From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2001 #13 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Websites: http://www.jmdl.com http://www.jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Wednesday, January 10 2001 Volume 2001 : Number 013 The 'Official' Joni Mitchell Homepage, created by Wally Breese, can be found at http://www.jonimitchell.com. It contains the latest news, a detailed bio, Original Interviews, essays, lyrics and much much more. The JMDL website can be found at http://www.jmdl.com and contains interviews, articles, the member gallery, archives, and much more. ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- RE: the President-elect's cabinet picks (NCJ) ["Pitassi, Mary" ] Re: Joni/Thom Yorke [Siresorrow@aol.com] rufus NJC ["Wally Kairuz" ] Re: harvey head - njc [Siresorrow@aol.com] Re: Political sniping content (NJC) ["Kakki" ] RE: LONG RANT (NJC) ["Pitassi, Mary" ] Re: the President-elect's cabinet picks (NCJ) ["Kakki" ] Re: Chavez ["Jim L'Hommedieu" ] Nathan La Franeer ["BRIAN SYMES" ] 20 to 1 on VH1 ["cassy" ] Re: **Portland JMDL group gathering? ["Elizabeth Udall" ] Re: joni in poetrymagazine.com [Don Rowe ] Re: **Portland JMDL group gathering? ["cassy" ] Re: 20 to 1 on VH1 [Penny ] Re: 20 to 1 on VH1 ["cassy" ] RE: LONG RANT (NJC) (md) ["Lori R. Fye" ] Hound Dog Taylor NJC [john low ] Re: Van, Joni and Georgie (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Another one for the list (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Another one for the list (NJC) [jan gyn ] Re: Another one for the list (NJC) ["Kakki" ] RE: LONG RANT (NJC) ["Deb Messling" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:37:58 -0600 From: "Pitassi, Mary" Subject: RE: the President-elect's cabinet picks (NCJ) Kakki wrote: "If only he had done the bidding of the opposing party and picked all their idealogical choices like a good puppet, eh?" Me now: of course not. But bipartisanship, which Mr. Bush claims to embrace, involves taking some care not to totally alienate the opposition and even throwing it a few bones every once in a while. Reasonable minds may disagree on whether that's been done so far, but I think it hasn't. Kakki also wrote: "In the meantime, though, do people really think all the wrangling and dirty politics is productive for the country? The negativism, uncertainty and distraction that will no doubt result from all the mud-slinging is not going to be beneficial for the overall running of the country." Well, OK. What might the incoming Bush administration do to lessen the negativity it has generated? (tongue only half-firmly in cheek). Finally, Don Rowe wrote: "It's not *that* call the manager's really interested in ... it's the next one. The one that might count. The play at the plate. Ashcroft's nomination, in other words, is really not much more than a straw man offered as sacrfice to more liberal Democrats. Sure they can shoot Ashcroft down, but how much *better* in comparison, will Bush's nomination for ... Supreme Court Justice ... look by comparison?" That's an excellent point Don, but I have a slightly different view. I think the nomination for the Attorney General of the United States, and the head of the Department of Justice, *is* a play at the plate---or at least, a play at third base. If anyone doubts just how powerful Justice is in enforcing our laws, just take a look at the mischief to civil rights, affirmative action, and employment law that was done almost entirely, if memory serves, by two high-ranking Justice Department officials under the Reagan administration, (and maybe some of the G.H.W. Bush administration): one William Bradford Reynolds and a then-little-known attorney named Kenneth Starr. Mary P. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 10:50:04 -0800 (PST) From: Penny Subject: Re: **Portland JMDL group gathering? Rob wrote: >I'm sending you out this signal here' - let's organize a nice casual meeting someplace where we can swap stories, tell lies..... Pick a date and place y'all and I'll do my best to be there. I seldom leave town this time of year, so my schedule is probably more free than you guys'. I think we're going to be going to the Robben Ford show anyway, so if anyone wants to meet up there TOO, let me know so I can be on the lookout. I liked that that show was on a Friday night if Ray and Cathy wanted to come from Seaside, Elizabeth from the Gorge, or maybe even we'd be lucky and the wonderfully wacky and witty Catherine T might be down from Seattle. ;-) >I am also seeking information about, and likely a copy of a Joni Laserdisc entitled "Come In From The Cold" (?), a Laserdisc that somehow has escaped my discover until just recently. Any help from the group on these matters will be greatly appreciated!! I don't have any of these on Laserdisc, but I do have the store bought VHS of each and would be glad to loan them to you to preview or record until you find them on disc. You can check ebay periodically - didn't see any on disc (only vhs) there last night when I went a lookin. As for the CD bootlegs - oh baby, you're in for a treat! I don't have a burner yet, but I'm sure someone will hook you up...I could loan you a few of the CD copies (most of what I have is on tape) if you have a burner. Besides the early 2nd Fret stuff, A Day In The Garden and Joni & James in London are must haves too! >If I am the senior of the group, just remember - history has taught us that the elders of the tribe represent a vast sea of knowledge, a deep reservoir of wisdom, and a huge fountain of bullshit! I will expect to be received accordingly. ;-) ...Rob But of course, sir! My kids playfully mock me because, especially around those older than I, I'm so much like the Alaska Airlines brown nosing kid gardener! ;-) But in the same regard, I hope you're not intimidated by Mr. Symes (thanks for the pic Brian!) who looks like he could be our Les's, equally handsome, brother. ;-) Penny Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:58:34 