From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2002 #452 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 Thursday, October 31 2002 Volume 2002 : Number 452 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: -------- Today in History: October 31 [ljirvin@jmdl.com] Re: Judy Collins NJC [Catherine McKay ] Re: eat the rich NJC [Deb Messling ] Ryan & Joni ["Sarah Cartwright" ] Re: JMDL Digest V2002 #450 - NJC Cheese & Crackers [Jerry Notaro ] Re: eat the rich NJC ["Brenda" ] spin-off from "everything is political" (NJC) [ReckersL@ebrd.com] Re: spin-off from "everything is political" (NJC) ["kakki" ] RE: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) [] judy judy judy ["walterphil" ] Tr: 1987 Benefit ["Laurent Olszer" ] Dave Holland, Njc ["Laurent Olszer" ] Re: spin-off from "everything is political" (NJC) [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: JMDL Digest V2002 #451 [Kardinel@aol.com] RE: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) ["Brenda" ] Re: Dave Holland, Njc ["Mike Pritchard" ] Joni on politics...made in the USA...globalism NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] RE: Partisanship & Spin (NJC) ["Brenda" ] Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) [Murphycopy@aol.com] RE: Estate Tax (NJC) ["Brenda" ] RE: Estate tax (NJC) [] Re: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) [] Re: Estate tax (NJC) [Murphycopy@aol.com] Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) [Murphycopy@aol.com] Re: Estate tax (NJC) ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) ["Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Judy Collins NJC --- William Chavez wrote: > I think that whole tour was a real purging > experience for her because not > only did her son commit suicide but he was on of > those sons that you > continuously had to be on top of, trying to keep him > well directed. The fact > that I gave her flowers and asked her to sing a song > she hadn't sung in > twenty years is what probably will keep that night > in her mind for awhile. I > know it will be in mind forever. ... The song ends with > > "And I feel like something is being born, tells my > soul not to mourn.", Wow! That was the song I was *going* to sing at jonifest, if I had made it. I love that song! I didn't realize when you mentioned it earlier - I was sure you said it was "Amazing Grace", but I guess I wasn't paying that close attention at the time. The song is "Winter Sky" and it's by Billy Edd Wheeler. It has a very soulful gospel sound. I have the Judy Collins songbook that must have been published 25-30 years ago and it's one of my favourite songbooks. It has a lot of Judy's early material, but interspersed with that is a sort of autobiography with lots of photos of Judy and her family from the time she was just a baby. The last photo in the book (on the inside back cover) is a picture of Judy's son Clark when he was about 12-14. What a cute kid, with freckles all over his face, and what a tragedy that he ended up committing suicide. I don't know anything about him, but he was Judy's only child, so I can only imagine the pain. Out under the winter sky, out under the winter sky Stars come tremble my eye, stars come tremble my eye And I feel like something's gonna die I feel like something's gonna die I feel like something's gonna die Hand me wings, for to fly. High is heaven in early morn, high is heaven in early morn Men lie sleeping in beds that are warm Sleep in beds that are warm And I feel like something's being born I feel like something's being born I feel like something's being born Tells my soul not to mourn. ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 07:03:37 -0500 From: Deb Messling Subject: Re: eat the rich NJC Brenda, I'm curious, what's the source of this figure? At 05:48 PM 10/30/02 -0800, you wrote: > > The median income of members of the Republican party is a little over >$36,000. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Deb Messling -^..^- messling@enter.net - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.408 / Virus Database: 230 - Release Date: 10/24/02 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:13:06 +0000 From: "Sarah Cartwright" Subject: Ryan & Joni Bob, Just wanted to heartily applaud your NP Ryan Adams 'Winding Wheel' - do you like no.13 on Heartbreaker too out of interest? i can never remember the name of it but i just love the lyrics .There are a few tracks on Demolition Man which are worth a mention too. The start of You Turn Me On I'm a Radio of Joni's is slightly Ryanesque I feel? have taken the advice from the Joni Die-Hards and bought both FTR and C& S, both of which I absolutely love, esp. Judgement of Moon & Stars which Ken of JMDL kindly sent me the piano music too and my neighbour came round last night to ask me what it was as she could hear me playing it so Joni can travel fine through walls aswell....! is FTR all about James Taylor or is there another man of the moment too at that time? ( 'xcuse my lack of in-depth jonifacts ..i am trying!.) sarah - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. Click Here ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 08:20:49 -0500 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: JMDL Digest V2002 #450 - NJC Cheese & Crackers mack watson-bush wrote: > Bryan wrote: > > (but included the fantastic "I Remember Sky," right?) > > indeed. what a tune. Judy has the ability to evoke emotion that few can > match. 