From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #146 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, May 19 2004 Volume 13 : Number 146 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: Greg Shell vs ROTL [] reap [Eb ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 [Capuchin ] Re: A plug for my favorite blog (NR) [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: the fighting rages on [] Re: Kerry Schmerry ["Fortissimo" ] oil and ideology... ["Fortissimo" ] Re: The Moral High Ground [Barbara E Soutar ] re: Vegetable Friendless, etc. ["Marc Holden" ] Re: The Moral High Ground ["Matt Sewell" ] Re: plea to London-area fegs ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Will these guys shut down if Kerry wins? [steve ] Pretentious Wankers? [steve ] re: Vegetable Friendless, etc. ["Brian" ] RE: reap ["Bachman, Michael" ] ...and now for a question completely different... [Carrie Galbraith ] Re: ...and now for a question completely different... [ Subject: RE: Greg Shell vs ROTL [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:56 , Palle Hoffstein sent: >...It has >taken europe more than 10,000 years to even start getting close to what we >accomplished in the United States in less than 100 years... > >Astonishing claim. Please cite examples, excluding any developmental arc >begun in Europe. Those begun or actually completed? The greatest so far has to be an almost complete unification of north america. How about a list of things that Europe can take credit for? Lets start with World War I, World War II, all the religious wars, indentured servant (slave) trade through around 1955, non-unification, the french-indian war, the Berlin Wall, the fucking soviets, the fucking nazis, yugolslavia, napolean, that crap over god and christianity in the preamble of the EU, non-unification again, dictatorships, monarchies, us-french naval war and the holocaust to finish it off. I can make a much longer list. And lets not forget the colonization, slavery and slaughter of millions of native populations, human and otherwise, throughout most of the world. >Actually, given that America is currently composed of a largely liberal >urban population and a largely rural conservative, usually religious >population, with very different interal and external interests, and that the >left/right disparity has been growing in tension since 1949, while remaining >at roughly 50% of equal votership interest, I think America is actually in >danger of serious internal conflict. Dream on. >The situation has curious analogies to the voter frustrations that led to the >civil war. What? Please explain. >I'm curious. Are you saying that because there is another conflict that is >worse, the lesser conflict is therefor ok? No. >Or are you deflecting the issues of the US/Iraq conflict by offering that because >we're focusing on one conflict and not the other, that we are somehow negligent in >the scope of our arguments. Yes. >Does the a worse conflict, or an under-educated discussion of that conflict make our >comments about the one conflict invalide? No. The same book moves, or party line statements just get really old and boring after a while and a comparison needed to be made. So are you saying I am ignorant on the facts regarding the russian occupation and destruction of chechnya? >Well, that's pretty ingnorant. America has been a power for about 200 years, >and may already be slipping. might be slipping, where? >That's nothing compared to the years as international powers put in by Britain, >France, Spain, Portugal, etc. You mean the combined international misery caused by these great powers during each of their power periods. That is true. >In the grand scheme of things, 200 years is not a long time for an empire. And in >that 200 years America has had one big-ass civil war, hardly the picture of >success. so are you saying that because we had a civil war, we are unsuccessful? >Again, you seem to suggest that the existence of other atrocities, somehow >makes current atrocities ok. I "seem to suggest something"? Ok, point taken. I was just making a point, stating a fact. I did not ever say that any atrocities at any time were ok or acceptable. When was the last time a super power admitted and took action internally to correct such a problem on this level? gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:14:22 -0700 From: Eb Subject: reap Legendary jazz drummer Elvin Jones. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:16:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 On Tue, 18 May 2004, Michael Wells wrote: > 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? Yeah. I've mentioned that myself, at times. Folks get upset and start alleging problems with "tone" and stuff. I don't intend it and I don't see 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. Can you cite examples? I'm not using that as a tactic to undermine your argument, but as a person with a genuine interest in understanding whence this opinion comes. I mean, I certainly feel that my arguments are superior (else I wouldn't argue them!), but I think that's how everyone feels. > 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. I think we can all agree that discussions that cause people to just cover their ears and shake their heads are at best noise and at worst counter-productive. > And calling it "Quail tactics" is compliment any way I read it. Seriously? As I recall it, Quail unsubbed right after pulling this gambit a few times and getting called on it by people other then me. If I had eddie's keen sense of archives, I would pull up the instances. The tactic is to dump your opinion out and then claim that you're not going to respond no matter what anyone says back. It's nothing but arrogance, closed-mindedness, and bluster. > Michael "and don't get me started on Troy yet" Wells Hoo, boy. Not looking forward to that one. