it is perhaps worth noting that the original German minister's statement did not compare Bush to Hitler. It compared Bush's methods to Hitler's methods. A subtle difference, but an important one. >> That is, the dusks are better the further you >> get from the equator. > >yeah, but you guys got your seasons ass-backwards ... nah. That's you northerners. What better time to have Christmas than in the middle of summer? You can spend most of the holiday on the beach. (Admittedly, eggs and bunnies in autumn is a bit weird). James (will Nextdoorland ever be released in New Zealand???) nf - New Mexico. Well, why not? It's one of the most attractive US state flags. (Not much competition there, really, except Maryland, Alaska, Hawaii, and a couple of others). 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, 25 Sep 2002 21:21:25 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: The German Way On Wednesday, September 25, 2002, at 11:15 AM, gSs wrote: > On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, steve wrote: >>> Very interesting that the US did not veto today's UN resolution >>> calling >>> for Israel to stop smashing up the Palestinian chairman's compound >>> (passed14-0 by the Security Council). Could this be the beginning of >>> a more >>> even-handed policy? >> >> >> Not in 1000 years. > > why then didn't the us veto the resolution? Don't mistake a short term position for a long term goal. - - Steve __________ Do you think Americans should ask God to grant George W. Bush the power to fly? House majority whip Tom DeLay, the ability to predict the future? Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, X-ray vision? In a prayer written for the National Day of Prayer, May 2, the Reverend Lloyd Olgivie, the Senate chaplain, asks God to "bless our President, Congress, and all our leaders with supernatural power." He didn't beseech God to endow them with strength and wisdom--a more reasonable request--but to make them superheroes. - David Corn ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:57:06 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: Setting down my last political post, slowly backing away... On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Rex.Broome wrote: > But still, can you blame any voter (and I mean anyone) for voting for the > campaign that puts forth the vision that's more compelling to them? IST > dimly R something called voting your conscience. Yeah, there is such a thing...but given teh way voting actually *works*, quite often it's not a very good idea. In a very close race (that is, close in your state), if we know that most Nader voters otherwise would vote for Gore (if they'd vote at all) and that Nader himself has no chance, a vote for Nader is effectively a vote for not-Gore - and the only viable not-Gore is Bush. Voting *shouldn't* work that way - but it does. (Glad to see someone else mentioning IRV in this context.) - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::[clever or pithy quote]:: __[source of quote]__ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 23:08:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: a series of short knee-jerk responses On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, John McIntyre wrote: > There's a marvelous scene in the movie _Party Girl_. Due to some drug > induced indiscretions, Parker Posey has been sentenced to community > service in the public library. She falls in love with the Dewey Decimal > system, and her DJ boy friend comes home to prep for a gig, only to > discover that she has rearranged his record collection according to the > Dewey Decimal system. And this is my cue to mention one of my geek-fave album titles: the band Dis- titled their debut full-length _M386.D57 1994_. Okay, I think that's Library of Congress system, but still... - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Never drive a car when you're dead:: __Tom Waits__ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:23:15 -0400 From: rosso@videotron.ca Subject: Re: harmony ruins a bloody good racket? I may as well chime in. Generally, by the time I get the latest RH release other listmembers have been discussing it for weeks. This time I came across a promo release for $0.63.5 US (as explained earlier). My own reaction is at odds with Drew's. Another feg friend had already told me he was "underwhelmed", so I was braced for disappointment. It didn't happen. What I heard was the Soft Boys, not exactly sounded way back when, but as a contemporary band (OK, a contemporary band of old farts like me). I can hear a Robyn who has been through Moss Elixir and is continuing (in part) that line of thought with the help of a full and interacting band. That's something I've been missing lately from Robyn. My first reaction was that this is the CD I can play for my friends who roll their eyes back into their sockets when I play RH solo. Subsequent plays haven't made me think otherwise. No, there isn't an "Old Pervert", or a "Sandra's Having Her Brain Out". Robyn's doesn't have any zits of that nature left to squeeze. To me those songs were sometimes interesting, sometimes embarassing songwriting exercises. If this year's SB CD did comprise a number of tracks like those, wouldn't that be the " half-assed nostalgia" Drew heard? When I hear this I think I'm hearing a band whose next CD I will want to hear. Compare that to CS&N's first reunion album, or the Threetles. I don't think it sounds like the Egyptians, either. As a matter of fact, I just wrote another feg a letter (but didn't mail it) saying how I thought this was one of the two things I wanted. The othe would be a carefully planned excursion over the edge. At least that's how I hear much of the Egyptians material I prefer. The first time I heard "Strings" I said to myself "now *there's* the Soft Boys", but I'm rethinking that reaction now. I still like Strings, but isn't the Soft Boys the band that features a Robyn who is nearing 50? Songs like "My Mind Is Connected To Your Dreams" is the Soft Boys of today, and the song itself sounds better as rendered by the band than it did with Robyn on TV a while back. This whole thing is the Soft Boys, and it could be the most vital reunion album I can remember hearing. Maybe some of you can think of better examples. I can't. If the Beatles were all