'I Remember Sky" is one of those tunes as is 'Secret Gardens' on the > equally poignant album 'True Stories." Secret Gardens is one of my favorite Judy penned songs. Pure perfection on the piano. I Remember Sky is oft performed by great singers. It was written by Stephen Sondheim for his rarely done Evening Primrose. Jerry, just loving this thread ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 08:52:03 -0500 From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Ryan & Joni > Just wanted to heartily applaud your NP Ryan Adams 'Winding Wheel' - do > you like no.13 on Heartbreaker too out of interest? Yeah Sarah, I really enjoy that entire record. Ryan hasn't done any wrong yet in my book, whether it's the early Whiskeytown stuff or his latest collection of 'demos' that makes most singwriters look like also-rans. "Gold" remains my favorite Ryan to date, inspired by and not derivative of the best of 70's classic rock and balladries. But I know a certain Paz-dawg who lists "Heartbreaker" as #1, which is cool. It's all good. < Demolition Man which are worth a mention too. The start of You Turn Me On > I'm a Radio of Joni's is slightly Ryanesque I feel? Hadn't thought about that, but I wouldn't disagree with you now that you mention it...my immediate response to Demolition is that it is VERY Paul Westerberg/Replacements influenced, from the fragile ballads to the balls-out rockers. Adams admits to being a huge 'Mats fan. And Adams' duet on "Concrete Sky" with Beth Orton is certainly one of my favorite tracks of the year. Simply takes my breath away! > is FTR all about James Taylor or is there another man of > the moment too > at that time? That is the conventional wisdom, Sarah...the giveaway clue is her line "Pack Your Suspenders", referencing his look on the cover of "Mud Slide Slim & The Blue Horizon". Cold Blue Steel references his heroin use. I'm sure there are others on there, I'll leave it to those who have FTR in their blood to comment. Bob NP: Afghan Whigs, "My Curse" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 09:07:45 -0500 From: "Heather" Subject: RE: Rachel Z - "Moon At The Window" - njc I knew it!!! I had a suspicion when you opted for the beans instead of zucchini or squash. :-) Heather - -----Original Message----- From: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com]On Behalf Of Murphycopy@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:54 PM To: SCJoniGuy@aol.com; joni@smoe.org Subject: Re: Rachel Z - "Moon At The Window" - njc The Covers King writes: << The Joni tributes are falling out of the sky faster than you can say "Murphy is a cover-lover!" >> Truth be told, Bob, I don't really care for Joni Mitchell's music. Like many JMDLers, I'm just here for the Dating Service and the lively political debates! --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 06:55:00 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: Re: eat the rich NJC On 31 Oct 2002 at 7:03, Deb Messling wrote: > Brenda, I'm curious, what's the source of this figure? > National Election Studies - http://www.umich.edu/~nes/ > > At 05:48 PM 10/30/02 -0800, you wrote: > > > The median income of members of the Republican party is a little > > > over > >$36,000. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Deb Messling -^..^- messling@enter.net > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus > system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.408 / Virus Database: > 230 - Release Date: 10/24/02 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 07:39:48 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: Re: eat the rich NJC On 31 Oct 2002 at 6:55, Brenda wrote: > On 31 Oct 2002 at 7:03, Deb Messling wrote: > > > Brenda, I'm curious, what's the source of this figure? > > > > National Election Studies - http://www.umich.edu/~nes/ > > Let me clarify something. I original found this number in a student project by surfing the web. You'll find it here: http://149.43.80.142/cs100homeF01/delbert/webpage/Group_Project.html Thinking that one might find the results suspect because it is a student project and because the data at NES is raw, I emailed an old college classmate of mine who has done research at the Kennedy School. He confirmed the number was about right (might in fact be low) and talked about some unpublished work that affirms it. Because the work is unpublished, I can't cite it. OK....probably more than you wanted to read. BTW - I don't see anything really surprising by this number when you consider that nearly 80% of U.S. households have a total income of less than $75,000 per year and the median household income in 2001 was just over $42,000. B - ------------------------------ Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:57:03 -0000 From: ReckersL@ebrd.com Subject: spin-off from "everything is political" (NJC) I normally don't react to political posts, not because I don't have an opinion, but because by the time I read the digest, the point has already been made and I can stay in safe lurkdom. But now, after having read the various opinions on the "political vegetables" debate, I still feel like the kid in the class with her hand up in the air, saying "Miss, Miss" (or "Sir, Sir", but most of my teachers were female), trying to find out more, or make a point, or a bit of both. I must say, like Mike, that I admire Colin for making his point so fully and thoughtfully - I really like the way you logically dissect a point, Colin! And with Kakki and others shedding some different lights on it, I think we've got a very complete thesis on political actions, intentions, ramifications, consequences and affiliations! Wow, isn't it good to do some brain storming at times! But, but, Miss, please, I still have something unresolved! It started with Kakki and Bob, the point they made about it being the correct moral or political choice to buy "made in USA". Brenda questioned some of this but I'd like to question it more, and it's really my main intention to get some more clarity into my own head. First of all: I know the rich-poor divide does not just run between one country and another (eg US rich, India poor) but that there are rich and poor in every country. That