From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #485 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, February 4 2008 Volume 16 : Number 485 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: due props [michaeljbachman@comcast.net] Re Ralph! ["SH McCleary" ] Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama [Rex ] Mars Volta [grutness@slingshot.co.nz] Re: Reap [Capuchin ] Re: Ralph! [2fs ] Re: Ralph! [2fs ] Fwd: Ralph! [2fs ] Re: Ralph! [FSThomas ] Show Cat [Shane Apple ] Re: Mars Volta [Tom Clark ] DANGER: TIGER!!! [2fs ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #483 ["kevin studyvin" ] Re: Showbiz Cat [2fs ] Re: Mars Volta ["kevin studyvin" ] Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ["Jason Brown" ] Re: due props [Tom Clark ] Re: Ralph! [FSThomas ] Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama [Carrie Galbraith ] Re: Ralph! [FSThomas ] Re: Show Cat [Rex ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:23:00 +0000 From: michaeljbachman@comcast.net Subject: Re: due props - -------------- Original message -------------- From: Jill Brand > Deep breath. > > I think that the Giants deserve kudos for their upset victory last night. > I am totally devastated, but that doesn't mean that > > a. I had confidence that the Patse were going to win from the get-go > b. I don't recognize that the Giants played harder and that the Pats > offense looked like it had hardly ever played together before. > > What I really hate is that Boston baseball and football seem to have > taken on this Yankee-like persona or reputation. Everyone thought it was > great when the Sox finally won in 2004, but now everyone hates them. And > the country cheered when the Pats upset the Rams in SB XXXVI (I'm just > practicing my Roman numerals), but now they made the nation happy by > losing. This is natural. I'm not whining. I'm really happy for my > neighbor Tony, who is a rabid Giants fan (do you all know that the Giants > second largest fanbase is New England because we didn't have an NFL team > for so long? A lot of my friends root for the Giants because their > fathers were Giants fans). I'm just sad that we are now the Rolling > Stones instead of the Kinks. > Jill, I think a lot of people that turned on the Pats did so because of the spying incidents. I didn't care for Belichick leaving the field before the game was over. I didn't see any coaches from opposing teams leave the field before the game was over when the Pats were scoring 40 or 50 points on them during those September and October blow outs. Still, I wouldn't have minded seeing the Pats win, if only to shut up those nauseating 72 Dolphins. Michael B. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:27:14 -0500 From: "SH McCleary" Subject: Re Ralph! Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:50:47 -0500 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Ralph! Barbara Soutar wrote: > Interesting factoid: Canadians rarely sue doctors. Mainly because they > don't need to recoup their losses for paying expensive medical bills - > medical litigation often comes about when people feel bitter about being > ripped off. I think things are a bit more ... litigious here in the US. We're the people who order coffee at a drive-thru, hold it between our legs while driving and then sue when we burn our respective crotches, remember? - ------------- We are indeed unsafe at any speed. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 15:39:50 -0800 From: Rex Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama On Feb 4, 2008 3:22 PM, Jason Brown wrote: > On Feb 4, 2008 2:24 PM, Rex wrote: > > > And aside from the fact I believe she > > > really does polarize people? > > > > Only those who are pre-polarized, I think, which, should she be the > nominee, > > would be a moot point. > > I personally know five moderate independents that have told me that > they will vote for Obama over McCain but will vote for McCain over > Clinton. And all are not fans of Bush. Dude, that's just nuts. Why not shoot your own kids? Is this simple unreasonable personality hatred? Tom asked why Hillary is so intensely disliked, and nobody took him up on it... presumably because it's all unreasoning hatred, but from whence does it spring? > The video game industry is now brings in more money in the US than > either the film industry or the music industry. So its no small > potatoes. Not exactly important on the level of the iraq war > andhealthcare but still significant. I was assuming that the issue was videogame content policing, not profitability > > I think its fair to say that video game censorship is a huge > manufactured cultural crisis issue on level of rock lyrics and comic > books of yore. However, because of the relative newness of the medium > and the general cultural fracturing of the internet age, non-gamers > are unlikely to be exposed to the efforts for asshole activists like > Jack Thompson outside of scare tactic reports on the local news at 11. > Just so. Which is why I made the scrapbooking comparison. The "relative newness" of the medium is interesting-- does the medium in this form have a certain advent date? Videogames in general have been around since the '70's, seeming to wax and wane in terms of poularity; the current version seems to have more adult adherents, but these adults *were* raised with 2600's and Gorf machines at 7-11. Just curious. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:41:47 +1300 From: grutness@slingshot.co.nz Subject: Mars Volta A question for y'all knowledgeable music types: I've just for the first time become aware of the music of The Mars Volta - specifically how it would appeal to an old King Crimson fan like myself (it was playing in the background in a music store I was in earlier today, and sounded like a metal version of "Pictures of a city"). What would be a good first album to hunt down as an "in" to their work? 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: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:53:40 -0600 (CST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Reap On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Stewart Russell wrote: > Sheldon Brown, 63 > (Jeme might be the only other feg who'd know about "Captain Bike") And I'm thoroughly devastated! Holy crap. I truly mourn his passing. J. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:12:09 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Ralph! On 2/4/08, FSThomas wrote: > > 2fs wrote: > > > How the hell do you measure "quality of care"? Can I see some > statistics, > > please, on whether US citizens are, on average, in better health than > > Europeans? > > I never said anything about health *condition*, but the over-all quality > of the care available. Big difference. "Health care" means the care of people's health. I don't know what on earth you mean by "overall quality of the care available" other than that. The condition of people's health has much to do with the quality of the care. Not exclusively of course: the doctor can say over and over again stop eating the triple cheeseburgers, but the patient might not stop. But statistically, there's going to be a correspondence. > If you cap salaries or compensations you'll see a shortage of physicians > and healthcare professionals. Why would someone go to school for God > knows how long, incur piles of debt, put up with internships and > wretched hours during that hazing process, and then spend the rest of > your career paying massive insurance premiums to prevent themselves from > getting sued into the stone age if there's no light at the end of the > tunnel; no reward? This is hilarious to me, as a former grad student now toiling in the margins of academia. Even if I were a tenured, full professor, what I'd earn would be significantly less than what most doctors earn, now. Every academic, for example, went to school "for God knows how long, incur[red] piles of debt, put up with internships and wretched hours during that hazing process" - though not called "internships." As for the insurance thing: any real reform of the health care would also reign in the insurance industry, who's one of the chief beneficiaries of our current system. To answer your question: plenty of people do. It's called "principles." Believe it or not, not everyone in America makes every decision on the basis of how much cash can they grub. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:17:01 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Ralph! On 2/4/08, FSThomas wrote: > > Barbara Soutar wrote: > > > Interesting factoid: Canadians rarely sue doctors. Mainly because they > > don't need to recoup their losses for paying expensive medical bills - > > medical litigation often comes about when people feel bitter about being > > ripped off. > > I think things are a bit more ... litigious here in the US. We're the > people who order coffee at a drive-thru, hold it between our legs while > driving and then sue when we burn our respective crotches, remember? We're a bit more litigious because our entire culture is about me me me me me me me me. And one of my main arguments re capitalism is that its essential immorality is that it does nothing to counter such a socially corrosive immorality but everything to further it. (BTW: the real grounds for that infamous suit is that the victim's burns were *far more severe than they otherwise would have been except that McD's superheated the coffee to save money*. As is often the case, actually looking at the facts makes things far less ridiculous than they seem. If you're stupid enough to hold a BB gun up to your eye then fiddle with the trigger, you probably don't have any particular justification in suing the manufacturer. If, however, the manufacturer decided it'd be cool to coat the BBs in a corrosive acid and treat them such that they exploded upon contact - - w/o telling anyone - and as a result the BB hitting your face did far worse damage than merely putting a hole in your cheek, yes, you're justified in suing for the injuries and damages that go beyond what would have been caused by your own stupidity. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:17:46 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Fwd: Ralph! Accidentally sent this as individual reply - intended for El Listo - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: 2fs Date: Feb 4, 2008 12:09 PM Subject: Re: Ralph! To: Rex n 2/4/08, Rex wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2008 12:51 PM, FSThomas wrote: > > > > > A decade from now it'll be undisputed that the whole Global Warming > > phenom was a joke, just as we now know the threats of a coming ice age > > back in the 70s were a joke. > > > Well, that's where I stop reading. I'm convinced. I say, fuck it. Let's > pollute more just because we can! We* can have cooler, louder, faster > cars, > which is extremely important, and everything will turn out just > fine. Pitch > all the catalytic converters, chop down as many trees as possible, and > breathe in deep. What I don't understand here is this: let's say that Global Warming really is a myth, mistaken science, a plot by terrists to get us all using pigshitto power our cars so we'll go to hell because the pig is an unclean animal...does