From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #145 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, May 18 2004 Volume 13 : Number 145 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Vegetable Friendless ["Rex.Broome" ] RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 [] Re: Letting Ross off the hook... [] RE: Vegetable Friendless ["Bachman, Michael" ] RE: Moral High Ground [] Smile [Eb ] RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 ["Fortissimo" ] Re: Moral High Ground ["Fortissimo" ] RE: Moral High Ground [] RE: Moral High Ground ["Fortissimo" ] RE: Moral High Ground ["Brian Huddell" ] Re: the fighting rages on [grutness@surf4nix.com] Re: the ongoing debate [grutness@surf4nix.com] could this be the source of... (>50% RH!) [grutness@surf4nix.com] RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 [Capuchin ] plea to London-area fegs [Dolph Chaney ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 ["Michael Wells" ] Re: Kerry Schmerry [Jeff Dwarf ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 12:23:32 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Vegetable Friendless Nuppy: >>It should be released as a live album- except there is no performance of >>Vegetable Friend. Come to think of it I don't think that one's been performed >>live. Correct me? The Asking Tree has no record of it ever being performed live... The list of originals never known to have been performed live is actually pretty interesting: http://www.jh3.com/robyn/base/songs.asp?qq=11 Quite heavy indeed on Invisible Hitchcock and Groovy Gravy selections... Overall, it's a really short list of unperformed song when compared to the amount of songs the man has written! - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:24:35 -0500 From: Subject: RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 11:37 , Palle Hoffstein sent: >This is, of course, yet another reponse to gSs: > >...offense >intended.... > >Ah, now I understand. Well, since your goal gshell, is to offend, I must >therefor conclude something. the goal to offend was only stated and intended their. i usually make some sort of signal when that is to be expected. >Your limited knowlege of world history made me suspect as much anyway. >I will assume in the future that each of your posts has offence in mind, >not the dispensing of facts or ideas. Well at this point I really don't care how you feel, but would you mind giving some examples to support your claim of my limited knowledge of world history. Everyone makes mistakes and i've made mistatements in regard to documented facts, but anytime this has happened it usually gets followed with a correction from someone on the list. sometimes even conflicting corrections at that. If I have mistated something as fact, I beg for correction so please send a list. >...it always seems to end this way. i reveal my thoughts, like so many do on >this >list, it cuts the thin skin so many have... > >Interesting. In 15 years of internest discussions that may rank as one of >the vainest things I've read. That was the intent. Thanks. >You probably pride yourself on your thick >skin, or the thin-skinnedness of others would not be such a badge of honour. No not really. >However, you cannot claim to offend intentionally, and decry others for >being offended. >That's like cutting off someone's hand and mocking them for bleeding. >I certainly won't be de-listing because you're here - I am slow to >take offence and like debates. My intent there was not to make you or anyone else leave the list. I just said what was on my mind. The responses of many people on this list to many of things I said with no intentional offense meant, was meant specifically to offend me. sometimes i respond accordingly, sometimes i don't. often i say and write what comes to mind, almost verbatim. most people try to proof everything they say and write, i don't bother. >I will instead take you as a reminder that >xenophobia and backwoods national vanity, as a rationale for selective >historical doctoring, continues as a phenomenon today. yeeee haaaaa, i got you going. see, that was meant to offend. you wrote it for that specific reason. it certainly wasn't the first time that nearly same exact offensive comment was thrown in my direction from someone on this list. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:26:25 -0500 From: Subject: Re: Letting Ross off the hook... [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 11:25 , Rex.Broome sent: >Actually, not that I want my hat back in the ring... that was me. > ah shit sorry. you can be excused. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 15:49:59 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Vegetable Friendless Rex wrote: >Quite heavy indeed on Invisible Hitchcock and Groovy Gravy selections... >Overall, it's a really short list of unperformed song when compared to the amount of songs the man has written! Plus a couple from Black Snake Diamond Role. I seems to mostly songs from his early solo days. Give Me A Spanner, Ralph was only played 3 times. My theory, that is to say the theory which is mine, is that Arnold was thinking of Give Me A Spanner, Ralph when he uttered the line "Hand me the torque wrench" in Terminator 2. Michael B. NP The George Shearing Quintet - Back To Birdland ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 12:57:51 -0700 From: "Palle Hoffstein" Subject: RE: Greg Shell vs ROTW Behalf Of Jason Brown (Echo Services Inc) ...I think you are really reaching here. I'd wager Canada has a higher likelihood of serious internal conflict than the US, be it Quebecois or Western separatism. Urban and rural America have long been very far apart politically and the real power these days lies in the suburbs and ex-urbs. Sure there is the Red/Blue State split but that is not the stuff of violent struggle. Even the south is far less homogenous than it once was. Political strife may well continue but vilolent struggle outside the fringiest of the fringe? No way... Well, I don't see anything like a civil war or anything. But I could see something greater than say, the unrest of the sixties. And I think it's a way off yet, if it does actually happen. And I would see it more along the lines of violent protest, even terrorism, than actual fighting. But I don't see the tensions between the two sides lessening soon. If anything, the far right and far left are entrenching. I don't think the fundamentalists will give up without a fight, nor will the liberals give up the bill of rights to a theocracy. I don't really see it as a Red/Blue state thing, as a division that exists within almost every state. And, yes, I could see it in Canada too, though Quebec and Western separatism are currently on something of a decline. I think if it happened here it would be a left/right thing too. But I stand by my observation that North America could see more strife in the near future than Europe, which was what gSs seemed to be implying. A look at diaries in the 1850s reveals total shock that the civil war happened. Despite the deep differences that divided America at the time, if you asked any American 20 years before the civil war if something like it could happen, almost all would say "no chance" and mean it. Things have a way of getting where you'd never expect it. I hope I'm wrong - and again I'm talking percentages, not predictions. Palle ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 15:27:33 -0500 From: Subject: RE: Moral High Ground [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 11:17 , Palle Hoffstein palleh@digitaleclipse.com> sent: >Subject: Re: Moral High Ground >Again, you respond to worries about what the US is doing, by raising what >others are doing instead. The vast majority of political, non RH comments we get here concerns US actions. Not all US actions are good and I have never said anything to support that. Far leaning groups of all kinds are always the most interesting. Some of my social and humanitary beliefs put me way past even the most "liberal left" people I have ever met. But two things are always the same. Right wingers think I'm a communist and left wingers think I'm not a communist. It works out just perfect. >Again, I ask, what does what Russia is doing have to do with our >concerns about what America is doing? Cannot we be concerned about both? Sure so why aren't we? Sure but nobody here ever mentions this or seems concerned. I was just inserting a few interesting facts. it's like eating wasabi sushi, kinda. >Would it not seem obvious that a discussion group with many Americans but no >Russians on it would tend to discuss one more than the other for obvious >reasons? I like to consider myself an earthling at best and would love to issue everyone an earthid, valid anywhere on earth and licensed worlds beyond. >At least Russia, unlike Bush, insn't asking for internation >applause. They admit they want to hold on the region for economic reasons >and to maintain some influence in the middle east - same reasons as America, >but America is unwilling to admit it. I don't remember Bush ever asking for applause, just assistance. But, I do remember hearing the administration state long before the war that a new stable democracy in iraq would help not only the us, the middle east and the rest of the world. is that his true intent? i don't know and i don't claim to know. even time might not reveal his true intentions. do i think he is a man who is pure evil in heart and mind? nope. do i think he is a good leader and should be president? nope, and i never claimed he was. i didn't vote for him or gore and i won't vote him or kerry in november. i actually would like to see some things change. >America has always wanted to be loved. Russia has never cared. When America >isn't loved, they get offended and threaten to go away. But they