relatively poor factory workers, being put out of work in a town in the UK, for instance, can have a hard time. But why is it wrong to allow, by buying cheaper foreign products, workers in, say, Poland or China to also earn a living? Yes, I know, there is child labour in many poor countries, the average wage is low etc, but surely overall it is better that they manage to produce SOMETHING, to export SOMETHING rather than nothing? Isn't that how e.g. Korea has worked its way up, how now most countries in Eastern Europe are getting their economy going again which means employment and improved living standards? Why would it be better if you only bought "made in the USA" products, and we here only "made in the UK" and my mother, as she always tried to do, "made in Belgium"? Should we only care about the workers in "our" country? Should we then forbid our own industries to export abroad, so that the Russians can only buy "made in Russia" or the Indians "made in India"? What's the point??? I think the solution should be much more that international companies should behave (and be made to behave) responsibly, e.g. not allow child labour, pay a decent wage (even if much lower than in our own country, is it a decent wage locally?), be taxed properly on its profits, etc. This to me seems to make much more sense than that we should all retreat to a smug "charity begins at home" approach. True charity, or justice, fairness etc, should not have boundaries. Yes Miss, I'm sitting down now! Lieve. _____________________________________________________________ This message may contain privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please keep it confidential and return it to the sender. Although we have taken steps to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses, the EBRD accepts no liability for any loss or damage caused by computer viruses and would advise you to carry out your own virus checks. The contents of this e-mail do not necessarily represent the views of the EBRD. ______________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 08:34:36 -0800 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: spin-off from "everything is political" (NJC) Lieve, > It started with Kakki and Bob, the point they made about it being the > correct moral or political choice to buy "made in USA". My remarks were meant in a wry, half serious, half facetious way and not meant to represent what I thought was the truly correct moral or political choice. In fact, my actual take on it all follows more along the lines of what you have wrriten on the subject. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 08:38:29 -0800 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) Mary wrote: >I'm less interested in the Forbes 400 than the Fortune 500; in the Democrat "super-billionaires" in the L.A.-based entertainment industry than the far greater number of Republican "country club millionaires" scattered throughout the nation. And if we >looked at the compensation packages, benefits, "golden handcuff" packages, etc.,of CEOs and other top executives, I don't doubt that quite a few Republican super-billionaires, or at least, >extremely rich millionaires, would tumble out. No doubt. I'll check out the Fortune 500 stats when I get a chance. I do think demographics may be changing, however. I happened to come across this article in the Christian Science Monitor which discusses how the Rep./Dem. axis has switched in California. The majority of liberal/Democrat voters are now concentrated along the coastal region (where you have to be ultra rich to own property and make an upper range income to live) while the inland areas have a majority of middle and working class Republican voters. http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1031/p01s02-uspo.html > And there are certainly reasons other than financial > ones for allignment with the Republican Party, as religious conservatives, > some libertarians, and others will attest to. There are a myriad of reasons beyond financial and religious for many. > But overall, the Republicans have been, and are still, the party of business and of wealth. One need look no farther than its platform and favorite issues to see this, again and again and again. I look at it as a bit more complex than that, but don't have a problem with it being a champion of business. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:48:46 -0600 From: Subject: RE: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) Kakki wrote: There are a myriad of reasons beyond financial and religious for many. Yes, I tried to speak to those by my inclusion of some libertarians, and others. I do not consider libertarians concerns to be necessarily financial or religious: I see them as fundamentally different in origin. I'd be happy if you wished to articulate more specific reasons that you know of for identifying with the Republican party. I think were probably reading from the same page on this one. Then I wrote, and Kakki also responded: > But overall, the Republicans have been, and are still, the party of business and of wealth. One need look no farther than its platform and favorite issues to see this, again and again and again. I look at it as a bit more complex than that, but don't have a problem with it being a champion of business. It IS more complex than the Republican Party simply being the champion of wealth and business, as I elaborated in the paragraph that preceded that sentence. But my point is still that, of the two major parties, the Republicans align themselves, and are seen as aligned, much more closely to the concerns of business and the wealthy than do/are the Democrats. I stand by that statement. I dont know that I have a problem with the party being a champion of business, either. Business has legitimate interests, and, in a democracy, the people get to decide which interests to put their votes behind. My only concern, and this applies to EITHER major party, would come if or when it attempted to style itself as something it was not. I see both parties as having been guilty of this in the past decade, although sometimes its difficult to tell the difference between a facelift for political expediency and a genuine change in direction. As for demographics changing, you raise interesting possibilities. I'll have to check out that article. Thanks for providing the link. Mary P. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:53:13 -0500 (EST) From: "walterphil" Subject: judy judy judy joni---laura---judy the big 3 of course laura and joni have the edge because of their outrageous songwriting skills but listening to old judy albums gets me so excited yes i agree with you folks that "wildflowers," "in my life," and "who knows..." are probably her best, but that sells the first 5 folk albums short again with the alto soprano comparisons in general judy's first 6 lps (thru "in my life") she mostly sang in a rich alto starting with "wildflowers" her voice began to get more soprano to where it eventually got on my nerves. (recently it seems that she is beginning to mix the 2, thank goodness) 1."maid of constant sorrow" and 2."golden apples of the sun" have recently have been released on a single cd. beautiful beautiful beautiful rich readings of well chosen folk songs. particularly outstanding is "pretty saro" from the first (poigniant and elegant) and "golden apples" from the second (a poem by yeats judy set to music) and "the great silkie" is stirring beyond belief and "crow on the cradle"--- what an odd and scarey song. if you like folk traditionalism these first 2 may be your cup of red zinger 3. judy collins #3 have you ever heard her do guthrie's "deportee?" or dylan's "farewell"? for me the definitive versions of each 4. judy collin's concert. and what a perfect concert it was! (at carnegie hall) "wild rippling water" is amazing as is "winter sky," "last thing on my mind" and "coal tattoo" (they don't wite em or sing em like THAT anymore) i only hope that when she finally puts this one out on cd, it's an expanded version (for that matter, #3 also.) 5. 5th album my personal favorite. every song a gem sung so perfectly. and richard farinia on 2 songs to boot! "so early in the spring" is jaw droppingly gorgeous and "mr. tambourine man" is definitive (sorry roger & bob). "tomorrow is a long time" is heartbreaking and "early morning rain" is my favorite judy performance 6. in my life. an amazing cover and album. her brittle alto singing in "marat sade", for instance, is sheer perfection as is "hard lovin loser." and again, "suzanne" is definitive 7. wildflowers i guess this is the one that put joni on the map- did you know her and joni are friends? read her book lovely for "both sides now" and "michael.." altho i wish this album had a guitar here or there. "since you've asked" is a lovely first judy composition 8. Who knows where the time goes for me, judy's other perfect album truly some of her stongest singing ever listen to the "when he comes to call..." part from "someday soon" wow! also backing by a great rock band, including steve stills. wished this one could have been a double and has judy's best composition, "my father" 9. Whales and nightingales here's where for whatever reason judy started singing in a higher register. but i still like this album a lot. joan baez' "song for david" is sheer magic and "marekie" is judy most beautiful performance (i plan on doing joan baez in another email) "recollections" and "colors of the day" and "so early in the spring" are all repackages. both are ok but the organal lps they are culled from are so much better. (and it is so annoying to me that some of the songs are redone.) why fool with classics? all her albums following (for me) are spotty-but they certainly have their share of classics. cook with honey, send in the clowns, pretty women, 4 strong winds, joan of arc, rainbow connection, i'll be seeing you, city of new orleans to name a few... but i return to those first 9 lps again and again. desert island discs all. sort of like joni's "song to a seagull" THRU "Don juans' reckless daughter." not a bad one in that bunch either. oh, and ALL of laura's xxx walt The most personalized portal on the Web! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:02:21 -0000 From: "Laurent Olszer" Subject: Tr: 1987 Benefit > > > I was there. What the reviewer doesn't say is that Joni did stop more > > than > > > once because the talk from the audience was literally covering her > singing > > > at the piano. Joni opened the benefit (gasp!) and everybody had come > for > > > Willy Nelson and Kris so you can imagine how much attention they paid > Joni > > > in between 2 frankfurters and beer! Grand fiasco at the piano. > > Craig asked: > > You wonder why she would continue to do these. Did she ever say she was > > going to be more selective about what she did? > > > > You had the Amnesty concert where the crowd was loud and almost peltered > her > > with a water bottle and a couple of others come to mind but not he > details. > > > Hi Craig, > > The only explanation I could gather from this list is that she tries to > please her fans first and only her fans. > If you ask me she must have some masochist tendencies. >Let's hope the list gets us some answers. > > Laurent ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:11:05 -0000 From: "Laurent Olszer" Subject: Dave Holland, Njc > From: "mike pritchard" > Subject: Mingus Band - NJC > > It's International Jazz Festival time here again in Barcelona and I've just > got my tickets for Norah Jones and also for the Mingus Big Band concert. > Anyone out there heard the Mingus band and have an opinion