From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #487 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, February 5 2008 Volume 16 : Number 487 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Ralph! [FSThomas ] Re: Ralph! [FSThomas ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #486 [grutness@slingshot.co.nz] RE: DANGER: TIGER!!! ["Marc Alberts" ] Re: Why's that angel so afraid of this subject line? Ah hell - I'm diving in... [2fs ] Re: DANGER: TIGER!!! [2fs ] Re: Why's that angel so afraid of this subject line? Ah hell - I'm diving in... [2fs ] Re: Ralph! [Rex ] =?UTF-8?Q?The=20most=20influential=20albums=20ever=20Thriller=2 0?= =?UTF-8?Q?sold=20zillions=20=E2=80=93=20and,=20more=20important,=20i?= [] RE: DANGER: TIGER!!! ["Marc Alberts" ] Re: so let's talk about Buffy [lep ] Re: so let's talk about Buffy [lep ] Re: Mars Volta [Sebastian Hagedorn ] Re: Mars Volta [Steve Schiavo ] Re: so let's talk about Buffy ["Sumiko Keay" ] Re: Mars Volta [Rex ] Re: Lolita/American tunes [The Great Quail ] Re: Lolita/American tunes ["kevin studyvin" ] Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama [Jeff Dwarf ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 22:05:53 -0500 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Ralph! 2fs wrote: > My argument is that many more people will be selfish, even destructively > so, in a culture that valorizes selfishness. In a culture that gave more > worth to cooperation and community, more people (again: in the "middle" > group) would be swayed in that direction. > > Tha'ts not "legislation" - that's the influence of cultural mores on > behavior. If not through legislation than what? The sheer hope that everyone in the middle will be brought up right? A culture that valorizes (sp?) self-sufficiency would be better able to sustain itself, wouldn't it? Especially if the self-sufficient excel to the point of excess when they might be prone to willingly give some of the excess away then when they have it wrested from their grasp. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 22:23:15 -0500 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Ralph! Stacked Crooked wrote: > (it of course goes without saying that "military-age" niggers, anywhere in > the world, at any time of day and night, are fair game.) You're around the bend. I let the first one pass, but frankly your choice of vocabulary/vernacular is reprehensible. You might be trying to be clever or coy, or to reinforce your *obvious* solidarity with the Brown Peoples of the world and their struggle against The Man, but what you write and your phraseology reads as utter crap. Slice it however you want, you're still a cracker from the Northwest (if memory serves -- I mean I know you're a cracker -- there's no doubting that at all -- I'm questioning the geographical locale) and nothing, no-how is going to change that. If you've got guilt issues based on your race noodle it out on your own time. > > > as a u.s. citizen, i don't really see why my opinion should be solicited -- > except to say that, you know, u.s. troops (and weapons, and bases) out of > israel, out of the middle east, out of korea, out of the philippines, out > of south america, out of western africa, out of central asia, out of south > asia, out of puerto rico, out of okinawa, out of...anything i missed? Isolationism worked phenomenally well prior to the first World War. I embrace it whole-heartedly. And I *think* we're out of the Philippines. And it's worked swimmingly for them so far. And I frankly don't understand the benefits of our relationship/territorial binds with Puerto Rico. Do all their nationals have to go home if we sever our ties? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:33:48 +1300 From: grutness@slingshot.co.nz Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #486 >Also, it's the root of all evil. Like, for reals. The stem, branches and >leaves, too! FWIW, money isn't the root of all evil. *The love of* money is. 1 Timothy, 6:10. FWIW. 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 19:37:50 -0800 From: "Marc Alberts" Subject: RE: DANGER: TIGER!!! Jeff wrote: > 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. That's not actually true. There had never been an empirical study on the subject until quite recently, and it showed definitively that money did indeed buy happiness, and there was no poverty aspect to the calculation. http://money.netscape.cnn.com/pf/package.jsp?name=fte/happiness/happiness Not surprisingly, sex does buy a bit of happiness, but paying for sex does not. It's a strange world we traverse when we try to understand what really makes people happy. Marc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:05:16 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Why's that angel so afraid of this subject line? Ah hell - I'm diving in... On 2/4/08, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, 2fs wrote: > > > On 2/4/08, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, 2fs wrote: > > > > > Is it? I'm not so sure I'd call "democratic" a society that > > > systematically > > > > limits the rights of an entire subset of the populace. Of course, > that > > > > described the US for most of its existence, too... > > > > > > Once again, Israel being held to a higher standard than the rest of > the > > > world holds itself... > > > > > > Uhh...I rather specifically avoided that accusation by *including* > another > > nation in the "undemocratic by this definition" column - a nation that, > in > > fact, is typically presented as *the* democracy. > > Since you added "for most of its existence" I assumed you were implying > that recently the US had become truly democratic. My mistake if you didn't > mean that, and meant it was still undemocratic. Well, clearly it was *less* democratic under slavery, when