still alive and reunited, I'd wish for better than a rehash of "I Am The Walrus". I think this is good music, and that the promo copy I found at the used CD shop is unfortunately in good company. Maybe Robyn needs to be the next Moby. Am I babbling? At least it's about Robyn. On 25 Sep 2002 at 0:24, drew wrote: > well. > > it's polite. > it's pleasant. > it's even-tempered. > > these are three things a soft boys album really shouldn't be. i will > probably get used to the fact that i paid $16.00 for what is really a > robyn hitchcock & the egyptians album with matt seligman standing in > for andy metcalfe and kimberley rew guesting. i will probably learn > to enjoy this record as hitchcock-flavored wallpaper. but i don't > think i'm ever going to get excited about it. > > it's just not an exciting record. the tempo is pretty even all the > way through, and morris windsor takes a share of the responsibility > for the boredom by playing a sedate, adult-contemporary drum pattern > for most of the songs. the songs themselves just don't turn me on, > and haven't since i heard a few of them on the last tour. to > paraphrase sondheim, "they're not good, they're not bad, they're just > nice." this is not the band that clanged out "ugly nora," "sandra's > having her brain out," and "old pervert," and while i don't miss the > alleged misogyny i do miss that aura of nastiness and sordidness, > both in the lyrics and the music. these boys never got too > dirty, just enough to keep things interesting. > > the only songs that sound at all like soft boys songs are the only > ones all four contributed to, the fun mostly-instrumental "i love > lucy" and the lopsided but relatively unpredictable "strings". but > line them up next to "the pigworker" or even "have a heart, betty > (i'm not fireproof)" and you have to wonder what the point of this > was. the reason is obvious: hitchcock's aged over 20 years and he > just doesn't write songs like that anymore. his new stuff is > excellent but it's just different in character. it's more personal, > and most of the time it's less abrasive. but it's not less diverse; > jewels for sophia had more variety over three songs than > nextdoorland has in its entirety. what happened here? > was it the awkwardness of writing songs for a full band again? > > eh. well, i'm starting to like "mind is connected" a little, though > the "bzup bzup" stuff still seems lame and it still seems like > self-parody. "i love lucy" and "la cherite" are terrific, if slight. > "sudden town" isn't bad. the rest of it i can mostly take or leave, > and i would definitely leave "mr. kennedy" (which gets actively > annoying come solo time) and "lions and tigers," which no one seems > to want to admit is not just uninvolving but actually a dud. > > i'm disappointed, but fortunately not surprised. i'll keep > listening, and it'll probably grow on me, but i hope it's the sudden > fertility of sophia and a star for bram > that's robyn's future, and not this oddly half-assed nostalgia. > > - drew ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 22:00:38 -0700 From: Mark Gloster Subject: clari-fixations and more rantations Here is a little clarification of my 2% comment, for which I didn't see any response, and some extra thotz: Statistically, Ralph Nader did not exist in the election, as he brought in 2% of the voters to the election that would not have otherwise voted. The thing that will never cease to amaze me is how unable the major parties- especially the Democratic party- are to say, "this is my fault." Ralphy is an easy scapegoat, and because of that the party will not take sufficient credit for their woes. This also means that the political system will not change for the better until the parties are seriously challenged from elsewhere. It is a complete waste of time to villify a statistical non-entity for the failings of an incompetent entity, though it is doing just that. Until the Dems figure it out, they will probably begin to lose races due to real statistical entities who are more populist than Ralphy, and, yes those elections will be won by Republicans. Maybe they need to prepare their excuses for those future races now. Here's a thought I have more every day. Why does the Democratic party claim ownership of all voters who disagree with their enemy? I did not leave that party (for which I used to work on campaigns) in so much as they left me. My party affiliation change happened around '89. I think that was acknowledging something that had occurred around '82 or before. There are no virtues in the Democratic party, if so, they are only comparative ones. The more my allegiance is expected by the Democrats and the more negative their view of challengers, the less likely it is that I will _ever_ vote for another one of their candidates. Both parties are steadfast in holding onto some form of status quo, though the Dems have drifted far to the right and seriously form no alternative. No candidate from the two parties appears to comport him/her/itself in an honest fashion. American (yes, and world) politics is broken. "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is the singular piece of policy which differentiated Bush/Clinton/Bush, and it is possibly the most pathetic executive order ever (except for a number of pardons from the last several presidents.) I will admit that the _focus_ of those presidents has been different, though. Because of the state of our country's politics, had there been no Nader in the election I could likely have supported nearly any of the fruit-and-nut party candidates or not voted for a presidential candidate at all, but I suppose my personal world view has changed such that I'd vote for almost anybody who just told the truth. Don't worry, I'm not holding my breath. We as an entire people need to figure out how to look upward for better possibilities instead of trying to merely limit our losses at every juncture by selecting the lesser of two sames and accepting that as the path of life. If we choose to stay within the confines of a broken system we need to avoid whining about those who look for an alternative, for to do so we are aiding and abbetting to perpetuate the problems of our parties. Happies, - -Markg ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #303 ********************************