to share? Dave > Holland Big Band here too. Any opinion on that? > mike in barcelona Hi Mike, Dave Holland has to be one of the top 3 bass players alive, along with Ron Carter. Once I went to see Kevin Eubanks backed up by Dave and the great drummer who currently plays with Dave: Marvin "Smitty" Smith. Kevin was detained by the Late Show so Dave and Marvin decided to IMPROVISE the entire 1st set just the 2 of them. Whoa, that was incredible. I believe you will hear those 2 cats along with Kevin's brother on trombone. Enjoy. Laurent ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:06:27 -0500 From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: spin-off from "everything is political" (NJC) In a message dated 10/31/2002 11:57:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, ReckersL@ebrd.com writes: > It started with Kakki and Bob, the point they made about it > being the > correct moral or political choice to buy "made in USA". Lieve, as with Kakki there appears to be a misunderstanding about what I was saying. My point about "made in the usa" has NOTHING to do with any kind of moral decision, or even being the 'correct' choice. My main point is that I think as a nation we'll pay the price eventually for selling out our domestic manufacturing to produce a short-term return. Don't want to reopen the whole debate, just hope to make myself clear. Great to hear from you! Bob NP: Luther Allison, "I Believe In You" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:32:54 EST From: Kardinel@aol.com Subject: Re: JMDL Digest V2002 #451 I've heard that too but really we all have that side if pushed enough. I have read a lot of remarks about Joni Mitchell's Rolling Stone interview and I thought about a story a friend told me last year. She has a friend-a reporter- who spend two hours with JM and raved about how easy she was to talk with, friendly, open, and smoked non stop and talked non stop. I have heard other reports like this. Hey, we can all be bitchy at times and we all have a bad side. These women are human too. I think people get into speculating too much. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 10:38:54 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: RE: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) On 31 Oct 2002 at 11:48, blckcrow@chorus.net wrote: > Then I wrote, and Kakki also responded: > > > But overall, the Republicans have been, and are still, the party of > business and of wealth. One need look no farther than its platform > and favorite issues to see this, again and again and again. > > I look at it as a bit more complex than that, but don't have a problem > with it being a champion of business. > > It IS more complex than the Republican Party simply being the champion > of wealth and business, as I elaborated in the paragraph that preceded > that sentence. But my point is still that, of the two major parties, > the Republicans align themselves, and are seen as aligned, much more > closely to the concerns of business and the wealthy than do/are the > Democrats. I stand by that statement. > > I don t know that I have a problem with the party being a champion of > business, either. Business has legitimate interests, and, in a > democracy, the people get to decide which interests to put their votes > behind. My only concern, and this applies to EITHER major party, > would come if or when it attempted to style itself as something it was > not. I see both parties as having been guilty of this in the past > decade, although sometimes it s difficult to tell the difference > between a facelift for political expediency and a genuine change in > direction. > I think both parties are business parties. It's just that sees it as beneficial to have it as a part of its platform and the other doesn't. I think this comment is critical: "The Republicans align themselves, and ARE SEEN AS ALIGNED, much more closely to the concerns of business and the wealthy than do/are the Democrats." If you read the actual party platform it is clear that it speaks to prosperity moreso than wealth. However, the media and Democratic spin is that it is about wealth, just as the Republican spin is that Dems want to rob the public with taxation and make the government bigger. Personally, I find both sides of the spin extreme, distracting and counterproductive to the American people reaching some consensus among our seemingly opposing views and using that consensus to demand better from our elected officials. B - -------------------------------------------- "Radio has no future" - Lord Kelvin, 1897 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:07:44 +0000 From: colin Subject: brussels njc Lieve reminded me we are going off to Brussels on Saturday to pick a bitch up from the airport there. thru the Chunnel again. She flies in from Copenhagen which works out cheaper and much shorter time thatn me driving to Copenhagen. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:11:41 +0000 From: "Mike Pritchard" Subject: Re: Dave Holland, Njc Hi Laurent, Thanks for the tip but I was unable to get tickets for the gig, Oct 30th. The other tickets are in the bag and I have Norah J on Tues 5th and Mingus Band on Thursday 7th. Looking forward to both. Mike >>Hi Mike, Dave Holland has to be one of the top 3 bass players alive, along with Ron Carter. Once I went to see Kevin Eubanks backed up by Dave and the great drummer who currently plays with Dave: Marvin "Smitty" Smith. Kevin was detained by the Late Show so Dave and Marvin decided to IMPROVISE the entire 1st set just the 2 of them. Whoa, that was incredible. I believe you will hear those 2 cats along with Kevin's brother on trombone. Enjoy. Laurent<< - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:30:55 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Joni on politics...made in