never do. let's hope that continues. >...yeah, these kinds of things are >just not normal during war and have probably never happened before... > >So you are OK with these things, because they are commonplace? no and i never said they were ok. not even once. i was trying to make a point in regard to her reactions to the pictures in apparent absolute amazement that things like that could occur during wartime. my point was that they happen in every war and it shouldn't be a surpise. >I think that, at most, people are hoping that you might consider some of >what they are saying, instead of going for the reactionary gainsay response >everytime, especially given how limited your arsenal of points seems to be. that is especially pitiful since you know damn well EVERYTIME I respond to anything I don't use a reactionary gainsay response. but thanks for your concern anyway, pompous twit. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 15:06:25 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Smile BRIAN WILSON READIES ALL-NEW RECORDING OF LEGENDARY SMiLE Long-awaited work to be released by Nonesuch Records on September 28 Recording follows triumphant SMiLE performances in Europe with U.S. tour planned for the fall Thirty-seven years after its anticipated release, an all-new studio recording of SMiLEoften referred to as the most famous unreleased album in historywill be made available worldwide by Nonesuch Records on September 28, 2004. SMiLE will be produced by Brian Wilson and will feature the ten-member band that has supported him on tour over the past five years, augmented by The Stockholm Strings and Horns. Wilson and lyricist Van Dyke Parks, who collaborated on the original SMiLEsessions in 196667, listened together to the 37-year-old tapes in November 2003, following Wilsons announcement of his intention to complete and perform SMiLE in a series of concerts in London. Acting as Wilsons and Parks musical secretary, Darian Sahanaja, of Wilsons touring band, began preparing the music for performance. This led to Wilson and Parks creating new material to make the concerts possible. The public premiere of the finished SMiLE took place at the Royal Festival Hall in London on February 20, 2004 to overwhelming response. The Los Angeles Times said: What we do know now is that Wilson and Parks created a glorious piece of music whose grand ambition is outstripped only by its inherent beauty and cumulative power. In London, The Guardian referred to SMiLEs groundbreaking complexity and sophistication and wrote that it seemed the grandest of American symphonies, while the Daily Telegraph added, Leonard Bernstein once proclaimed Brian Wilson one of the greatest composers of the 20th century: he was not wrong. The Independent summarized the feeling in the hall: We knew wed witnessed a miracle of sorts. Wilson is currently finishing the new recording of SMiLE at Los Angeles Sunset Sound studio. He will tour the U.K. and Europe this summer and in the fall will embark on a U.S. tour, during which he will perform SMiLE (further details will be announced soon). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:38:22 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 On Tue, 18 May 2004 14:24:35 -0500, gshell@americangroupisp.com said: > the goal to offend was only stated and intended their. i usually make > some sort of signal when that is to be expected. Would that "signal" be yapping away like an ignorant, half-crazed yahoo? You can see, then, why we might be confused. (BTW: here's a link to an article about the US' status as a net debtor nation: As the linked article makes clear (and Morgan Stanley is hardly a left-wing house), it's not hte case that other countries probably owe us more than we owe them.) - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: crumple zones:: :: harmful or fatal if swallowed :: :: small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:45:55 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: Moral High Ground On Tue, 18 May 2004 09:19:23 -0700, "Barbara E Soutar" said: > Brian Huddell said: > > "If you think, Barbara, that it is somehow *difficult* for Americans to > find > solid information about the war or anything else then you are hopelessly > misinformed. You ignore journalists like the contributors to Znet and > Common Dreams, not to mention mainstream writers like Krugman in the NY > Times and Hersh in the New Yorker. You ignore the blogosphere. Greg has > easy access to the same information you do, whether or not he avails > himself > of it or comes to the same conclusions that you and I might." > > I realize that many folks in the States have good access to information. > The same information I have, that is freely available on the evening news > and in newspapers in Canada. Americans have been cut off by a sycophantic > and grovelling media, and have to want to find real news. If Barbara had written that most Americans don't come across good info about the war because their primary sources for news are (a) TV news broadcasts (for Americans generally) and (b) late-night talk-show monologuists (for folks under 25), she'd be on quite solid ground, statistically. It's less a question of what's *possible* to find, and more a question of whether most people bother to look. Given that something like a quarter to thirty-three percent of Americans believe Iraq shared responsibility for 9/11 (not to mention similarly high percentages believing in astrology, UFO abductions, and guardian angels), it's pretty clear that a large number of them are not bothering. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: crumple zones:: :: harmful or fatal if swallowed :: :: small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:57:35 -0500 From: Subject: RE: Moral High Ground [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 16:47 , Matt Sewell sent: >I have to agree with Brian on this - it's a lazy cliche over here that >Americans are either a) stupid; b) fat; c) Have no sense of irony. which is of course neither arrogant nor pompous. >but I would guess that if you took 100 Americans at random and >100 other people at random from any other (certainly Western for fatness) >nation, you'd probably find an equal number of stupid people, fat people >and people with no sense of irony in both demographics... but matt, that takes a big bite out of the very thing this list has come to feast on. >Of course, Americans quite clearly aren't bright enough to get rid of >their *terrible* government but *looks at every other country on Earth* >neither are the rest of us... there you go again matt. damn, yer teetering on the edge. gSs > >Cheers > >Matt > >>From: "Brian Huddell" bhuddell@bellsouth.net> > >Barbara Soutar: > > >>Your government with its > > "embedded journalists" has fooled you. >Everyone else in the > > world is not fooled. > >I've got no interest in >Shell vs. Soutar, but I can't let this insult stand. >If you think, >Barbara, that it is somehow *difficult* for Americans to find >solid >information about the war or anything else then you are hopelessly >>misinformed. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN >Premium! > - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:50:07 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground On Tue, 18 May 2004 11:17:28 -0700, "Palle Hoffstein" said: > Would it not seem obvious that a discussion group with many Americans but > no > Russians on it would tend to discuss one more than the other for obvious > reasons? Exactly. I mean, if someone told you they'd surprised your wife flirting heavily with some guy in a cafe, would you reply, yeah, but Bob's wife down the road slept with the high school hockey team? Of course, as Americans people are more concerned about America's shortcomings than about those of other nations. As I've said, Americans can theoretically do something about those shortcomings: if the government of Australia is acting up all funny, about all we can do is threaten to ban Paul Hogan movies... - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: crumple zones:: :: harmful or fatal if swallowed :: :: small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 19:00:25 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground Jeff: > It's less a question of what's *possible* to find, and more a > question of whether most people bother to look. I agree. And it's even *less* a question of whether or not one is Canadian. I think it's entirely possible that that a higher percentage of Americans than Canadians choose to base their opinions on the feel-good nationalism of most Big Media. But like any generalization, it's also completely irrelevant when you're discussing an individual. The word for that is prejudice. In the case of gSs, I find it hilarious when people think he's some kind of Fox News / Rush Limbaugh byproduct, when even a cursory look at his posts reveals some thing far weirder than that. It's like when people call Jeme a "liberal" or assume Eddie's a "Democrat". +brian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 12:43:05 +1200 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: Re: the fighting rages on FS: > > OK, so long as we can keep the government there from > > solidifying, we keep the money. > >Yep; provided we do that. The war-time deficit definitely is looking a >little anemic, there, Jeme. It's really in our best interest to weaken >that government in Iraq and keep those troops there for, what, another >two years? Maybe five. Hell, let's clean out the DMZ in Korea and send >*those* boys over to Iraq. Let's fatten that deficit because, you know, >the oil revenues have entirely *paid* for the war! We're almost >breaking even! From BBC-online: "The Pentagon has confirmed it is to send about 3,600 troops from South Korea to Iraq. A brigade of the Second Infantry Division