women didn't have the right to vote, etc. And you could argue that the lack of national standards re voting eligibility (there is no constitutional right to a vote), and that some states can prohibit felons from voting, effectively disenfranchises large numbers of citizens. And the system itself fails to be democratic quite often - as in the nomination process whereby "superdelegates" are free to all but ignore the results of the primaries in choosing their party's candidate for President. > No - I'm holding Israel to the standard that says in a democracy, people > are > > not limited rights based on ethnicity or religion. In so saying, I'm > making > > no statement about what other nations might also fall short of such a > > standard (there are many). > > Fair enough. But why does Israel receive such criticism so much more > often, though, than its size would lead one to expect? Merely because the > US supports them? That's a pretty big "merely." I think it's a huge part, though: fairly or un-, Israel is perceived as the US's arm in the Middle East. *In* the Middle East, that's not to discount anti-Semitism as a factor (which in this case is also a hundreds-years-old tribal conflict - similar in some respects to the way Serbs and Croats rehash what happened in 13-whatever...). > Israel and the US share a troubling tendency to imagine themselves shining > > beacons, the best of the best, etc. I wish instead each nation would > look to > > its ideals, recognize where it falls short, and work on improving - > rather > > than belligerently yelling about how it's better than its neighbors, or > that > > others are just as bad, etc. > > Does Israel really imagine itself as "the best of the best"? I think > not...a shining beacon, perhaps--as it certainly was right after World War > II...but I don't think everyday Israelis have any illusions of > superiority. No, I don't think it's primarily the everyday Israelis. I'm not even sure it's the Israeli leadership. Apparently, debate on Israel's actions and proper role is far more vigorous within Israel than in the US...where the merest hint that Israel isn't always and forever justified causes accusations of "anti-Semitism" to be hurled forth...even when you're as benign a figure as former President Carter. > Sorry - but if I say to someone, you know, tossing that empty can on the > > street is kinda obnoxious, it's not a defense to say, yeah, but I live > next > > door to a chemical plant that spews toxins into the river. > > No defense meant. But if that person comes under harsher fire than the > chemical plant on a regular basis, something's surely wrong. True enough. But we also tend to criticize more strongly that which is closer to us - and we also tend to criticize more strongly for smaller failings people whom we believe could be better. We don't lecture mass murderers on littering in the subway. It's Israel's status as *nominal* democracy - and, of course, the close connection it does have to the US (for reasons good and not-so) - and, even more "of course," the context of its existence and establishment after the horrors of the Holocaust, and what it means to the Jewish people - that makes its failings all the sharper. And, as I said, it seems such debate is fairly common *within* Israel. Really, aside from criticizing some of its govt's actions (which obviously is rather important), my argument here has to do with the lockstep of most US press and govt. I would think and hope that a friend receives *stronger* criticism when it does wrong - because that criticism is rooted in a friendship - than an enemy does. Most US critics of Israel want to save it...from itself, perhaps. I'm not expert on the issues to argue for a two-state solution, a power-sharing agreement w/in Israel, etc. - but it's clear that something needs to change, and that Israel's current attitude toward its "expanded" borders is a huge problem in the way of such change. Certainly not the only one - it's not as the Palestinians have been entirely saintly here. But look also who has the power (i.e., the armies, the guns, the government, the land) vs. whose casualty numbers are dramatically higher. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:17:40 -0800 (PST) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: Why's that angel so afraid of this subject line? Ah hell - I'm diving in... On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, 2fs wrote: > > Sorry - but if I say to someone, you know, tossing that empty can on > > > the street is kinda obnoxious, it's not a defense to say, yeah, but > > > I live next door to a chemical plant that spews toxins into the > > > river. > > > > No defense meant. But if that person comes under harsher fire than the > > chemical plant on a regular basis, something's surely wrong. > > True enough. > But we also tend to criticize more strongly that which is closer to us - and > we also tend to criticize more strongly for smaller failings people whom we > believe could be better. We don't lecture mass murderers on littering in the > subway. It's Israel's status as *nominal* democracy - and, of course, the > close connection it does have to the US (for reasons good and not-so) - and, > even more "of course," the context of its existence and establishment after > the horrors of the Holocaust, and what it means to the Jewish people - that > makes its failings all the sharper. And, as I said, it seems such debate is > fairly common *within* Israel. Really, aside from criticizing some of its > govt's actions (which obviously is rather important), my argument here has > to do with the lockstep of most US press and govt. I would think and hope > that a friend receives *stronger* criticism when it does wrong - because > that criticism is rooted in a friendship - than an enemy does. Most US > critics of Israel want to save it...from itself, perhaps. I'm not expert on > the issues to argue for a two-state solution, a power-sharing agreement w/in > Israel, etc. - but it's clear that something needs to change, and that > Israel's current attitude toward its "expanded" borders is a huge problem in > the way of such change. Certainly not the only one - it's not as the > Palestinians have been entirely saintly here. But look also who has the > power (i.e., the armies, the guns, the government, the land) vs. whose > casualty numbers are dramatically higher. Well put. I'm glad to read this. Wish there was more of this on the "left" and less of THIS: http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_7966.JPG http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_8044.JPG http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_7952.JPG http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/AntiWarRallyFeb162003.jpg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:34:51 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Ralph! On 2/4/08, Stacked Crooked wrote: > > that the NLF didn't exist before the unilateral violation > of the geneva accords? Not true - the Packers and the Bears at least date back to the 1920s. > except to say that, you know, u.s. troops (and weapons, and bases) out of > israel, out of the middle east, out of korea, out of the philippines, out > of south america, out of western africa, out of central asia, out of south > asia, out of puerto rico, out of okinawa, out of...anything i missed? Out of Ohio? - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:37:29 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: DANGER: TIGER!!! On 2/4/08, Marc Alberts wrote: > > Jeff wrote: > > 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. > > That's not actually true. There had never been an empirical study on the > subject until quite recently, and it showed definitively that money did > indeed buy happiness, and there was no poverty aspect to the calculation. > > http://money.netscape.cnn.com/pf/package.jsp?name=fte/happiness/happiness The headline says that - but the article doesn't seem to bear it out, and focuses mostly on sex. It's also not clear exactly where those amounts come from. I'm just surprised to find "Netscape" still has any sort of existence...that's a blast from the past! - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:42:56 -0600 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Why's that angel so afraid of this subject line? Ah hell - I'm diving in... On 2/4/08, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > > > Well put. I'm glad to read this. Wish there was more of this on the "left" > and less of THIS: > http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_7966.JPG > http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_8044.JPG > http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_7952.JPG > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/AntiWarRallyFeb162003.jpg You know, assholes like that...of course someone's gonna take their picture. And I suppose it's also true that if a group has a legitimate criticism of Israel, anti-Semites are going to want to come along and shit all over the place. But I don't think that's very common, or popular. The only place I regularly hear anti-Semitism these days is from misfit elderly guys. I'm sure they're not *alone* - but really, I don't think people like those in the photos are representative of much. Certainly not of "the left" generally. Any more than your white-sheet-wearing morons represent most of the right. I think most racism these days is less a function of animosity and more a function of ignorance (obviously, the animosity comes from ignorance, too - but in this case I mean people who don't realize they're misunderstanding or misrepresenting people and being hurtful in the process. You know - sorta like Michael Scott on _The Office_...) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:55:15 -0800 From: "Jason Brown" Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama On Feb 4, 2008 5:13 PM, Rex wrote: > Anyone who would vote for first Obama, then McCain, and then Clinton has > really odd priorities. "My first choice is peace and positive change. If I > can't have that, I'll take war, death and ruination. If they're all out of > that, I'll settle for no war, death or ruination, but instead slightly less > progressive change than in that first option". Well Americans have been voting against their own values and self interest since this whole thing started so its really nothing new. But i think the issue at hand is credibility. They find McCain and Obama and granted these people are not tremendously tuned in to the race and none of them are planing to go to our state's caucuses on Saturday. For what its worth, 3 of the 5 are women. . Anyhow don't give these folks a chance to vote stupidly. Vote Obama on Tuesday! - -- "Never go with a hippie to a second location." - Jack Donaghy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:35:54 -0800 From: Rex Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama On Feb 4, 2008 8:55 PM, Jason Brown wrote: > But i think the issue at hand is credibility. They find McCain and > Obama and granted these people are not tremendously tuned in to the > race and none of them are planing to go to our state's caucuses on > Saturday. For what its worth, 3 of the 5 are women. . Anecdotal evidence is always so much more interesting than statistics. > > Anyhow don't give these folks a chance to vote stupidly. Vote Obama on > Tuesday! Alright, that *is* a fair argument... - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:38:03 -0800 From: Rex Subject: Re: Ralph! On Feb 4, 2008 8:34 PM, 2fs wrote: > On 2/4/08, Stacked Crooked wrote: > > > > that the NLF didn't exist before the unilateral violation > > of the geneva accords? > > > > Not true - the Packers and the Bears at least date back to the 1920s. > > > > except to say that, you know, u.s. troops (and weapons, and bases) out > of > > israel, out of the middle east, out of korea, out of the philippines, > out > > of south america, out of western africa, out of central asia, out of > south > > asia, out of puerto rico, out of okinawa, out of...anything i missed? > > > > Out of Ohio? > Shouldn't that be fROMOHIO? More importantly, as Dean Wareham would say, and coincidentally perfect for the "American songs" thread, "USA Out of My Pants!" - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:53:52 EST From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?The=20most=20influential=20albums=20ever=20Thriller=2 0?