the USA...globalism NJC i have had to skim the digests lately & haven't given enough real time to every detail of people's posts but i've enjoyed the fact that it seems like everyone has offered their opinions with respect for each other...here is my experience & i hope no one will jump on me for it: i think there are often many misconceptions regarding manufacturing in other countries...i've traveled to china & visited one of the factories there ...since my husband has been a toy designer for years he has spent a good part of his life there & has often been asked to oversee some of the production to be sure his designs have been manufactured correctly...so he has a long standing intimate view of what some of the factories in china are like... the atmosphere in the factory i visited was very relaxed & didn't seem any different than any other manufacturing plant in the US, except for the fact that everyone was chinese... yes, the wages are lower but so is the cost of living...by a lot... jeff says that he has sometimes seen children working in the factory but they've always been in there running around in dangerous situations...he thinks its safer if they are going to be there, that they given a task & a wage...(i didn't see any children in the factory that i visited however) the people who come to the factory to work are very poor & from agricultural families...these people have not been given the opportunity for eduction so the children are working anyway on the land...however, most of the people who come to work at the factory are women & the factory wages are higher than they were receiving as agricultural labor... they are given higher wages in the factory, a clean, warm apartment & the opportunity to move up in the company...their appearance changes over time from kind of raggedy, dirty hands, etc to clean with nice clothes because they can now afford it...& they have money to take home to their family...i see this as an opportunity for women to become valued members of a culture which previously did not value women at all...it seems like a good thing to me since the culture has placed a premium on male babies & not on females...in fact, from what i hear there is now a great shortage of women compared to men... one of the businessmen jeff worked for built an entire city, factory, apartments, stores, etc for his employees anyway, i learned a lot by seeing first hand what is was like....its so easy to make blank statements about sweatshops in foreign companies without really understanding all the elements...or knowing that they are not all the same ******************************************** Kate Bennett: www.katebennett.com Sponsored by Polysonics/Atlantis Sound Labs Over the Moon- "bringing the melancholy world of twilight to life almost like magic" All Music Guide ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:31:01 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: RE: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) i live in an area that attracts many wealthy folks, from the entertainment industry as well as other businesses...i was in fundraisng for many years & it was always a common misconception that the celebrities had the most money, but in reality it was the other business people who were the wealthiest members of our community...its just that the celebs had more visibility...of course this has nothing to do with dem or rep but just a tangential thought to the discussion... ******************************************** Kate Bennett: www.katebennett.com Sponsored by Polysonics/Atlantis Sound Labs Over the Moon- "bringing the melancholy world of twilight to life almost like magic" All Music Guide ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:33:47 -0500 From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni on politics...made in the USA...globalism NJC > here is my > experience & i hope no one will jump on me for it: How can one be jumped on for speaking the truth? :~) You're right, sometimes there is a big difference between a perceived reality & a real reality. By the same token, the "sweatshops" DO exist and we should not allow ourselves to believe that they do not. But you're right, certainly not all of them are. By the way, I work for the world's largest global construction company (Fluor Corporation), so there's a good chance that we built that factory in China! The only China project I have worked on was for a plant in Qingdao where Dupont was making nylon for bicycle tires. Like I said, these are very complex issues...I am employed in the USA because my employer constructs factories in other countries, which sort of supports what Brenda was saying... Bob, now working on an Eli Lilly plant in Puerto Rico (when I'm not posting, that is...) NP: Allman Brothers, "Mountain Jam" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 12:00:56 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: RE: Joni on politics...made in the USA...globalism NJC oh, you actually have time for a job? heh heh... bob wrote >>I am employed in the USA because my employer constructs factories in other countries, which sort of supports what Brenda was saying...Bob, now working on an Eli Lilly plant in Puerto Rico (when I'm not posting, that is...)