From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V15 #128 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, June 7 2006 Volume 15 : Number 128 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again [FSThomas ] NEW on DIME: Robyn Hitchcock 1999-09-06 Bumbershoot [wojizzle forizzle ] Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again [FSThomas ] Re: Washington, D.C. [Eb ] Re: Washington, D.C. [2fs ] RE: Washington, D.C. ["Bachman, Michael" ] My name is "Eb" and I love bass pedals [2fs ] Re: My name is "Eb", and I'm still reading this subject line ["Spotted Ea] [My Name Is Eb] Re: In honor of today... [J ] [My Name Is Eb] Re: My name is "Eb" and I love bass pedals ["Spotted Eagl] [My Name Is Eb] Re: Washington, D.C. [2fs ] [My Name Is Eb] Re: Washington, D.C. ["Spotted Eagle Ray" ] [My Name Is Eb] Re: My name is "Eb", and I'm still reading this subject line ["Stewart C. Russell" ] [My Name Is Eb] My name is William Shatner, and I abhor that past tense. Plus, I'm Canadian! [2fs ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 10:09:54 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again 2fs wrote: > This is bullshit: the Constitution stakes its claims in universal terms. It > does not limit the applicability of the principles it sets forth to US > citizens (even though laws at the time did so). Because the principles > explicitly are to apply to everyone, we cannot disregard them as they might > apply to non-US citizens. Really? I'm actually quite fond of the idea that if you're in the country illegally then you should be bereft of Constitutional protections. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." "To ourselves and our Posterity." Not "To ourselves and anyone else who's found themselves within our borders." What Alito is eluding to, though, is the consideration of foreign laws when pondering decisions for the Supreme Court. > If they engage, given the > circumstances, they would essentially have to regard nearly anyone as a > threat - and instant decision-making as to threatworthiness would inevitably > result (as it has in Iraq, in fact) in the killing of civilians: women, > children, elderly, etc. And that situation surely leads to a hatred of what > would be regarded as occupying forces. > Given the sort of thing that happened at Haditha, it's utterly unreasonable > to expect the population to regard the US as "saviors." Can y'all hold judgment on that until after the investigations are complete? I hate the idea of what is being said to have happened. If it *did* happen, then the actions of some rogue soldiers not only endanger the entire military mission, but casts our servicemen in an extremely bad light. If it did happen then the guilty should be prosecuted to the full extent of military law (much harsher than civilian courts, btw). If, however, it *didn't* happen then something needs to be done to stop a flow of false information. False accusations and disinformation have happened. According to James Crossen, who was sitting next to (US Marine Lance Corporal Miguel) Terrazas when the roadside bomb exploded, women and children in the area often helped insurgents. It's likely, according to Crossen, that women and children had given information about US patrols to insurgents. This information, according to Crossen, led to the roadside bomb attack. [1] In addition, Terrazas' father said other marines told him they were fighting with insurgents who used civilians as human shields.[2] (Taken from the Wikipedia entry on Haditha) Hypothetically, what if that's what happened? What if the women and children were used as human shields by insurgents? I'm not towing a party line here, but I don't like a pronunciation of guilt before a trial's even happened. > If a foreign army > had shown up on our shores (even if invited by our government - say, to > ensure the recognition of a contested election) and had found itself > frequently killing groups of civilians, do you really think you, or most of > your fellow citizens, would support them, would regard them as "helping" > your nation, would consider them anything but an occupying force to be > overwhelmed, defeated, and driven out? Define "frequently." Far, far more civilians are being killed by foreign insurgents (read: non-Iraqi) than by US/Coalition forces. > Oh, by the way: I believe in "rule of law" as it applies to the people in my > household and network of friends; outside that, there is no law. So I'll be > ripping off your credit cards shortly ;-) Take my wife! Please! 1. http://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/videoPlayer.php?vidId=68258&catId=81 2. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060531/ap_on_re_us/marines_iraq_terraza - -- FS Thomas | Interactive Developer | fsthomas-at-ochremedia.com 404.758.8616 (home/office) | 404.274.1632 (mobile) | ferraatu (AIM) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 06:14:44 -0700 From: "Marc Alberts" Subject: RE: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again > Stacked Crooked wrote: > > > but, see, there are laws governing international relations -- and these > > laws supersede the constitution. I'm intrigued by your ideas, and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter, but this just ain't so. In the US, the Constitution says this: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be Supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding." Treaties can be allowed to rule over domestic law, but only in accordance with the Constitution and only in areas where the