= =?UTF-8?Q?sold=20zillions=20=E2=80=93=20and,=20more=20important,=20i?= The most influential albums ever Thriller sold zillions b and, more important, it changed music. What are the most influential albums ever? _http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/arti c le3277332.ece_ (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/arti cle3277332.ece) **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp00300000 0025 48) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:41:56 -0800 From: "Marc Alberts" Subject: RE: DANGER: TIGER!!! Jeff wrote: > On 2/4/08, Marc Alberts wrote: > > > > Jeff wrote: > > > 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. > > > > That's not actually true. There had never been an empirical study on > the > > subject until quite recently, and it showed definitively that money > did > > indeed buy happiness, and there was no poverty aspect to the > calculation. > > > > > http://money.netscape.cnn.com/pf/package.jsp?name=fte/happiness/happine > ss > > > > The headline says that - but the article doesn't seem to bear it out, > and > focuses mostly on sex. It's also not clear exactly where those amounts > come > from. The amounts come from the econometric analysis that they did to determine how much money buys happiness. They then equate certain sexual situations to those levels of happiness. > I'm just surprised to find "Netscape" still has any sort of > existence...that's a blast from the past! AOL still owns the name, but then again I'm sometimes surprised they still have any sort of existence as well. Marc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:02:58 -0500 From: lep Subject: Re: so let's talk about Buffy Jason says: > On Feb 4, 2008 2:28 PM, lep wrote: > > Christopher Gross explained: > > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, lep wrote: > > > > > > > WARNING: SPOILERS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (space) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (end of space) > I think the big difference is that the part of spike that allowed him > to tried to rape her was very much part of the intense and a dangerous > side of Spike that attracted her, while Angel's transgressions as > Angelus were wholly apart from what attracted her to Angel and once > the angel she once loved returned she could give him another chance. > Plus the guilt about killing him after his soul returned figures in as > well. as mr. dawson says: good answer. that's a very good point that in the relationship with spike, much of the problem is within buffy herself, and that isn't contingent on how spike acts, or whether he goes and gets himself a soul. xo - -- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:08:40 -0500 From: lep Subject: Re: so let's talk about Buffy Carrie says: > -----Original Message----- > >From: Christopher Gross > >Besides, we all know Buffy is eventually going to hook up with Faith.... > > Ah, there is the one character I have had the hardest time finding any empathy for throughout the show. Faith leaves me cold. She doesn't even work as the "dark side of the slayer made manifest" for me. Perhaps it's the actress. I don't know. Her screentime bores and annoys me. i pretty much felt the same way about faith up until season 4 of angel. she didn't bore me so much (i kind of liked her antics), but i had trouble finding empathy for her until towards the end of the series. as ever, lauren p.s. to chris: BTW, yes, i finshed all of angel (it would be a tragedy to not get to illyria's entrance!) and even watched firefly in the meanwhile. - -- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:48:55 +0100 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: Mars Volta - --On 5. Februar 2008 12:41:47 +1300 grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > I've just for the first time become aware of the music of The Mars Volta Same here - actually I was wondering if I was allowed to like them as a Feg? > would be a good first album to hunt down as an "in" to their work? I've only listened to "De-Loused In The Comatorium" once and liked it a lot. That's also the AMG pick. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:53:54 -0600 From: Steve Schiavo Subject: Re: Mars Volta On Feb 5, 2008, at 5:48 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: > --On 5. Februar 2008 12:41:47 +1300 grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > >> I've just for the first time become aware of the music of The Mars >> Volta > > Same here - actually I was wondering if I was allowed to like them > as a Feg? You're allowed to like anything you want. As long as it's not something with cookie monster vocals, or Nicole Atkins. I'm still waiting for The Mars Volta to make what, for me, would be a killer album. But I think the possibility is there. Or maybe I just need to put their albums on heavy rotation. I'm told they just put out a new acoustic release. - - Steve __________ I can't resist an anime that includes a small, cute, violence prone