<<< ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:08:53 EST From: FMYFL@aol.com Subject: Re: brussels njc In a message dated 10/31/2002 2:08:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, colin@tantra-apso.com writes: > Lieve reminded me we are going off to Brussels on Saturday to pick a bitch > up from the airport there. > LOL Colin !!! For new listers who don't know that you breed dogs, your sentence is kind of funny. :~) Of course we all know Lieve is the sweetest girl in the world. Jimmy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:25:59 -0600 From: Subject: RE: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) Brenda wrote: "If you read the actual party platform it is clear that it speaks to prosperity moreso than wealth. However, the media and Democratic spin is that it is about wealth, just as the Republican spin is that Dems want to rob the public with taxation and make the government bigger." Well, I'd be the first to admit that the Democrats can "spin" with the best of them. And certainly, wealth and prosperity are interconnected. But I'd say that we need to look to the Republicans' own ACTIONS, as well as to their platform, to see where at least a portion of their interests lie. And I see those actions--on environmental issues, on regulation of business in general, on various positions on capital gains and the estate tax--as more vigorously alligned with aiding business and maintaining wealth than I do the actions of the Democrats. As with all spin, there's an element of truth to both parties' "positions," as you put them from the presumed perspective of the other. The Republicans, as I see it, DO protect wealth, and the Democrats ARE willing to "tax and spend." But of course, neither caricature goes far enough. The Democrats ignore that wealth can--it does not always--bolster and support general prosperity. And the Republicans ignore that some investments in our present and future are worth paying for, even if it hurts now. They decline to ask: tax and spend *for what*? Is it worth it? Can some things be done best, or done only, by government? In all, I, too, wish there were a lot less "spin" and a little more truth in our public political discourse. But until that day arrives--and I'm not holding my breathe that it will arrive anytime soon--those with ears to hear will simply have to find it for themselves. It sounds like we're doing a good job of trying to do just that on this list. Mary P. P.S. One of the examples of "spin" I hate the most is the Republican characterization of the estate tax as the "death tax." In exasperation, I say, repeat after me: The ESTATE TAX only kicks in if you DIE with an **ESTATE**!!!! And currently, the worth of the estate in question is somewhere between $1 and $2 million (I should know the exact amount, but I don't practice in this area). Now I concede that that amount means that the tax does not apply merely to the filthy rich, but to a significant portion of the upper middle class. Granted. But to style it as a "death tax," when the vast majority of Americans who die will never, ever have to pay it, is simply, in my view, intellectually dishonest. And I see it as a slick attempt to come across as the party of the common people rather than the rich that, in this instance, just doesn't work. Let the floodgates open for comparable examples of Democratic dishonesty! ;-) 2d P.S. If anyone thinks this discussion should move over to the PC list, just let me know by separate e-mail. I'm on digest. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:08:14 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: RE: Partisanship & Spin (NJC) On 31 Oct 2002 at 14:25, blckcrow@chorus.net wrote: > > Well, I'd be the first to admit that the Democrats can "spin" with the > best of them. And certainly, wealth and prosperity are > interconnected. But I'd say that we need to look to the Republicans' > own ACTIONS, as well as to their platform, to see where at least a > portion of their interests lie. And I see those actions--on > environmental issues, on regulation of business in general, on various > positions on capital gains and the estate tax--as more vigorously > alligned with aiding business and maintaining wealth than I do the > actions of the Democrats. > I think it's worth taking a good hard look at the ACTIONS (NAFTA, the Telecommunications Act, welfare reform) of the administration under Clinton before making this declaration. (Or the actions of Gray Davis.... some of my diehard Democrat friends in California said that they would have happily replaced Davis with Republican Richard Riordan.) And likewise the actions of Bush. Last I heard the Department of Homeland Security could become one of the biggest parts of our federal government and one of its biggest spenders. There are many conservatives lamenting that Bush is less conservative than Clinton when it comes to expanding government. > As with all spin, there's an element of truth to both parties' > "positions," as you put them from the presumed perspective of the > other. The Republicans, as I see it, DO protect wealth, and the > Democrats ARE willing to "tax and spend." But of course, neither > caricature goes far enough. The Democrats ignore that wealth can--it > does not always--bolster and support general prosperity. And the > Republicans ignore that some investments in our present and future are > worth paying for, even if it hurts now. They decline to ask: tax and > spend *for what*? Is it worth it? Can some things be done best, or > done only, by government? Certainly, some things can be done only by government, some are better done by local government than federal government and vice versa. I think that Republicans do ask that question, at least that's my firsthand experience in local politics. But I really don't think that one can generalize about either party in this way and have it be productive. Both parties operate in degrees and those degrees can vary widely from federal to state to local governance. > > In all, I, too, wish there were a lot less "spin" and a little more > truth in our public political discourse. But until that day > arrives--and I'm not holding my breathe that it will arrive anytime > soon--those with ears to hear will simply have to find it for > themselves. It sounds like we're doing a good job of trying to do > just that on this list. > We don't need that day to arrive. We, as