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 19:44:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: A plug for my favorite blog (NR) steve wrote: > > > Take a look at the second entry down, an email from Josh > Marshall's friend in Iraq. It's farther down now, so just hit this: ===== "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/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:34:59 -0500 From: Subject: Re: the fighting rages on [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Wed, 19 May 2004 12:43 , grutness@surf4nix.com sent: >when a person implies that something cannot happen, it only takes one >counter-example to disprove him or her. Like a slot machine. I say you won't make the 10 million dollar pull, not implying anything. Will someone win? Sure, someday someone should win, but after how many people lose? I didn't say it could never happen, I said something more like, it won't ever happen. >exactly. They learnt how to conquer - by violence - and continued >with perfect consistency. Do you think the Iraq war is or was ever based on the desire to conquer and colonize, dominate, brutalize and exploit the entire nation for oil? Or do you think the desire was just the violent overthrow of an enemy government? Would you list alternatives or just state why you think nothing should have been done for another decade or so? gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:54:05 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: Kerry Schmerry On Tue, 18 May 2004 19:44:12 -0700 (PDT), "Jeff Dwarf" said: > 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. Could it be arranged to catch me in bed with Kerry's daughter? Oh wait - I wrote that out loud. > already have at those debates. Kerry, while bland, will at > least sound steady and adult. There's his campaign slogan for ya: "Kerry: Vote for an actual adult." - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: "In two thousand years, they'll still be looking for Elvis - :: this is nothing new," said the priest. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 23:36:47 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: oil and ideology... On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:34:59 -0500, gshell@americangroupisp.com said: > Do you think the Iraq war is or was ever based on the desire to conquer > and colonize, > dominate, brutalize and exploit the entire nation for oil? Or do you > think the > desire was just the violent overthrow of an enemy government? And: > (all Iraqi oil profits for the next 5 years) - (monitary cost of war) > does not equal zero. The answer to both questions above is "yes, for the most part." The Iraq war is based on a desire to eliminate an unfriendly government that controlled access to lots of oil, and install a friendly government that will allow continued access to that oil. I think reassuring Israel might factor into this as well. There's an ideological component as well - but since that ideology is, essentially, less government, more business, it in practice equates to what I said above. As to your equation: the oil profits will not pay for the war. We will. We, however, will not see those oil profits: Cheney, Bush, and most prominent politicians, who have strong oil-related interests and portfolios, will. I wish I could remember where it was - but I once saw a stunning chart listing like the last ten or so presidents, vice presidents, secretaries of state and defense, and maybe a few other high offices - and something like 75-80% essentially came from oil money or were heavily invested in same. Right-wingers *want* government to hemorrhage money, be inefficient, and generally be a pain in the ass to all concerned: that way, it's likelier that right-wingers running on anti-government platforms will be elected, and be able to continue their devolution of power from government to corporate interests. If there were a Nobel Prize in Cynical Demogoguery, it should go to the right - for their incredibly successful bait-and-switch effort in convincing thousands of poor and middle-income Americans to vote for them, by appealing to those voters' social conservatism, while their actual practice enacts a consolidation of corporate power. (See Tom Frank's article in _Harper's_ a few months back.) It's also astonishing how conservatives have helped make Americans so incredibly allergic to taxes...and then turn around, point at lame governmental services and inefficiencies (because there's little support to figure out how to be efficient), and blame the poor services on "too many bureaucrats" - and thereby get taxes (i.e., funding for public services) lowered yet again. Our tax load is incredibly small compared with that of most nations - and that of our wealthiest citizens is even lower, in many cases, than that of our poorer citizens. First, even if the actual *rates* of taxation were equivalent, percentage-wise, it's obvious that poor people, and many nominally middle-class people, need a far greater percentage of their gross income for essentials of living. For wealthy people, that's all gravy - so their tax payments come from their yacht fund or whatever. Not to mention that the ridiculously low cut-off for FICA taxes (about $80k for a single income earner) means that that top percentile of Americans earning over $80k actually get about an 8% *bonus* on every dollar they make above that limit - in other words, yet another tax break for the wealthy. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: "In two thousand years, they'll still be looking for Elvis - :: this is nothing new," said the priest. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:40:02 -0700 From: Barbara E Soutar Subject: Re: The Moral High Ground My final comment on the two Americans who are throwing their weight around in such a belligerant fashion on the Feglist, in exact parallel to what their government is doing in the Middle East. Hubris - that's the word for it. Barbara Soutar Victoria, British Columbia ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 23:17:23 -0700 From: "Marc Holden" Subject: re: Vegetable Friendless, etc. Rex pointed out: >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 I saw Robyn play Nocturne once at the Largo. He said it was the only time he had ever played it publicly. I don't recall any of the others being done before. James stated: >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?" He's right of course. I think James or some other Kiwi might have arranged for us to get nailed by Cyclone Grace during our visit to Australia so our already astoundingly good memories of NZ would stand in better contrast to the 5 days of torrential rain we got when we first got to Oz. Marc I wish everybody would have to have an electric thing implanted in our heads that gave us a shock whenever we did something to disobey the president. Then somehow I get myself elected president. Jack Handey ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:23:16 +0100 From: "Matt Sewell" Subject: Re: The Moral High Ground Well I think that's going a little far, Barbara! The war is, quite clearly, an emotive issue, and I'm glad people here can, for the most part, have emotive discussions without having to resort to personal attacks - even when it sinks to that, it's allowed to drop when the subject changes. I can't clearly identify to whom you're referring as throwing their weight around in a belligerent fashion, but I'll take a wild guess and say it's Ferris and Greg. Well, can't say I agree with Ferris too often when it comes to politics, but what he says is perfectly well argued and quite brave, what with all the stick he gets. As for Greg, well, he's got one of those "challenging web personae" and, shall we say, widens the diversity of the list. And I would say that getting too worked up about things that are said on Internet mailing lists, though not necessarily hubris, is probably folly! Cheers Matt >From: Barbara E Soutar > >My final comment on the two Americans who are throwing their weight >around in such a belligerant fashion on the Feglist, in exact >parallel to what their government is doing in the Middle East. >Hubris - that's the word for it. > >Barbara Soutar >Victoria, British Columbia - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Have more fun with your phone - download ringtones, logos, screensavers, games & more. Click here to begin! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 08:07:00 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: plea to London-area fegs Dolph Chaney wrote: > > in light of recent topics, I'm seeking advice about how best to comport > myself once outed as an American in various settings. some useful phrases: - - how about those leafs, eh? - - Sudbury's beautiful in the fall. - - howzitgohwin, eh? - - who needs a president when we got Paul Martin? - - gotta loonie for the meter? I might even have a spare maple leaf decal for your luggage. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 08:51:39 -0500 From: steve Subject: Will these guys shut down if Kerry wins? - - Steve __________ We will look back 20, 30, 50 years from now and recall this as the day marriage ceased to have any real meaning in our country. The documents being issued all across Massachusetts may say 'marriage license' at the top but they are really death certificates for the institution of marriage as it has served society for thousands of years. - James Dobson, Focus on the Family ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 08:58:26 -0500 From: steve Subject: Pretentious Wankers? From Salon's "Wednesday Morning Download" by Thomas Bartlett - "Grave's Disease," matt pond PA, from "Emblems" I had a feeling that I might like matt pond PA as soon as I read Pitchfork's scathing, 1.8 out of 10 review of "The Green Fury," because Pitchfork has such a long history of viciously slamming brilliant albums (Ryan Adams' "Love Is Hell" EPs, Gomez's "In Our Gun," Town and Country's "C'mon"). (I should note that I do read Pitchfork every day, and rely on its coverage of new music -- but I think they're a bunch of pretentious wankers, and their penchant for high-concept, low-content meta-reviews is obnoxious.) In truth, there's nothing really exceptional about the band's middle-of-the-road, wistful, orchestral indie pop. But their music is so sweetly straightforward, and the arrangements and performances so impeccable -- note the way Pond pauses briefly