Constitution is not the ultimate authority. Furthermore, under the Supreme Court decision in Reid v Covert, 354 US 1 (1957), the states rights clause in the Bill of Rights is given certain powers that restrict the ability of treaties to be enforced even if enacted by the Senate. The key phrase from the majority decision was "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." In other words, we're still a sovereign country as far as the Constitution is concerned, and no treaty can be enforced where we have de facto sovereignty within the courts under the US Constitution. Marc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 17:06:02 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: In honor of today... On 6/6/06, Eb wrote: > > > I had a Harold Budd album that listened to for years at the wrong > > RPM. It > > happens. :) > > Somewhere I have a Sub Pop single by Wire's Bruce Gilbert...I recall > it being equally good (bad?) at 45 or 33. Don't ask me which speed is > correct, because I don't even remember. Similarly I digitized a bunch of vinyl that a friend leant me and there was one Crash Worship 7" for which I never did figure out the right speed. I just digitized it both ways. Funny things happen. One record started skipping on the phrase "nothing-- at the record store, nothing-- at the record store", and I kept that. And as I was getting ready to digitized Neil Young's RE-AC-TOR the needle dropped onto the record and bounced out of the groove of "Opera Star" so that you heard a blast of scratches, Crazy Horse guitar, and Neil singing the two words "fucked up". It sounds like s dumb joke that I did on purpose, but twasn't so. - -SER ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:40:17 -0400 From: wojizzle forizzle Subject: NEW on DIME: Robyn Hitchcock 1999-09-06 Bumbershoot http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=98877&hit=1 - ----- Forwarded message from DIME ----- A new torrent has been uploaded to DIME. Torrent: 98877 Title: Robyn Hitchcock 1999-09-06 Bumbershoot Size: 328.76 MB Category: Singer/Songwriter Uploaded by: gilde Description - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robyn Hitchcock 1999-09-06 Bumbershoot Festival Opera House, Seattle Center, Seattle, WA Schoeps MK-4 > SBM-1 a/d converter > DAT 01 Arms Of Love 02 Cheese Alarm 03 Lysander 04 Wind Cries Mary 05 Glass Hotel 06 My Wife and My Dead Wife 07 Viva Sea-Tac 08 No, I Dont Remember Guildford 09 Beautiful Girl 10 I Something You 11 I Feel Beautiful 12 Sally Was A Legend 13 Gene Hackman 14 The Ghost In You 15 The Speed Of Things 16 Beginning Of A New Age First time seeded. Yes, that last song is the Velvet Underground classic. Rather big room, so this won't sound as intimate as my Crocodile masters, and the applause is rather thunderous. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:15:02 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again On 6/7/06, FSThomas wrote: > > 2fs wrote: > > > This is bullshit: the Constitution stakes its claims in universal terms. > It > > does not limit the applicability of the principles it sets forth to US > > citizens (even though laws at the time did so). Because the principles > > explicitly are to apply to everyone, we cannot disregard them as they > might > > apply to non-US citizens. > > Really? I'm actually quite fond of the idea that if you're in the > country illegally then you should be bereft of Constitutional protections. > > "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect > Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the > common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of > Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this > Constitution for the United States of America." > > "To ourselves and our Posterity." Not "To ourselves and anyone else > who's found themselves within our borders." I typed too quickly: what I should have said is that while the Constitution is the supreme law of the nation, the nation itself is predicated on universalities (i.e., the Declaration of Independence). What Alito is eluding to, though, is the consideration of foreign laws > when pondering decisions for the Supreme Court. We need to back up a bit, I think; the point wasn't narrow legal considerations like those you say Alito was referring to, but the concept of "rule of law." I will only repeat: I'm not sure that the concept makes any sense if it just stops as one happens to cross a border, or a border happens to cross one. > Given the sort of thing that happened at Haditha, it's utterly > unreasonable > > to expect the population to regard the US as "saviors." > > Can y'all hold judgment on that until after the investigations are > complete? For this particular case, yes. But... > > According to James Crossen, who was sitting next to (US Marine Lance > Corporal Miguel) Terrazas when the roadside bomb exploded, women and > children in the area often helped insurgents. It's likely, according to > Crossen, that women and children had given information about US patrols > to insurgents. This information, according to Crossen, led to the > roadside bomb attack. [1] In addition, Terrazas' father said other > marines told him they were fighting with insurgents who used civilians > as human shields.[2] > > > (Taken from the Wikipedia entry on Haditha) > > Hypothetically, what if that's what happened? What if the women and > children were used as human shields by insurgents? I'm not towing a > party line here, but I don't like a pronunciation of guilt before a > trial's even happened. Well, Haditha or not, here's some eyewitness testimony, from soldiers involved in similar situations: Regardless of numbers, and who's doing more of what (sounds like rival gangs each claiming the other is responsible for more corpses), none of that is likely to endear the US to the Iraqis. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:17:20 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: In honor of today... (this one's for Eddie) On 6/6/06, 2fs wrote: > > > > And then they tried to change the way it was pronounced... to... no no > > wait, > > get this-- URINE - US! > > > > Ahhh. Good, good stuff. > > > > Of course, it's actually pronounced OOO-RAAAAAAHHH-NOOOSE! But that isn't > funny. Sure it is-- gallows humor. Thanks, I'm here all week. - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:38:16 -0400 From: wojizzle forizzle Subject: Re: offer to you one time at band camp, Stewart C. Russell (scruss@sympatico.ca) said: >DAVID GERECHE ESQ. wrote: >... the first spam seen on feg? huh. the copies sent to the list were caught by majordomo and i don't think i approved 'em (though i did accidentally send a note from the big list to the announce list this morning so obviously i'm not infallable). guess we'll see for sure when the next digest pops out. the copy which was sent to the list-owner address was caught by spamassassin. doesn't look like one was cc'ed to me. >I notice each of us were in the CC list. a lot of feggy addresses at the top but then a lot of random addresses beneath them. strange. woj ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:39:09 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again 2fs wrote: > Regardless of numbers, and who's doing more of what (sounds like rival gangs > each claiming the other is responsible for more corpses), none of that is > likely to endear the US to the Iraqis. Much less anyone else, for that matter. - -- FS Thomas | Interactive Developer | fsthomas-at-ochremedia.com 404.758.8616 (home/office) | 404.274.1632 (mobile) | ferraatu (AIM) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:46:17 +0100 From: hssmrg@bath.ac.uk Subject: Re: Electric Castle; and a couple of dates Brian, I really liked "The Castle Hall" from Into the Electric Castle. Didn't care for the other CD though - bit too something or other. Parachute, what a great LP! My mate Rich's pal Vic from the Broughtons plays on it. Is Phil May still up there doing it? Just saw the Billy Preston obit in the paper. Only 60 - still that means I have 2 years to go... If you are in or around BANES in August, I am plotting a formal gig on 17th August and a jam session on 13th August. Please e-mail me off-list if you want to take part - Dolph, Michael Wells, Brian Hoare, I'm talking to you! - - Mike "Demons Dance In the Castle Hall - or is it Wall" Godwin n.p. Rain [Lennon-McCartney] by Ed Harcourt ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:45:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again FSThomas wrote: > Look at the makeup of the Security Council (2006): > > Permanent members: > > China > France > Union of Soviet Socialist Republics The whosawhatsis? - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:16:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, 2fs wrote: > This is bullshit: the Constitution stakes its claims in universal terms. It > does not limit the applicability of the principles it sets forth to US > citizens (even though laws at the time did so). Because the principles > explicitly are to apply to everyone, we cannot disregard them as they might > apply to non-US citizens. Quite right. But the US Constitution only applies within the United States. You're not saying it applies worldwide, are you? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:19:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, FSThomas wrote: > 2fs wrote: > > > This is bullshit: the Constitution stakes its claims in universal terms. It > > does not limit the applicability of the principles it sets forth to US > > citizens (even though laws at the time did so). Because the principles > > explicitly are to apply to everyone, we cannot disregard them as they might > > apply to non-US citizens. > > Really? I'm actually quite fond of the idea that if you're in the > country illegally then you should be bereft of Constitutional protections. I've agreed with a lot of your other posts, but can't agree here. Some very important Constitutional protections have exactly to do with criminals. I would submit that's part of what makes it a great document and part of what makes the US a pretty great place to live, on the whole. (I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of other countries only extended protections to their own citizens.) Besides, what about non-citizens who are here LEGALLY? > "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect > Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the > common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of > Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this > Constitution for the United States of America." > > "To ourselves and our Posterity." Not "To ourselves and anyone else > who's found themselves within our borders." The preamble isn't actually part of the law, AFAIK ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:38:44 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again You'd think there would be at least ONE of you less infantile than Eddie, who would change this thread's name as it persists. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:45:40 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again On 6/7/06, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, 2fs wrote: > > > This is bullshit: the Constitution stakes its claims in universal terms. > It > > does not limit the applicability of the principles it sets forth to US > > citizens (even though laws at the time did so). Because the principles > > explicitly are to apply to everyone, we cannot disregard them as they > might > > apply to non-US citizens. > > Quite right. But the US Constitution only applies within the United > States. You're not saying it applies worldwide, are you? Not as law, of course not. My point (which I hope I clarified in a later post) was that the principles the US was founded upon are claimed as universal - so it's philosophically inconsistent to claim, for example, that we won't respect the free-speech rights of someone because they're not a citizen. And it's something like that that I'm hearing when someone says, oh, I believe in the rule of law...but not international law. Well, obviously US law essentially stops at the border - so outside the US, there's no law? Maybe the real problem is that I conceive of law as subsumed under and rooted in ethics - which therefore can supersede it. But that also means that insofar as the law is so rooted, it creates obligations in us, which at some level we're bound to respect. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:00:17 -0400 From: wojizzle forizzle Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I've shit the bed again one time at band camp, Eb (ElBroome@earthlink.net) said: >You'd think there would be at least ONE of you less infantile than >Eddie, who would change this thread's name as it persists. methinks the Eb doth presume too much! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:02:31 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I'm still reading this subject line On 6/7/06, Eb wrote: > > You'd think there would be at least ONE of you less infantile than > Eddie, who would change this thread's name as it persists. I stopped noticing it quite some time ago. Then again, my name's not in it. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:24:42 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: RE: Washington, D.C. Quail: >Ok, Rush. I think the Dark Years began creeping in with "Power >Windows," hit a nadir with "Hold Your Fire," and then perked back up >for "Counterparts" - before nose-diving again with the awful "Test for >Echo." Then...then came "Vapor Trails," and all was right in the world again. That's a pretty good read on it; I would go so far as to say the signs were there on SIGNALS that something nasty was afoot, although GUP was deceptively strong. I also rate T4E lower than HOLD YOUR FIRE, but just barely. To me it that period all rather runs together. And as you point out, even the cover art suffered. >My favorite Rush is the "main sequence" from "Fly By Night" to "Moving >Pictures." But I still love "Signals" and "Grace Under Pressure." >Though, even bad Rush albums have a few keepers, such as "Force Ten," >"Chain Lightning," and "Driven." I agree, though curiously have found some of the more obscure tracks on those albums to have the longest staying power: "High Water," "Available Light," "Cold Fire" (maybe their best song ever), etc. But there sure are some bad songs there as well. And I rate the best period as HEMISPHERES through MP, but yeah...any way you slice it, it usually ends there. Although as you note VT makes it all OK again; in fact, I've come to think of VT as ranking among my fave Rush albums. I wonder what's next. Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells N.P. XTC "Making Plans for Nigel" on youtube ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:37:41 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Washington, D.C. Michael Wells wrote: > Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically appropriate. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:49:31 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Washington, D.C. On 6/7/06, Eb wrote: > > Michael Wells wrote: > > Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells > > I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically appropriate. Whereas a Paris Hilton bobblehead would be apt in so many ways. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:51:20 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Washington, D.C. Michael Wells wrote: >> Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells Eb came back with: >I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically appropriate. That could be a dangerous item in your pocket given the pointy nature of Geddy's proboscis! Michael B. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:53:01 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Washington, D.C. >>> Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells >> >> I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically >> appropriate. > > Whereas a Paris Hilton bobblehead would be apt in so many ways. What's the official term for those bouncing glass birds with the red liquid in a bulb at one end? Eb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:56:50 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: My name is "Eb" and I love bass pedals On 6/7/06, Bachman, Michael wrote: > > Michael Wells wrote: > >> Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells > > Eb came back with: > >I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically appropriate. > > That could be a dangerous item in your pocket given the pointy nature of > Geddy's > proboscis! I wonder if Peart's "Trees" lyric is really about noses. Hatchet, axe, and saw indeed. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:57:37 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: Re: My name is "Eb", and I'm still reading this subject line On 6/7/06, 2fs wrote: > > On 6/7/06, Eb wrote: > > > > You'd think there would be at least ONE of you less infantile than > > Eddie, who would change this thread's name as it persists. > > > > I stopped noticing it quite some time ago. Then again, my name's not in > it. I figured that drawing attention to it was an invitation to change it to something even viler, so big ups all around for feggy restraint. I sort of just assume "My name is Eb" is at the beginning of every subject line anyway... it's kind of like "Re:" in its invisibility. - -SER ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:13:48 -0700 (PDT) From: J Subject: [My Name Is Eb] Re: In honor of today... Beck - Satan Gave Me a Taco Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:07:00 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: [My Name Is Eb] Re: My name is "Eb" and I love bass pedals On 6/7/06, 2fs wrote: > > On 6/7/06, Bachman, Michael wrote: > > > > Michael Wells wrote: > > >> Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells > > > > Eb came back with: > > >I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically > appropriate. > > > > That could be a dangerous item in your pocket given the pointy nature of > > Geddy's > > proboscis! Is that a Geddy Lee Pez dispenser in your pocket or are you just happy etc. etc. etc. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:09:00 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: [My Name Is Eb] Re: Washington, D.C. On 6/7/06, Eb wrote: > > >>> Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells > >> > >> I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically > >> appropriate. > > > > Whereas a Paris Hilton bobblehead would be apt in so many ways. > > What's the official term for those bouncing glass birds with the red > liquid in a bulb at one end? "Anything-key" hitters? - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:05:21 -0700 From: "Spotted Eagle Ray" Subject: [My Name Is Eb] Re: Washington, D.C. Cognitive dissonance in this Rush-fan exchange: On 6/7/06, Michael Wells wrote: > barely. To me it that period all rather runs together. And as you point > out, even the **cover art** suffered. > > > >My favorite Rush is the "main sequence" from "Fly By Night" Completely apart from my opinion about Rush's music, I've always thought the owl on the cover art to "Fly By Night" was one of the dumbest looking jackets ever (although I can't really say why). But as a Neil Young mega-nerd I really cannot complain about hideous album art on records by Canadians. - -Rx, living with "Living With War" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 13:29:03 -0700 From: Eb Subject: [My Name Is Eb] [my name is Eb] reap http://icemagazine.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 16:29:08 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: [My Name Is Eb] Re: My name is "Eb", and I'm still reading this subject line Spotted Eagle Ray wrote: > > I figured that drawing attention to it was an invitation to change it to > something even viler, so big ups all around for feggy restraint. Shouldn't it have been 'shat the bed again'? Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:37:39 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: [My Name Is Eb] Re: Washington, D.C. On 6/7/06, 2fs wrote: > > On 6/7/06, Eb wrote: > > > >>> Michael "I need a Geddy Lee bobblehead" Wells > > >> > > >> I think a Geddy PEZ dispenser would be more physiologically > > >> appropriate. > > > > > > Whereas a Paris Hilton bobblehead would be apt in so many ways. > > > > What's the official term for those bouncing glass birds with the red > > liquid in a bulb at one end? > > > "Anything-key" hitters? > D'oh! I mean, of course, "any-key hitters." Now that the whole thing has far exceeded any possible humor content. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 16:00:40 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: [My Name Is Eb] My name is William Shatner, and I abhor that past tense. Plus, I'm Canadian! On 6/7/06, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > > > Shouldn't it have been 'shat the bed again'? - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 16:16:30 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: [My Name Is Eb] Re: Washington, D.C. On 6/7/06, Spotted Eagle Ray wrote: > > > > On 6/7/06, 2fs wrote: > > > > > > > What's the official term for those bouncing glass birds with the red > > > > liquid in a bulb at one end? > > > > > > > > > "Anything-key" hitters? > > > > > > > D'oh! > > > > I mean, of course, "any-key hitters." > > > > Now that the whole thing has far exceeded any possible humor content. > > > Okay, but why is the liquid always red? There's gotta be some humor > there. > > And don't they usually have top hats? WTF? > > For that matter, how did a caraffe with an orange handle come to be > universally understood to contain decaffeinated coffee? > > I mean, I'm not trying to be all Andy Rooney here, but... > And why did green come to designate low-fat versions of otherwise non-low-fat foods And why does Gallagher have a career? - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V15 #128 ********************************