EST From: Siresorrow@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni/Thom Yorke hey sarah, i'm glad there are young people on the list. i know sometimes some of us ...cough...mature folk don't fully recognize the unique perspective that comes with youth. you should get to know yael from michigan. she's very very up beat and postive and plays joni songs and often speaks for the young perspective. i think nikki is young too but from the last fest it looks like the old man paz was trying to corrupt her. as you see joni and rajoheyaad ( the proper southern phonetic for radiohead as i was reminded yesterday off list ) on the same list, i like to call that..cross threads that intersect in your sweetspot. this happens alot. the first time it happened to me was when i bought t.i. at the store and brought it to my office and played it and couldn't figure out why i liked the jacket so much. then i realized that i had a print of the vincent self portrait with bandaged ear hanging on my wall and i broke down cried and the mail man came in and thought i was having a nervous breakdown. anyway, this happens all the time and i do like thom yorke and i am posting next about that with the drity old pazman. and then i'm going to have to post about something yael put up earlier that comes from my incarnation as an italian woman in the body of an irishman. see how fun life is? good luck and enjoy. patrick np. dm / tr ants marching ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:04:50 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: rufus NJC at last someone agrees with me about goofus painwrite!!!!! what a bore!!!!! wallyK <> I would say not because Rufus was a MOST unpleasant listen for me...I didn't feel like he could hold a note in a paper sack. Richard's voice, on the other hand, is very soothing and on the money every time. Check it out for yourself at www.clearsongs.com Bob NP: Little Milton, "I Can't Quit You, Baby" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:07:58 EST From: Siresorrow@aol.com Subject: Re: harvey head - njc In a message dated 1/10/01 10:19:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, jmichaelpaz@telocity.com writes: << Still can NOT find anything by Radiohead that I like. >> i've been thinking about this today as i've been listening to some rayjoheyaad. here is what i like in their sound. first, the guy's voice is really edgy and cool. then, and perhaps most significant is this digitally perfect clear sound they have. like they make a new environment for the music to be heard in. and it's very powerful. it doesn't feel artificial to me even though it is compared to say a martin D28 and a singer. but it is really really powerful. magnetic. like a big wave that you catch and ride till the song is over. and when i listened to p.j. harvey's stories... i heard the same quality. where as say..patti smith's gung ho sounds similar but is more organic in it's nature. it has the gutteral guitar going and really strong vocals...but it does not have this pristine sharp techno quality that i hear in p.j.'s album. so i'm trying to identify a quality that i've seen now twice in new music. if i tried to translate into past sounds, i'd suggest ...rush....maybe some pink floyd...like specifically ..welcome to the machine. you know how that has that brum brum brum brum brum driving sound to it that never deviates....that's the kind of thing i'm talking about only not really because it still is not the same as radiohead. so that's what i get out of it. but i could easily see how people on this list would not like radiohead. i'm almost more surprised that some do and most surprised that i'm liking them. i've always thought of myself as more organic. so what do i know? ciao. patrick np. dm banter on luther college ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 11:12:44 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Political sniping content (NJC) Mary wrote: > Well, that's one spin on what happened. Another is that, according to her > own friends, Chavez was aware that the woman was an illegal alien three > months into having her live at her home for a year, although she later > stated publicly that she didn't know until after she left. There's also > speculation that the immigrant was, indeed, an employee, and regarded by > such by those who knew Chavez at the time. It's hard to tell which version is the spin and which version is thet truth. I was trapped in my car all day yesterday and heard reports on the radio from both sides which also made my judgment go back and forth on the issue. What ultimately was most compelling to me as to who to believe was hearing the replay of the press conference from the Guatamalan woman herself, Marta Mercado, and also hearing an interview with a and author whose name I don't recall and and some close friends of Chavez. Maybe that's being biased on my part, but another factor which tipped the scales for me was learning from several news sources the following as reported in today's Washington Post: "The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that the neighbor, Peggy Zwisler, employed the Guatemalan woman for household tasks between 1991 and 1993. The newspaper said the FBI was investigating whether a conversation between Mrs. Chavez and Mrs. Zwisler last month was an attempt to influence how Mrs. Zwisler would respond to an FBI background check on the nominee. The attorney who spoke to the Journal on Mrs. Zwisler's behalf was Neil Eggleston, the former White House associate counsel who worked with Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos on Whitewater scandal damage control." So if former Clinton associates are the source of the Chavez misdeeds at this point, I tend to trust more the principals involved until proven otherwise. > However, on the basis of the imperfect record that exists, I would have had > serious, serious reservations about this nomination. First, even