that mean we should just keep driving our SUVs? Of course not: unless we think that oil and other resources are unlimited, it still makes sense to use them more wisely. So what's the point of arguing whether global warming is/isn't real - the solutions proposed to mitigate its effects make sense regardless. Then again, if you believe that next Thursday Jesus is going to come flying down from Heaven and take all you believers home in his rad pimped-out Heavenly Escalade with platinum spokes, I guess it makes perfect sense to shit your own bed. I mean, I admit: if someone told me I had an incurable disease and was going to die in six months, I'd say, order a very large coffin, cuz I'm going to look like Orson Welles before I'm through. Bring on the triple pepperoni dammit. (Note to vegetarians: that's cool; I could get fat eating tasty veggie food too!) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:23:16 -0500 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Ralph! kevin studyvin wrote: > To quote the old ladies from Monty Python, "Moan, moan, moan." Excellent counterpoint. Very productive. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:23:24 +0000 From: Shane Apple Subject: Show Cat Nobody else seems to be saying it (or anything), so I will... I hate SHADOW CAT. It's the first time I've ever felt this way about something Robyn Hitchcock has put out, and I almost feel guilty. As in, I feel so guilty that I should apologize to somebody. I liked SPOOKED. Hell, I even liked LUXOR, mainly because I thought four or five songs were really good and overshadowed that terrible "One L" song. But I have tried my best to like SHADOW CAT and failed miserably. There's one, near-glowing moment (the title track), but even that doesn't excite me as much as even the lower eschelon stuff on other Hitchcock releases and you have to wait far too long before you get to it. "Green Boy" and "Statue with a Walkman" are ok (never favorites), but I had heard those previously and can't enjoy the latter without spoken dialogue. "For Debbie Reynolds" is cute enough, but also far too rough and short to amount to anything. The one with the lyric about shopping on painkillers is almost good (if you're really desperate and want to like one of the songs), but the majority of the Robyn-penned tracks are almost perversely trite, bland, un-Hitchcockian. "The Wind Cries Mary" is pointless, and don't even get me started on the two acapella numbers where he's using treated vocals (vocoder?). What? Yes, I realize it's a collection of outtakes, demos, etc. meant more for fans and that I should probably be thankful I get to hear the songs in the first place, but I just can't get over how much I hate this thing. I liked INVISIBLE HITCHCOCK and YOU AND OBLIVION when I first heard 'em (honestly, not so much now, especially when the songs are "out of context" on the latest box set), and I still consider them, like MOSSY LIQUOR, to be essential. This, I feel like tucking away on my shelf and forgetting about. And my final gripe...where's "Surfer Ghost"? Huh? Where is it? Come on! - --Shane _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:27:01 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Mars Volta On Feb 4, 2008, at 3:41 PM, grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > A question for y'all knowledgeable music types: > > I've just for the first time become aware of the music of The Mars > Volta - specifically how it would appeal to an old King Crimson fan > like myself (it was playing in the background in a music store I was > in earlier today, and sounded like a metal version of "Pictures of a > city"). What would be a good first album to hunt down as an "in" to > their work? "Frances The Mute" is a quality add to any collection. You might explore their previous band "At The Drive-In" also. - -tc p.s. REAP Tom Dowdy, 20 year Apple veteran (Quicktime / iTunes). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:30:08 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: DANGER: TIGER!!! A few more points on the political debate: 1. Wealth is relative. So Ferris's stats re taxation rate of various nations isn't all that relevant - some people are still wealthy relative to others in that nation, and are therefore able to invest, etc., and all the usual arguments in favor of wealth. If France, say, isn't choking on its taxes, why hasn't the populace risen up in disgust and elected politicians to lower them by gutting health care? Why isn't it even an issue? Probably because, to all evidence, Europeans would sooner get rid of nearly anything before their health care programs, which are seen as a universal value. 2. Money doesn't make you happy. Study after study has shown that, once you're past poverty, having more money doesn't, on average. lead to greater feelings of satisfaction with life. 3. Wealth isn't something that organically flows to individuals; it can do so only under social arrangements that manage wealth that way. That is, it's a societal choice. We have rules and laws, regulations and ordinances, that tell employers, bankers, investors, as well as their employees and customers, what they can and cannot do with money in terms of compensation, fees, etc. Do you think your employer pays you voluntarily - if he could get you to work for less - hell, for nothing - why wouldn't he? And if he didn't, someone else would. So arguments that so-and-so "earned" their millions only amount to saying that within the rules of that particular society, that wealth followed legitimated channels into so-and-so's wallet. We impose certain conditions upon employers in terms of worker compensation, working conditions, etc. I suppose you could argue that all of that's a bad thing - that if someone is able to enslave someone else, well, that's just the law of the jungle, etc. Most of us, however, are a bit more civilized and recognize the ways in which such behavior is immoral and hurtful - and, ultimately, socially destructive as well. It seems to me that the more people allow themselves to glut on individual wealth, the more they are treating other human beings as objects - and the coarser their moral character becomes. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:30:55 -0800 From: "kevin studyvin" Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #483 > Without subsidised health care, I would simply continue to limp and be in > tears every time I had to climb steps. > > That's what's known as a "free market solution." All you foreigners ever > do is complain... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:32:27 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Showbiz Cat On 2/4/08, hssmrg@bath.ac.uk wrote: > > Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 02:00:16 -0500 > From: lep > Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fwd:_Get_"Show_Cat"_by_Robyn_Hitchcock_for_=A39. > 99?= > > From: Amazon.co.uk > Date: Feb 4, 2008 1:29 AM > Subject: Get "Show Cat" by Robyn Hitchcock for #9.99 > To: "softboygirl@gmail.com" > Greetings from Amazon.co.uk, > As someone who has purchased or rated music by Robyn Hitchcock, you > might like to know that Show Cat will be released on 11 February 2008. > You can pre-order yours for just #9.99 by following the link below. > Show Cat > Robyn Hitchcock > Price: #9.99 > Release Date: 11 February 2008 > > Track Listings > > > show cat? is that the british-language release? > as ever, > lauren > > * No, mine is titled "Shadow Cat", I think she was joking. But in fact, _Show Cat_ is a special edition of _Shadow Cat_ overdubbed by Christopher Guest and his usual acting troupe, creating from the characters and situations of Robyn's songs the tale of a gang of idiots involved in competitive cat breeding. (Peter Buck has a cameo as "Cat Rescue Man!" - a superhero.) Either that, or _Show Cat_ is _Shadow Cat_ in an ad-free edition. (British-style crossword division) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:33:54 -0800 From: "kevin studyvin" Subject: Re: Mars Volta I'd thought "Pictures Of a City" was pretty metal, itself. On Feb 4, 2008 3:41 PM, wrote: > A question for y'all knowledgeable music types: > > I've just for the first time become aware of the music of The Mars > Volta - specifically how it would appeal to an old King Crimson fan > like myself (it was playing in the background in a music store I was > in earlier today, and sounded like a metal version of "Pictures of a > city"). What would be a good first album to hunt down as an "in" to > their work? > > 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: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:42:08 -0800 From: "Jason Brown" Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama On Feb 4, 2008 3:39 PM, Rex wrote: > > > > And aside from the fact I believe she > > > > really does polarize people? > > > > > > Only those who are pre-polarized, I think, which, should she be the > nominee, > > > would be a moot point. > > > > I personally know five moderate independents that have told me that > > they will vote for Obama over McCain but will vote for McCain over > > Clinton. And all are not fans of Bush. > > > Dude, that's just nuts. Why not shoot your own kids? Is this simple > unreasonable personality hatred? Tom asked why Hillary is so intensely > disliked, and nobody took him up on it... presumably because it's all > unreasoning hatred, but from whence does it spring? In the case of these folks its mostly a combination of: - - Political dynasties are bad and GWB is prima facia evidence. - - The Clintons think they are entitled to power. - - Hillary offers no vision for the future just more no-compromise political warfare, while McCain, like Obama, has shown a willingness to compromise. - - McCain is honest and straightforward while Hillary like Bill says what she thinks people want to hear. - - McCain is a war hero and a true patriot and like Obama makes one proud to be an American. - -Iraq and the war on terror are not much of an issue as "Its all such a mess i dont know what we should do". > The "relative newness" of the medium is interesting-- does the medium in > this form have a certain advent date? Videogames in general have been > around since the '70's, seeming to wax and wane in terms of poularity; the > current version seems to have more adult adherents, but these adults *were* > raised with 2600's and Gorf machines at 7-11. Just curious. Overall its relatively new compared to other entertainment media like film, recorded music, or television. But only in the last decade or so has it been considered an art of its own rather than a child's toy. For instance, France just last month added Video games to its government sanctioned list of official arts. - -- "Never go with a hippie to a second location." - Jack Donaghy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:42:49 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: so let's talk about Buffy On 2/4/08, Christopher Gross wrote: > > > > Besides, we all know Buffy is eventually going to hook up with Faith.... Thanks a lot, Chris. Now I've gotta wash the computer screen. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:41:44 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: due props On Feb 4, 2008, at 10:10 AM, Jill Brand wrote: > So congrats to you, Tom Clark. But fuck you anyway. Thanks, that means a lot. I really didn't have anything against the Pats - I mean I lived in Massachusetts for a while when they were just another AFC East team that wasn't the Bills or Dolphins, so their fame is definitely due. Belicheck pissed me off though when he walked off the field with time still on the clock. Made him look like a sore loser. I'm just glad is was a tight game and the Giants pulled it out without any fluke plays. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:47:54 -0500 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Ralph! Stacked Crooked wrote: > you realise, of course, that this is precisely osama's argument justifying > attacks on american civilians? So he was right? > seriously, though, hamas' actions (ditto the iraqi querillas') are not a > violation of international law -- which grants to those suffering > occupation to use any means at their disposal to force the occupiers to > quit. Hmmm. They situate Qassam rockets in civilian areas; schools, hospitals, etc. It should be argued that such an action constitutes the use of human shields which is ... wait for it ... illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention. > and, also, um, you know: how if russia or china were to supply the > palestinians with billions of dollars' worth of military equipment -- just > as the u.s. does to israel -- thereby leveling the playing field, and > obviating the necessity to resort to the use of "terror tactics"? surely > you'd not have an issue with this? Not for nothing, but there's a methodology to choosing your dance partner. Israel is a democracy. The Palestinians are a glorified theocracy.. Israel has been the target of focused aggression by their neighbors and the Palestinians have been aggressors (along with Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria, if memory serves). Yes Israel is a creation of the UN in 1947 but keep in mind that most neighboring states weren't in their present-day states until roughly the same time frame (Saudi Arabia: 1932, Jordan: 1921, Iran: 1935, Iraq: 1932, and Syria, 1920) Not to mention that the Israelis actually bother to educate their citizens as opposed to sending (the males) straight into indoctrination in anti-Jewish militarism. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:35:11 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Carrie Galbraith Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama - -----Original Message----- >From: Jason Brown >The video game industry is now brings in more money in the US than >either the film industry or the music industry. So its no small >potatoes. Not exactly important on the level of the iraq war >andhealthcare but still significant. >I think its fair to say that video game censorship is a huge >manufactured cultural crisis issue on level of rock lyrics and comic >books of yore. However, because of the relative newness of the medium >and the general cultural fracturing of the internet age, non-gamers >are unlikely to be exposed to the efforts for asshole activists like >Jack Thompson outside of scare tactic reports on the local news at 11. > Ah, we're back to this! When the rating system was introduced, '94 I think, the industry was in an uproar over the proposed censorship of their product by the government. It was quite the fray. In the end, the games companies decided that self-regulation was a smarter move. That's when we began submitting games to be rated to a 3rd party game-rating body which was developed by the games companies themselves. All the companies I worked for then voluntarily had their games rated. I know there is a new rating system out there now, although I've been out of that industry for a few years. Seems to me that should be enough and this new hew and cry is just ridiculous. Besides, we used to be able to slip Easter Eggs in to all our games and still get a decent rating. ;-P - - c, who just interviewed for a job in, yes, the games industry... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:50:37 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama On 2/4/08, The Great Quail wrote: > > > > Hopefully this is useful stuff-- YMMV. > > What does YMMV mean? Well, in my house, it means "your monkey may vaporize," but that's probably a far less common reading than "your mileage may vary." But hey! Possible Arrested Development movie? Whoo-hoo! - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:51:38 -0500 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Ralph! 2fs wrote: > We're a bit more litigious because our entire culture is about me me me > me me me me me. And one of my main arguments re capitalism is that its > essential immorality is that it does nothing to counter such a socially > corrosive immorality but everything to further it. If you think you can legislate morality I'm surprised you don't fall in line behind the religious right; they're all about that! And FYI: you can't legislate altruism, either. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:56:48 -0800 From: Rex Subject: Re: Show Cat On Feb 4, 2008 4:23 PM, Shane Apple wrote: > Nobody else seems to be saying it (or anything), so I will... Props be to Nuppy, who did review it (positively). I shamefully still haven't listened to it-- too busy renaming David Byrne accidentally-putative Sounds from True Stories. (Almost done, but I have a few songs that are evading ID-by-Google-or-AMG, which I may soon need to submit to the fegmind... in this case, because I *do* care). - -Rex ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #485 ********************************