before the last note of the second phrase, making a banal melody into something special -- that I can't help liking them. Free download: "Grave's Disease" - - Steve __________ The Bushies hail pre-emption as a brilliant innovation by The Man, except when they're downplaying it as nothing new to worry about. - Michael Kinsley ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:04:45 -0400 From: "Brian" Subject: re: Vegetable Friendless, etc. On Tue, 18 May 2004 23:17:23 -0700, "Marc Holden" said: > Rex pointed out: > >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 > > I saw Robyn play Nocturne once at the Largo. He said it was the only time > he > had ever played it publicly. I don't recall any of the others being done > before. It's a crying shame Do Policemen Sing? hasn't ever been performed live! "Knife" hasn't really? I thought I saw RHE do this in 89. - -Nuppy - -- Brian nightshadecat@mailbolt.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 11:18:00 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: reap Eb wrote: >Legendary jazz drummer Elvin Jones. That means that McCoy Tyner is the only one left from the classic John Coltrane quartet of 1961-1965. I'll probably be listening to a lot of Coltrane tonight. Elvin also played on a great McCoy Tyner album from the 1970's TRIDENT. Highly recommended. Michael B. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 17:58:04 +0200 From: Carrie Galbraith Subject: ...and now for a question completely different... Hey Fegs, I have an opportunity to see Bob Dylan and "his band" for 28 euros at a Villa near here. Should I? I've never seen him but am just not sure. Any response? Anyone seen him lately? You can email me off line. I'd hate to interrupt the political debate with a music inquiry. Be Seeing You, - - carrie ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 18:11:37 +0200 From: Carrie Galbraith Subject: Re: Vegetable Friendless, etc. (RH content!) On 19/mag/04, at 16:04, Brian ha scritto: > It's a crying shame Do Policemen Sing? hasn't ever been performed live! > > "Knife" hasn't really? I thought I saw RHE do this in 89. > Same here - I was reading through the list and having distinct memories of hearing some of these gems played live somewhere since the first show I saw in 85 or 86 but then I got confused and wondered if I was hearing the recorded version in my head and overlaying in the wild clapping when it never really happened. I seem to remember all the covers real well. I have a clearer memory of his doing Kung Fu Fighting than some of his great originals. However, I know I heard Furry Green Atom Bowl because it was the first hearing and I was with a friend who loved it. But I could be wrong. Sheesh, I'm getting old. Take my eyes, I've used them, - - c ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 17:25:17 +0100 From: "Matt Sewell" Subject: RE: ...and now for a question completely different... Carrie, you should definitely go, though my friend (and Dylaniac) Jim says try and avoid the first 15 rows as that's where the serious obsessives who follow Bob around the world sit. Most recent show I've heard is a couple of years ago and absolutely excellent, but from what I've heard from a few Zimmerheads, Bob is really on form at the moment. I can't stand going to massive arenas (the only places Dylan plays over here apart from a couple of smaller venue shows I was *this close* to getting tix for... grr...), so I've yet to see the man... Cheers Matt >From: Carrie Galbraith >Hey Fegs, >I have an opportunity to see Bob Dylan and "his band" for 28 euros >at a Villa near here. > >Should I? I've never seen him but am just not sure. > >Any response? Anyone seen him lately? > >You can email me off line. I'd hate to interrupt the political >debate with a music inquiry. > >Be Seeing You, >- carrie - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay in touch better and keep protected online with MSNs NEW all-in-one Premium Services. Find out more here. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 17:32:07 +0100 From: Dr John Halewood Subject: RE: plea to London-area fegs Dolph Chaney mimsy'd > 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? There's a few options I can think of 1) Pretend to be Canadian. This won't always help, as the mere presence of a maple leaf is too subtle for many British people. Others just like winding Canadians up by noting the maple leaf and asking "Which part of the states are you from then?" 2) Pretend to be Glaswegian. This entails only eating deep fried food (and strictly no green vegetables or salad), drinking yourself into a stupor by lunchtime every day and greeting people with a headbutt instead of a handshake. Provided you've drunk enough, people won't be able to tell that the accent's wrong. 