if Chavez > was at some level performing a charitable act, if she paid the woman under > certain circumstances, she may have broken the law. Where is the vaunted > Republican concern with the primacy of the "rule of law" in this > instance--or does that only apply to Democrats thought to be the wrongdoers? > Second, the laws she may have violated concerned, yes, immigration, but also > *labor and employment*, the same laws she would have been sworn to uphold as > Secretary of Labor! Third, her truthfulness has been called into question. I have thought about those very factors myself and I agree. However, she is being pre-judged without a proper trial and the apparent source of the allegations seems suspect to me. However, as for the alleged crime, there has been a compelling insistence that Mercado was not being hired and used as an employee and there have been other instances where Chavez helped illegal immigrants in need. A few people have also raised the point that if the only crime she is guilty of is "harboring" an person of illegal status, then indeed should the battered womems center where Mercado had gone before being taken in by Chavez, and which reportedly sheltered many other woman of illegal status, be prosecuted? > Contemporaneous witnesses clearly recall her knowing about the woman's immigration status > and telling others about it, but she has gone on record as denying her > knowledge. Where is the great concern with honesty that was so evident in > some circles throughout the entire Lewinsky scandal? And again, how > effective could she have been in her job under these circumstances? Again I would also be very concerned if Chavez is an out and out liar. But again, what/who are the sources of these allegations? > Fourth, Chavez is on record as having made some especially biting comments > about the eventually-torpedoed nomination of Zoe Baird to be Attorney > General under the Clinton administration in 1993. Baird, I believe, had > failed to pay taxes and/or withholding for a nanny who worked in her employ. I've heard this one, too, and it is based on some comments she made on PBS, right? I've also heard that some people have reviewed the broadcast and read the transcript and maintain that her comments were taken and snipped completely out of context to add fuel to this fire. > Finally, about bipartisanship and "negativity." The first doesn't involve > the Democrats lying down and playing dead, and the second hasn't all been > generated by one side. Politics is, by definition, a volatile and sometimes > nasty business. I agree, and don't expect any group to just rollover - we would not have a dynamic system without oppositional views, but I've never seen so much outright lust for blood, revenge and destruction in all my life as I've witnessed with Bush, and he hasn't even been sworn in yet. Based on what I've seen so far, it turns my stomach to think what will be done to him and the people who work with him in the next few years. And we are going to have to hear about it on a daily basis. It's going to be negative, divisive and a constant downer. And ultimately for what good purpose when it comes right down to it? At some point Americans should be more concerned with the politicians and representatives in government actually getting some real work done for the country instead of wasting time fighting political wars and wrangling on all our collective dimes. Let them fight over real matters for a change, I say. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:14:03 -0600 From: "Pitassi, Mary" Subject: RE: LONG RANT (NJC) Lori wrote (among many other things): "When I called Linda Chavez a hypocrite yesterday, I wasn't referring so much to her harboring an illegal immigrant -- I knew there had to be more to the story (and as I learned more, I admired Chavez's actions) -- as I was to Chavez's opposition to affirmative action and minimum wage increases. For Chavez, as a Hispanic and as a woman, to deny the existence of a glass ceiling is CRAP. Bully for her if she never experienced professional discrimination (although I'd bet she'd be lying on that count). Many, many more people of color and women HAVE experienced denial of promotions based on race, ethnicity, and gender (nevermind sexual preference), and this practice continues everyday." Lori, thanks for getting into the SUBSTANTIVE reasons why Chavez's nomination was so controversial. If she had not withdrawn her name from consideration, our national conversation eventually would have gotten beyond the situation involving Marta Mercado and into the broader issues. And that's where I wish it had remained. However, given the opposition that was mounting from organized labor and concerned others about whether Ms. Chavez could be trusted to enforce the labor and employment laws she would have been sworn to uphold at the DOL, I'm not certain that she would have been confirmed even had she remained in the running, and managed to surmount concerns about Mercado. In my previous post, I commented only on the Mercado situation, since that's what we had been discussing. But for me, as I suspect, for many, that was only the outermost tip of the iceberg. Mary P. P.S. Lori, how the heck are you?!! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 11:23:27 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: the President-elect's cabinet picks (NCJ) > Me now: of course not. But bipartisanship, which Mr. Bush claims to > embrace, involves taking some care not to totally alienate the opposition > and even throwing it a few bones every once in a while. Reasonable minds > may disagree on whether that's been done so far, but I think it hasn't. I agree he needs to throw some real bones to the opposition, but how can people so easily predict what these appointees are going to do before they have even been confirmed, much less actually spent a day on the job. > If anyone doubts just how powerful Justice is in > enforcing our laws, just take a look at the mischief to civil rights, > affirmative action, and employment law that was done almost entirely, if > memory serves, by two high-ranking Justice Department officials under the > Reagan administration, (and maybe some of the G.H.W. Bush administration): > one William Bradford Reynolds and a then-little-known attorney named Kenneth > Starr. What mischief did they do? Please enlighten me because I don't recall issues regarding those laws during the Reagan administration. I'm not being obstinate - I truly am not aware of such issues. As for the current AG Janet Reno, many will argue that she has also facilitated some mischief in the area of civil rights in the form of Waco, Elian Gonzalez, the FBI files that were gathered up improperly on employees and others in the Clinton White House, etc. I may be completely naive, but I just don't see how a handful of people can successfully overturn long-standing laws such as abortion, on their political whim. I just can't see them being able to do that and get away with it under our current system Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:30:57 -0600 From: "Pitassi, Mary" Subject: The mischief one can do (NJC: was, RE: the President-elect's cab inet picks) Kakki wrote: "What mischief did they do? Please enlighten me because I don't recall issues regarding those laws during the Reagan administration. I'm not being obstinate - I truly am not aware of such issues. As for the current AG Janet Reno, many will argue that she has also facilitated some mischief in the area of civil rights in the form of Waco, Elian Gonzalez, the FBI files that were gathered up improperly on employees and others in the Clinton White House, etc. I may be completely naive, but I just don't see how a handful of people can successfully overturn long-standing laws such as abortion, on their political whim. I just can't see them being able to do that and get away with it under our current system" RE: Janet Reno: Exactly. I almost mentioned her in my original post, but decided to stick to one side of the political aisle! But conservatives would probably say that she, her department, and her picks have done precisely what I accuse Reynolds and Starr of doing. RE: their actions in the 1980's: I knew someone was going to ask me for specifics, and probably, you! I could give you much more if I had a chance to rout through materials for a class I took in law school over ten years ago. But my recollection is that the Reagan Justice Department pretty much gutted what had been the interpretation of affirmative action, in particular, by stressing racial equality as "color-blind": i.e., by denying the earlier argument that not all groups in the U.S. start out on an level playing field. My memory is that the DOJ, and Reynolds in particular, aggressively pursued this theory in the policies the department supported, the cases it chose to pursue, how far it chose to pursue them, and the persistence with which it did so. And new case law was indeed made. I am sorry that I don't have more specifics for you now, but I could get them. It just might take some time! I agree with you that one person can't single-handedly change the law, but one person in a powerful position can appoint and support many people who, working together, over a prolonged period of time and united behind specific policies, can. You also wrote: "I agree he needs to throw some real bones to the opposition, but how can people so easily predict what these appointees are going to do before they have even been confirmed, much less actually spent a day on the job." Again, I think (unfortunately) that that's politics as usual. It was done with Clinton's nominees in '93, and it was probably be done with the nominees of whichever new administration takes over in 2004, or 2008. Mary P. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:38:29 EST From: Siresorrow@aol.com Subject: Re: The president-elect's cabinet picks (NJC) In a message dated 1/10/01 8:28:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, yharlap@channelsinternet.com writes: << For example, will Ashcroft, as attorney general, be committed to upholding the law that keeps people from bombing and hounding abortion clinics? Whether or not one is pro-choice or anti-choice, it is important to uphold the law... Just as an example. >> hey yael, this made me think of my very italian, very liberal democratic, and very catholic mother. she hates the look of george bush. she hates his face. she hated ronald regan. she she still thinks oliver north is the devil incarnate because he acted alone and lied to congress. ( marcel, don't say a thing..this is my mother i'm talking about) she despises fundamentalist and truly hates jerry falwell. i'm sure she is seething about ashcroft, but i know better than to ask her. i could go on, but you get the image. liberal democrat to the core. but very very pro life. mother of 8 children and having lost two in early years. she just can't see abortion. now, at the same time, she does not see it as interwoven to womens rights. she had a daughter graduate from the first class of women at annapolis. her other two daughters have phd's and work as professionals. she believes in womens rights but does not see abortion as the fulcrum for leverage for those rights. my main point is this. she would never condone the bombing of clinics and would not look the other way of laws that protect the lives of abortion supporters. to her, that would be ...sick. the root for my mother on the issue is faith. becuse she believes that life comes from god and we should not interfere with that no matter how inconvenient it is. and we can guess ashcroft would agree with that last sentence. so i would hope that mr. ashcroft is able to separate the issues and work to protect all humans from injury and if he thinks that's important for unborn humans i would hope he'll see that important for born humans who work in clinics. patrick np. meshell - bitter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 11:41:21 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: LONG RANT - Re: The president-elect's cabinet picks (NJC) Lori wrote: > I'm sure my memory is failing me, but I don't recall > politics ever being quite as dirty and hateful as they > became during the Clinton administration. Once > Clinton took office, the opposition held nothing back > in their efforts to ruin him. In the wake of that and > considering the close election in November, they > expect things to be different now? Sorry. "You reap > what you sow." From the beginning of the Bush bashing, I've felt that this is all "Clinton's Revenge." If George W. is found to have done one percent of the things that Clinton has been linked with, I will also support any proceedings against him. > There's no doubt that this behavior promotes nothing > that's good for the country. As long as politics is > what it is, though -- a personal-power greed fest -- > this is the way things are going to be. Or worse. If > people could REALLY get behind doing what's good for > this country instead of being primarily concerned with > their own personal agenda ... oh fuck, I just feel > like I'm talking to air. You're not talking to air - I agree with you. I got fed up with the self-serving of both parties a long time ago. > When I called Linda Chavez a hypocrite yesterday, I > wasn't referring so much to her harboring an illegal > immigrant -- I knew there had to be more to the story > (and as I learned more, I admired Chavez's actions) -- > as I was to Chavez's opposition to affirmative action > and minimum wage increases. If Chavez is someone who would activiely work to do away with the minimum wage (which is never going to happen in reality) and would throw out all the employment protections, I absolutely would also not want her to be confirmed. But we will never know the whole story now because of the pre-emptive strike of the Marta Mercado situation. I paid for my own college education through post-grad and also lived (miserably I might add) on minimum wage for five years until I started getting a bit ahead financially. I've never known anyone who could live independently on minimum wage, at least in California! Bottom line is that Chavez should have been denied for valid reasons and not chased out before she even had a chance to state her case. Everyone should be allowed that in our system. If she was a horrible choice, then let the system resolve that in the proper way. The way the nastiness and dirty tricks has been going in recent years is truly going to prevent any decent people from any party wanting to serve their country at some point. Actually I think it has already happened - believe it or not, I was surprised that the Republicans couldn't come up with anyone more impressive than Bush and that the Democrats couldn't come up with anyone more impressive than Gore. All the low-down nastiness is turning away some probably stellar candidates. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 11:43:13 -0800 From: Scott Price Subject: Re: The president-elect's cabinet picks (NJC) At 05:59 AM 1/10/01 -0800, Kakki wrote: >I just learned that Van Morrison is going to >perform at Bush's inaguration. It has been reported that George W. Bush is a long-time fan of Van Morrison. Somehow this makes me feel better about our president-elect's character. Surely Mr. Bush must also be familiar with one Roberta Joan Anderson... :-) Scott ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:17:32 -0800 (PST) From: "Lori R. Fye" Subject: Re: LONG RANT - Re: The president-elect's cabinet picks (NJC) I really should be working and not carrying on about labor (the irony amuses me, though) ... Kakki wrote: > Bottom line is that Chavez should have been denied > for valid reasons and not chased out before she even > had a chance to state her case. Everyone should be > allowed that in our system. I agree with the last statement completely, and with the first to an extent. It doesn't seem like Chavez had much of a chance. Otoh, in the current political climate, she should have known better and should have laid all the facts on the table as soon as she had an inkling that she was going to be nominiated. By doing otherwise, Chavez did herself in. > Actually I think it has already happened - believe > it or not, I was surprised that the Republicans > couldn't come up with anyone more impressive than > Bush and that the Democrats couldn't come up with > anyone more impressive than Gore. Both Bush and Gore are lame bulbs. Each side has called the other side's candidate a "puppet," and each side is correct. I suspect there are smarter and perhaps more frightening minds behind the curtains, in both parties. (Cheneys scare the heck out of me.) > All the low-down nastiness is turning away some > probably stellar candidates. No doubt that's true. Sad, isn't it? Lori in DC Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:34:49 -0800 From: "Catherine Coffey" Subject: **Portland JMDL group gathering? Ray and I would most definitely get up to Portland for a Joni-gathering! (Hi Penny - how ya been??) Cathy in Seaside _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:36:01 -0800 From: jan gyn Subject: Re: The president-elect's cabinet picks (NJC) >>I just learned that Van Morrison is going to >>perform at Bush's inaguration. >It has been reported that George W. Bush is a long-time fan of Van >Morrison. Somehow this makes me feel better about our president-elect's >character. >Surely Mr. Bush must also be familiar with one Roberta Joan Anderson... :-) >Scott Seems like EVERYBODY between ages 40-80 like Van Morrison. Now if it was Jim Morrison... - -jan Time to get rid of all my Van Morrison albums- whoops, don't have any... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:46:23 -0500 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: rufus NJC All right. That is enough Rufus bashing. I have a tape of him live at the Knitting Factory and if y'all could hear his Over the Rainbow you would swoon. Jerry Wally Kairuz wrote: > at last someone agrees with me about goofus painwrite!!!!! what a bore!!!!! > wallyK > > <> > > I would say not because Rufus was a MOST unpleasant listen for me...I didn't > feel like he could hold a note in a paper sack. Richard's voice, on the > other > hand, is very soothing and on the money every time. > > Check it out for yourself at www.clearsongs.com > > Bob > > NP: Little Milton, "I Can't Quit You, Baby" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:09:21 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: Re: Chavez Hold on a minute. The NY Times accuses Chavez (who was entirely unknown to me 2 weeks ago) of being a hypocrite for being "fiercely critical" of Ms. Baird. But the Chavez quote simply says, "I think most of the American people were upset during the Zok Baird >> nomination that she had hired an illegal alien. That was what upset them >> more than the fact that she did not pay Social Security taxes." That's not an attack at all. She's guessing at what the public found objectionable. Now maybe she actually did say something critical but the quote above does not prove the Times' assertion. Respectfully, Jim ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:13:45 -0800 From: "BRIAN SYMES" Subject: Nathan La Franeer The ghostly garden is NYC seen in the 4th dimension in a transindental way each new tower is a sunflower or corn stalk in joni's mind, after all she was a girl from the plains of grain who traveled in planes leaving vapor trails across that bleak terrain. opps sorry 33 years i have listen to this muse second to only mi madre! Ola Adios. - ----------------------- Free Email Service provided to you by Office.com, a service from Winstar ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:12:20 -0500 From: "cassy" Subject: 20 to 1 on VH1 I had to go and pick up my son from school around 3PM EST today. My husband, Thom, got home from work early since he started at 4AM today. When I arrived home he said "Cassy, come here for a minute and look at this." He had cued up a 4-5 minute segment about Joni from a show he'd been watching on VH-1 "20 to 1" and he'd seen that Joni was going to be on... he'd put in a tape very quickly during the commercial and taped it for me... barely missed the intro but got the segment. I said "Thom, what is this a list of? 20 to 1 of what?" he said "Oh, I think they said the top 20 guitar - something" so I have no idea what category she was listed as 16 of 20 in. Anyone else know? Cassy NP: Buckwheat Zydeco "Five Card Stud" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:29:37 -0800 From: "Elizabeth Udall" Subject: Re: **Portland JMDL group gathering? Penny wrote: >Elizabeth from the Gorge, or maybe even we'd be lucky and the >wonderfully >wacky and witty Catherine T might be >down from Seattle. ;-) I'm all for it--just let me know when and where. As for the fabulous Catherine T., I'll do my best to get her down here! Elizabeth (from the Gorge!) NP: The Sundays-Reading, Writing and Arithmetic _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:46:05 EST From: MDESTE1@aol.com Subject: RE: LONG RANT (NJC) (md) <<>> This is positively laughable. Linda Chavez obviously has never faced a glass ceiling because shes a conservative and has been a super achiever so she would have said so if she had. HOWEVER, she has now. Look at what the Dems are doing to her for purely ideological reasons> Just like the Dems abandoned the women raped by Clinton and turned on them for bucking the agenda they are turning on her. This is beyond a glass ceiling or should I say HIGHER than one. This is to totally attack someone BECAUSE they are competent AND a woman AND one who refuses to fall in line with the program of vicitmology. The left is attacking all the women Bush has named from Whitman to the Interior cabinet member nominee, from kathlene harris to Paula Jones to Elizabeth Ward Gracen whether its showing backbone (Harris)or rape (Broaderrick) look how you all have treated them. Every one of the accusers from Flowers to the Secret Service women they threatened to shut them up. If they go against what the MEN in the Democratic party dict ate they get the treatment. This is probably the first out and out discrimination Chavez has faced because she would be the first to put it out there. No cause is too important that it cant be tossed overboard for the sake of the agenda. Its hillarious. In the midst of the most catty (Harris' Makeup)mysoginist hissyfit are the Dems conducting themselves. Its as if "Oh my God if one really does make it our position is totally discredited" and so the Jihad has begun just as it has with the blacks who dont "behave". Successful women have to realize the price they must pay. Considering the competence of the Bush nominees maybe they already have. The new Democratic theme song has to be the theme from Dr.Zhivago. Glass ceilings. What a laugh. Marcel deste ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:51:03 EST From: MDESTE1@aol.com Subject: Re: The mischief one can do (NJC <<>> Janet Reno has not created law. She has abused misused tatooed and ignored the law. She simply has maintained the greatest most expansive coverup of others crimes in the history of the Presidency.Which is precisely why she was hired in the first place. By the way there were no objections from republicans (unfortunately) to her nomination. Not one. In fact the Republicans rtefused to listen to those who would have brought her prior acts and activities to light out of respect for Clintons right to choose the Cabinet he wanted. I defy anyone to demonstrate how a single Clinton Nominee underwent what Chavez has. Look through your records all you want. This is absolutely unprecendented. And all the pundits even the liberal ones are admitting that. marcel deste ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:58:07 -0500 From: "cassy" Subject: Re: joni in poetrymagazine.com Bob asked: >>> Question: To what is Joni referring when she repeats "the ghostly garden grows"? Does she mean the world in general as a ghostly garden? Funny then, in Woodstock she says we've got to get ourselves back to the garden. <<< I always thought "we've got to get ourselves back to the garden" in Woodstock meant the garden of Eden... but the "ghostly garden grows" was a little less obvious to me on the first few listens. After many years of personal growth and hundreds of Joni listening hours I came to the following conclusion: As we pass through life we come into contact with many places, people and situations; then they are gone, fleeting vignettes which live only in our memory. It's almost as if they slip from our reality into another "world," the fourth dimension of time. On reflection, these vignettes could be conceived of as "ghostly," no longer tangible or based in reality but living on in another form and the longer we live and have experiences the more our garden of ghosts grows. I am probably full of shit , but are we ever "wrong" when we share our own interpretations? Cassy NP: Toad the Wet Sprocket "Fear" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:14:50 -0800 (PST) From: Don Rowe Subject: Re: joni in poetrymagazine.com - --- cassy wrote: > Bob asked: > > >>> Question: To what is Joni referring when she > repeats "the ghostly > garden grows"? Does she mean the world in general as > a ghostly garden? As we pass through life we come into contact with > many places, people > and situations; then they are gone, fleeting > vignettes which live only > in our memory. And here I thought that was a reference to Viet Nam. A place seemingly like the Garden of Eden ... but on closer inspection a garden where only body bags are harvested. I like cassy's spin MUCH better! Don Rowe ===== Visit me anytime at http://www.mp3.com/donrowe Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 17:01:24 -0500 From: "cassy" Subject: Re: **Portland JMDL group gathering? From: Penny said: >>> if Ray and Cathy wanted to come from Seaside, Elizabeth from the Gorge, or maybe even we'd be lucky and the wonderfully wacky and witty Catherine T might be down from Seattle. ;-) <<< I read this with a smile thinking all you were missing was "Michael from Mountains" (or could that be New Orleans?) Cassy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:40:15 -0800 (PST) From: Penny Subject: Re: 20 to 1 on VH1 >I said "Thom, what is this a list of? 20 to 1 of what?" he said "Oh, I think they said the top 20 guitar - something" so I have no idea what category she was listed as 16 of 20 in. Anyone else know? First off Cassy, nice catch! That goes for your Joni segment taping husband too! ;-) I mean really, thanks, cuz I seldom watch vh1 unless there's some kind of JC. Although I did enjoy the Cat Stevens piece a few weeks ago. Looking at the TV guide it lists vh1 this afternoon as showing several different categories of hour long "20-1" episodes titled "Girl Groups", "Duets", "Various categories", "Guitar superstars", "David Crosby", "Teen Idols" and "Divas". Wonder if Joni is in more than one category? I would imagine these will be shown repeatedly so if we don't get Joan's portions taped the first time, we'll get to try again in the near future. A check to their website might be in order.....a surfin' I will go, a surfin' I will go, hi ho the merry-o, a surfin' I will go! ;-) Penny Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 17:47:05 -0500 From: "cassy" Subject: Re: 20 to 1 on VH1 Penny wrote: >>> First off Cassy, nice catch! That goes for your Joni segment taping husband too! ;-) <<< Thanks, I was grinning from ear to ear that he taped it for me too... maybe I'll have to award him some "good boy" points or something (maybe a little B & B) >>> Looking at the TV guide it lists vh1 this afternoon as showing several different categories of hour long "20-1" episodes titled "Girl Groups", "Duets", "Various categories", "Guitar superstars" <<< I believe it was in the category of "Guitar superstars," Penny. I just went to him and asked if it could have been that category and he said very possibly since Les Paul was in the same program. They discussed her "oversized" guitar during the segment and they showed the photo of her that was used on the TNT Tribute poster holding her guitar. If you do confirm this... please let me know. Pretty soon I'll have to edit some things to donate to the next video tree. Cassy NP: Susan Tedeschi "Looking For Answers" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:56:43 -0800 (PST) From: "Lori R. Fye" Subject: RE: LONG RANT (NJC) (md) Ah, Marcel, my dear friend ... > << the existence of a glass ceiling is CRAP. >>> > > This is positively laughable. Linda Chavez obviously > has never faced a glass ceiling because shes a > conservative and has been a super achiever so she > would have said so if she had. There's a certain truth to something Clark wrote during the election fracas (and I paraphrase) about how Republicans think that everyone else has grown up and lived the way they have, so why should anything change? If you've never encountered a glass ceiling, of course you don't believe in its existence. But WOULD Chavez have said so if she HAD encountered such? She didn't ante up the information about sheltering and (possibly) employing illegal immigrants, so what makes you think she'd be truthful about her personal experiences with glass ceilings or anything else? She tows the party line, just as you say the rape-ignoring Dems do. > HOWEVER, she has now. Look at what the Dems > are doing to her for purely ideological reasons> Purely ideological reasons? Or payback time regarding the (hypocritical) argument over TRUTH? I'm not saying it's right; it's not. It's disgusting, really, but given the political climate it's also understandable. Perhaps Chavez would have been a good Secretary of Labor. I remain hesitant because