is expected to leave its position near the North Korean border. " Greg: > >things seem to be improving rapidly in Georgia. East Germany and >>Poland had remarkably bloodless coups, as did the Baltic states. > >All of these I believe are simply the result of the failure of the >entire soviet >socialist system. One system fails, another replaces it. Are more >people moving >into these countries, or out? into. There is a great migration boom into these regions as their economies open up to the west. >Fair examples of all the things russia did wrong, but what about the other >casualites of the soviet system for example Ukraine, Latvia, >Slovakia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, >Tajikistan, Uzbekistan for instance? Belarus has taken over exactly where the Soviet Union has left off, and the central Asian republics aren't good examples of democracy in action, sure. But Ukraine is becoming one of the stronger economies of eastern Europe, and Latvia is one of the Baltic republics I mentioned. >I could make a much longer list of countries and periods lasting >centuries or more >and costing millions of lives in which bloodless coups and revolutions haven't >worked. when a person implies that something cannot happen, it only takes one counter-example to disprove him or her. > >>The American colonists were brutal and violent to the British. Do >>>you think that the attitude of the US government today is a direct result of >>>this violent revolution? >> >>no, but what was the US Government's attitude to the native American >>races like for the first 50, 75, 100 years after independence? > >about equal with most but not all other dominant european, african, asian >attitudes towards the natives of any lands they were conquering. exactly. They learnt how to conquer - by violence - and continued with perfect consistency. 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, 19 May 2004 13:03:52 +1200 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: Re: the ongoing debate Palle said: > >Shit, you'd all be either heil hitlerin' or worshipping Stalin if it wasn't > >for us. That is a fact... > >That is true. Not that positive behaviour in the past excuses poor behaviour >in the present. We send people to prison for murder, even if they saved a >life previously, which is as it should be. Canada remembers America's help >in WWII and remains grateful. We also rememeber that, while we were being >slaughtered, it took the US to be attacked on their own soil before they >joined in. perfectly put, and much better than I could have expressed the same thing. >America has always wanted to be loved. Russia has never cared. When America >isn't loved, they get offended and threaten to go away. But they never do. speaking as someone who lives in a country that has suffered from "colonial cringe", this is perfectly understandable. NZ has always had this chip on its shoulder about being better than Australia, simply because somewhere deep down inside there is the fear that we are not as good. Coupled with that is a wish to be loved overseas. We want to feel good about ourselves, and we do that by putting our rivals (rivals? They're our best friends internationally!) down and wanting everyone to like us. Ask anyone who's visited NZ, and they'll tell you - the first thing a local will ask is "so, how do you like New Zealand?" The US feels the same way about Europe. Even when the apparent enemy or rival has been Iraq, or Japan, or the Soviet Union, western Europe is a major subject of US criticism. They see a region which should be their greatest international allies as a region which has to be considered a rival, yet at the same time wants to be adored by everyone. It's simply a geopolitical inferiority complex. It's interesting to note that the Ancient Romans heftily criticised the Ancient Greeks, while simultaneously adopting many Greek customs to make them seem more appealing to their neighbours. 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, 19 May 2004 13:22:25 +1200 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: could this be the source of... (>50% RH!) I was just reading an article in one of the Uncut "NME Originals" magazines, which was a report on Bob Dylan's first visit to the UK. It contained the following: 'What is your message? "Keep a good head an always carry a light bulb." (Dylan sat through the conference brandishing and outsize electric light bulb. He refused to be drawn on its exact significance.)' a long shot, perhaps, but could this interview have been an inspiration for a certain well-known early RH song? 