3) Pretend to be French. This won't really help a lot as the British have generally hated the French for longer than we've hated the Americans, but we're a bit more mellow about it these days. 4) Claim to be Welsh. As someone once said: "To call this the United Kingdom is a joke. The Irish hate the Scotish, the Scotish hate the English and everybody hates the Welsh." Alternatively, just be yourself. You'll probably find that you'll get some grief from people occasionally, but when you explain your position you'll find yourself in that most traditional of British pastimes: happily chatting away moaning about everything... cheers john ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 11:32:26 -0500 From: Subject: Re: ...and now for a question completely different... [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Wed, 19 May 2004 17:58 , Carrie Galbraith sent: >Hey Fegs, >I have an opportunity to see Bob Dylan and "his band" for 28 euros at a >Villa near here. > >Should I? I've never seen him but am just not sure. >Any response? Anyone seen him lately? A wonderful friend and musician extraordinaire named Carolyn Wonderland saw him and his band in Amsterdam around October or November of last year. She said the show sucked. Bob's voice was way gone and none of the players were in sync. Though the performance was bad, she said it was still a great experience. Plus, Bob kissed her. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 12:02:02 -0500 From: "Jay Lyall" Subject: Re: ...and now for a question completely different... I've met Carolyn - I think Bob got the better end of the deal ;-) - ---------------------------------------- Jay Lyall - Houston, Texas "Making people laugh is the lowest form of comedy." - Mike Donohue http://www.johnkerry.com - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 11:32 AM Subject: Re: ...and now for a question completely different... > [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] > On Wed, 19 May 2004 17:58 , Carrie Galbraith sent: > > >Hey Fegs, > >I have an opportunity to see Bob Dylan and "his band" for 28 euros at a > >Villa near here. > > > >Should I? I've never seen him but am just not sure. > >Any response? Anyone seen him lately? > > A wonderful friend and musician extraordinaire named Carolyn Wonderland saw him > and his band in Amsterdam around October or November of last year. She said the > show sucked. Bob's voice was way gone and none of the players were in sync. Though > the performance was bad, she said it was still a great experience. Plus, Bob > kissed her. > > gSs > > > ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:36:47 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: The Looming American Civil War; Robyn content Palle: >>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. Except we have a big cushy middle, and that's why the two major parties always have to field "moderate"-seeming candidates (Bush perhaps having turned out to be a miscalculation on this front, but when he was elected he was still spouting that "compassionate conservatism" BS) . Really, most Americans are either moderates who are a bit wigged out by both fundamentalists and perceived pinkos, or apolitical, which amounts to the same thing in terms of how they view their leaders: they just don't want a guy who seems nuts or dogmatic. Now, admittedly, my perception is that what passes for "moderate" these days is actually fairly conservative, but this pandering to the middle is why there's really a small subset of hot-button issues which are off-limits. Abortion, gay rights, that kind of thing, where the electorate is evenly split enough that candidates can make statements of position but not statements like "I intend to repeal Roe v. Wade" or "I intend to legalize gay marriage". Basic point: people with not much to say don't say much, and that's most Americans, by far. You hear the loud voices on either side of the political spectrum, but that's not very representative. Another place where the Civil War analogy falls a little flat is the lack of geographical concentration of the relative factions. But largely I think the apolitical nature of the majority is a buffer against this, for better or worse. Brian: >>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. Now that I agree with (the principle, anyway)-- way too often, here and elsewhere, I see a blanket assumption that anyone articulating a certain viewpoint is parroting the views of the most obvious proponent of similar viewpoints, usually in the big media. On the contrary, it's entirely possible to come to conclusions of any kind on one's own... in fact, more often than not, those who argue most vociferously will immediately answer such charges with "IDONTHAVEATELEVISIONSOIMUSTBEAFREETHINKER" or something similar. The odds as to whether or not Hitler has already been mentioned by that point are pretty much even, I'd guess, although perhaps our own Mike "Smokin' Fingers" Godwin can clarify that point. Over to that wacky novelty singer Robert Hitchberg... courtesy of Marc Holden, I've recently come into posession of quite a nice selection of Robyn rareties, and stumbled across a song I hadn't heard or thought of for years... "Statue with a Walkman". And I realized that when that little spoken word part, where Robyn takes on a kind of weird American accent ("Now, you might say, that old statue with a walkman, he don't come around much anymore" etc.) starts, I've always thought of that character as a filling station attendant, and I suddenly realized why: because it totally reminds me of a similar little interlude in Tom Verlaine's "Souvenir from a Dream" ("No mister, this is Plattsburgh... Gotta go back to the junction... About five miles... I think you've come the wrong way... You were supposed to make a right turn"), and *that* guy is definitely a filling station attendant. Probably an evil one. Of course by the end of Robyn's monologue, the guy turns into Beefheart again, but that's to be expected. Anyway, thanks, Marc! - -Rex ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #146 ********************************