of her views on affirmative action and minimum wage, however. > This is to totally attack someone BECAUSE they are > competent AND a woman AND one who refuses to fall in > line with the program of vicitmology. Oh hell, Marcel. MEN of both parties attack successful women, period. It's just the way it (still) is. That's exactly how the "glass ceiling" stays in place. What's really sickening is when WOMEN attack successful women (think Phyllis Schafly). As for the "program of victimology," I agree that the concept of victimization is overused and abused, but people do continue to be held back because of their color, gender, etc. The only people who seem to consistently deny that are Republican white men and their followers (think "Uncle Tom" -- or Uncle Clarence). I realize that because of the way the election played out, Bush hasn't had as much time as he should have to put together his "dream team" of Cabinet nominees. But I really wonder if Chavez isn't a bit of a "fall guy?" Why she didn't spill her guts and volunteer the information that should have been known ahead of time? Or are we playing a little game of shooting ducks to tire us all, so the Senate will have to eventually confirm SOMEONE, perhaps the worst possible choice? As Don Rowe pointed out, we may end up in a situation where, after all is said and done (and destroyed), a very conservative Supreme Court justice doesn't look so bad. Frankly, the idea frightens me. > The left is attacking all the women Bush has named > from Whitman to the Interior cabinet member nominee The Left is attacking ALL of Bush's nominees, as they will do (with the possible exception of Rod Paige). If Gore had won, the Republicans would do the same. > Successful women have to realize the price they must > pay. Believe me, successful women DO realize the price they must pay, in politics especially. But ANYBODY who wants to get into politics has to realize the price they must pay. If they don't, they have no business in the game. It's sad that things have seem to have degenerated to the place they have, but here we are. Lori in DC, who has been reading Rita Mae Brown's "Dolley" (a novel of Dolley Madison in love and war) and learning that the game of politics really hasn't changed all that much ... Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 10:43 +1000 From: john low Subject: Hound Dog Taylor NJC Hi jmdlers, Being partial to the Blues and knowing there are others on the list who feel the same, I wonder if someone can help me wih some information. The other day I bought a a CD in the Charly Masterworks series  Hound Dog Taylor, "Live in Boston". Its 'Hound Dog' at his rowdy, slide-slashing, house-rocking best! But, there are no liner notes of any kind and Im wondering whether anyone knows the date of these recordings? And, I guess the band members were his usual compadres, Brewer Phillips (rhythm guitar) and Ted Harvey (drums) but Id like to know for sure. Any info would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, John (in Sydney). __________________________________________________________________ Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:21:40 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Van, Joni and Georgie (NJC) Scott wrote: > It has been reported that George W. Bush is a long->time fan of Van Morrison. Somehow this makes me feel >better about our president-elect's character. > > Surely Mr. Bush must also be familiar with one Roberta >Joan Anderson... :-) Oh my, Scott, the thought boggles the mind if he ever got Joni to perform in the White House. Think I'll stock up on industrial-strength asbestos for my computer right away! ;-) Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:23:34 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Another one for the list (NJC) > Seems like EVERYBODY between ages 40-80 like Van Morrison. Now if it was > Jim Morrison... > -jan > Time to get rid of all my Van Morrison albums- whoops, don't have any... How about any Fleetwood Mac? Uh oh, John McVie has recently come out as a "staunch Republican," too. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:31:00 -0800 From: jan gyn Subject: Re: Another one for the list (NJC) >> -jan >> Time to get rid of all my Van Morrison albums- whoops, don't have any... > >How about any Fleetwood Mac? Uh oh, John McVie has recently come out as a >"staunch Republican," too. > >Kakki The only Fleetwood Mac stuff I like is the Peter Green stuff. But if I had any of their L.A. songwriter type stuff, it would be in the 'sell pile' like pronto. - -jan ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:41:09 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Another one for the list (NJC) > The only Fleetwood Mac stuff I like is the Peter Green stuff. But if I had > any of their L.A. songwriter type stuff, it would be in the 'sell pile' > like pronto. > -jan I'm with you on the Peter Green stuff. Let me know when you plan to sell. ;-) Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 18:51:05 -0500 From: "Deb Messling" Subject: RE: LONG RANT (NJC) Does anyone but me remember the 1986 election in which Linda Chavez ran against Barbara Mikulski for the U.S. Senate? A columnist for the Baltimore Business Journal characterized the Chavez campaign as "a dirt-ball campaign of innuendo and slurs." What I specifically remember is Chavez accusing Mikulski of being a "San Francisco-style Democrat." The media soundly berated Chavez for her comments, without ever saying out loud what Chavez was implying! It was pretty funny. Mikulski, of course, won, by 60% of the vote. She's considered unbeatable in Maryland, despite her connection to "San Francisco." - ----------------------------------- Deb Messling "I like cats. They give the home a heartbeat." ~Joni Mitchell - ----------------------------------- ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2001 #13 **************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe ------- Siquomb, isn't she?