girl with a scythe. - John ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:38:11 -0600 From: "Sumiko Keay" Subject: Re: so let's talk about Buffy On 2/5/08, lep wrote: > Jason says: > > On Feb 4, 2008 2:28 PM, lep wrote: > > > Christopher Gross explained: > > > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, lep wrote: > > > > > > > > > WARNING: SPOILERS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (space) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (end of space) > > I think the big difference is that the part of spike that allowed him > > to tried to rape her was very much part of the intense and a dangerous > > side of Spike that attracted her, while Angel's transgressions as > > Angelus were wholly apart from what attracted her to Angel and once > > the angel she once loved returned she could give him another chance. > > Plus the guilt about killing him after his soul returned figures in as > > well. > > as mr. dawson says: good answer. that's a very good point that in the > relationship with spike, much of the problem is within buffy herself, > and that isn't contingent on how spike acts, or whether he goes and > gets himself a soul. > > xo > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." > > - The Buddha > Just saw "Offspring" on TNT this morning - my I love Bitter!Pregnant Darla. And Angry Illogical Angel leads us to Bitter! Despairing Wesley - and that is my favorite flavor of Wesley. I always felt that the Connor we saw in the series finale was the Connor I wanted to see all along - I think that Connor - with his real memories and the fake ones would have been interesting to watch - particularly working with Angel. Sumi ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:06:33 -0800 From: Rex Subject: Re: Mars Volta On Feb 5, 2008 5:53 AM, Steve Schiavo wrote: > On Feb 5, 2008, at 5:48 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: > > > --On 5. Februar 2008 12:41:47 +1300 grutness@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > > > >> I've just for the first time become aware of the music of The Mars > >> Volta > > > > Same here - actually I was wondering if I was allowed to like them > > as a Feg? > > You're allowed to like anything you want. As long as it's not > something with cookie monster vocals, Nah, Muppets records are approved feg listening. > or Nicole Atkins. Who dat? The Mars Volta is eligible under the "some fegs like Rush" clause, I believe. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:02:31 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: Lolita/American tunes > Here's a cautionary one from waaay out in left-field: C.W. McCall's > "There won't be no country music, there won't be no rock'n'roll". A > pro-environmentalist truckin' song from the guy only ever remembered > for the considerably inferior hit, "Convoy". Has anyone else out > there even heard this track? It is, IMHO, a bizarre classic. Yeah, it's a good one. You can get it on iTunes pretty easily. C.W. McCall has a few oddities that are worth listening to, from the sequel to "Convoy" to "Wolf Creek Pass." Another American cautionary song from the annals of country music is John Prine's "Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore." - --Quail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:19:00 -0800 From: "kevin studyvin" Subject: Re: Lolita/American tunes Which immediately brings to mind Kinky Friedman's "They Ain't Makin' Jews Like Jesus Anymore." On Feb 5, 2008 9:02 AM, The Great Quail wrote: > > Here's a cautionary one from waaay out in left-field: C.W. McCall's > > "There won't be no country music, there won't be no rock'n'roll". A > > pro-environmentalist truckin' song from the guy only ever remembered > > for the considerably inferior hit, "Convoy". Has anyone else out > > there even heard this track? It is, IMHO, a bizarre classic. > > Yeah, it's a good one. You can get it on iTunes pretty easily. > > C.W. McCall has a few oddities that are worth listening to, from the > sequel > to "Convoy" to "Wolf Creek Pass." > > Another American cautionary song from the annals of country music is John > Prine's "Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore." > > --Quail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 11:22:54 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: On Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama Rex wrote: > 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? Bill Maher has said repeatedly that hating Hillary mostly says more about the person hating than her. That said, I think a lot of it comes down to plain old misogyny -- she has always been unapologetically ambitious and wonky, which fed this fantasy that she "obviously" was (a) a lesbian and (b) only married Bill to ride his coattails to the White House (nevermind that they were too young for her to possibly know that would happen -- it's not like finding a smooth-talking law student who thinks he's going to be President someday is that hard). The thing is that, in the aftermath of Monica-gate, when she really had no politcally motivated reason to stick with the guy -- after all, the 6 people who would actually hold divorcing Bill against her will never vote for her anyways -- SHE FORGAVE HIM, which shows that she probably actually loves the jackass. Throw in that she became a Democrat after growing up in a Republican family, and that she was a staffer on the Watergate investigative committee, .... "I'm not tempted to write a song about George W. Bush. I couldn't figure out what sort of song I would write. That's the problem: I don't want to satirize George Bush and his puppeteers, I want to vaporize them." -- Tom Lehrer "The eyes are the groin of the head." -- Dwight Schrute . ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #487 ********************************