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: Tue, 18 May 2004 18:51:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 On Tue, 18 May 2004, FS Thomas wrote: > Let's fatten that deficit because, you know, the oil revenues have > entirely *paid* for the war! We're almost breaking even! > > Not. That's the sort of accounting that gives you the puzzle of the three men in the hotel ("Where'd the extra dollar go?"). The PUBLIC pays for the war and a handful of private interests get the money. The oil revenue that you mention is the profit from the sales of the oil. The cost of production is being paid to the private corporations that are rebuilding the oil fields, pumping, refining, and shipping. And those aren't the same companies that were doing the job under Saddam Hussein. Whether or not the US government loses or makes money on the deal is totally irrelevant. (Hell, better if they LOSE the money, really, for the conservatives.) The purpose of government, in this right-wing regime, is to turn public funds into private profits: tax the poor to increase the wealth of the rich. > The revenue from the oil goes into accounts; those accounts pay for > reconstruction/rebuilding of infrastructure. Exactly! That money goes to Haliburton, et al. The Army Corps of Engineers isn't doing the rebuilding. It's being done by contractors. > I will give you (or anyone) the last word. The topic will go > unanswered. Quail tactics, too. Nice. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 21:30:16 -0500 From: Dolph Chaney Subject: plea to London-area fegs hi all: I'm going to be on vacation all around London from 16th-24th June. My accommodations are in Hampstead, but I intend to do loads of train trips. So, I am soliciting advice on non-tourist great things to do, eat, drink, see, and experience. I would also dearly love to meet up with as many of yez as possible! (Godders: a trip Bathward is in the offing...) in light of recent topics, I'm seeking advice about how best to comport myself once outed as an American in various settings. should I bring a Dubya voodoo doll and invite people to help me attack it? are there slightly more subtle ways to get the same point across effectively? - -- dolph shit, I've gotta be political now. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 21:45:52 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 Jeme finishes: > Quail tactics, too. Nice. Jeme, have you considered that people really *do* want to talk about this...but they have an upleasant reaction to the way you go about it? Honestly, it's amazing to read complaints of (paraphrasing here) 'a decrease in the quality of public discourse' from someone who often does his discoursing in a superior, belittling tone. Personally, I love systematically deconstructing arguments...but I don't want to read it or do it myself in a way that discourages other people from participating. And calling it "Quail tactics" is compliment any way I read it. Michael "and don't get me started on Troy yet" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 19:44:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Kerry Schmerry steve wrote: > On May 17, 2004, at 8:56 AM, Bachman, Michael wrote: > > The approval rate for Bush is down to 42%. It's > > slipping dramatically month by month. Close to 60% of > > the those polled believe the country is heading in the > > wrong direction. > > These are bad numbers for an incumbent. Big-time loser > numbers. No incumbent president with numbers that low has ever been re-elected in fact. Presidential elections with an incumbent are more of a referendum about the incumbent than about the challenger, so unless Bush suddenly learns how to make wheat into marijuana, he's pretty close to toast actually, assuming that Kerry isn't caught in bed with the proverbial dead girl or live boy. > If these numbers hold, Kerry need only prove > that he is a plausible replacement for Bush. The place > to do that would be in the debates. Exactly, and given Bush's increasingly huffy, self-righteous, and detached demeanor (could he have sounded any more bored when saying how disturbed he was about the Abu Ghraib abuses? Okay, maybe I'm projecting a smidge), Bush is unlikely to win over anyone he doesn't already have at those debates. Kerry, while bland, will at least sound steady and adult. Other than a temporary pushes after the conventions, most polling changes happen in the month or so before the election itself which is when most people really begin making their decisions. That Bush's numbers keep dropping this early on is actually pretty unusual. > It's six months to the election, and things can change, > but I wouldn't say I'd eat my shorts if Bush loses. > > The numbers - > > It should also be noted that in recent years, Zogby's numbers have generally been more accurate that those of other polling services. ===== "Life is just a series of dogs." -- George Carlin "I'm going to keep playing music until somebody shoots me." -- Scott McCaughey __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! - Internet access at a great low price. http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/ ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #145 ********************************