citizens just have to care and inform ourselves. There is so much information available to us outside of the mainstream media - it's astounding. I think that fact that so many Americans actually consider themselves moderate or slightly conservative, is proof that most people do not buy the extremes that are presented on either side. > Mary P. > > > Let the floodgates open for comparable examples of Democratic > dishonesty! ;-) I prefer not to go there; I'd rather talk about what we have in common rather than criticize each side for their lies. My view is that being partisan is fine but partisan attacks are counterproductive. B - ------------------------------ Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:22:01 EST From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) Mary writes: << Let the floodgates open for comparable examples of Democratic dishonesty! ;-) >> Gee, Mary, I can only think of two: 1. "I didn't inhale." 2. "I never had sex with that woman." --Bob, who for some reason prefers lies from Democrats ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:26:32 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: RE: Estate Tax (NJC) On 31 Oct 2002 at 14:25, blckcrow@chorus.net wrote: > > P.S. One of the examples of "spin" I hate the most is the Republican > characterization of the estate tax as the "death tax." In > exasperation, I say, repeat after me: The ESTATE TAX only kicks in if > you DIE with an **ESTATE**!!!! And currently, the worth of the estate > in question is somewhere between $1 and $2 million (I should know the > exact amount, but I don't practice in this area). > > Now I concede that that amount means that the tax does not apply > merely to the filthy rich, but to a significant portion of the upper > middle class. Granted. But to style it as a "death tax," when the > vast majority of Americans who die will never, ever have to pay it, is > simply, in my view, intellectually dishonest. And I see it as a slick > attempt to come across as the party of the common people rather than > the rich that, in this instance, just doesn't work. > I have no idea who coined the phrase, but my impression has been that it was positioned not to appeal to common people but to business owners, particularly small ones (of which there are many in this country) who may have assets that meet the minimum value even though their actual income places them below upper middle class. Republicans were not the only ones who supported this repeal; there was a significant portion of the Congressional Black Caucus that supported it as well, along with other African-American Democratic groups. Brenda - ------------------------------ Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:47:28 -0600 From: Subject: RE: Estate tax (NJC) Brenda wrote: "I have no idea who coined the phrase, but my impression has been that it was positioned not to appeal to common people but to business owners, particularly small ones (of which there are many in this country) who may have assets that meet the minimum value even though their actual income places them below upper middle class." I would consider small business owners "common people." And it sounds like, in that particular instance, the repeal of the tax actually had some direct applicability. Beyond that, however, I do think that once the term "death tax" got out into common usage, it took on a life of its own, with many thinking it applied to people with far fewer assets than small business owners. And I think whoever dreamed up the term knew that that's exactly what would happen, even thought it's obviously the responsibility of each and every citizen to keep herself/himself well informed. My final word (probably) on my pet bugaboo! Mary P. P.S. Brenda, why were African-American business groups in particular involved in this effort? I hadn't heard that, and would like to know more. E-mail me privately, if you like. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:53:47 -0600 From: Subject: Re: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) My dear Mr. Smurfman: I was thinking of examples of Democratic dishonesty in FORMULATING POLICY ISSUES, as (from my point of view) in the estate tax debate. But I didn't specify that in my question, did I? And the two examples you cited certainly qualify!! Murphy, for his trouble, should receive two free copies of Covers #736. Mary P. > > From: Murphycopy@aol.com > Date: 2002/10/31 Thu PM 03:22:01 CST > To: blckcrow@chorus.net, music@soulstreet.net, joni@smoe.org, > kakkib@vzavenue.net > Subject: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) > > Mary writes: > > << Let the floodgates open for comparable examples of Democratic dishonesty! > ;-) >> > > Gee, Mary, I can only think of two: > > 1. "I didn't inhale." > > 2. "I never had sex with that woman." > > --Bob, who for some reason prefers lies from Democrats ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:55:14 EST From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Estate tax (NJC) Mary writes: << I think whoever dreamed up the term knew that that's exactly what would happen >> My favorite spin phrase from the right: "pro abortion." Really. Is there anyone on this planet who's "pro abortion?" --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:57:46 EST From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) Mary writes: << Murphy, for his trouble, should receive two free copies of Covers #736. >> Thanks, Mary! Covers #736 is the one I've been waiting for! I just don't want a 148 year-old Bob Muller to lick the envelope! --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:15:36 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Estate tax (NJC) Smurf wrote: > My favorite spin phrase from the right: "pro abortion." > > Really. Is there anyone on this planet who's "pro abortion?" I am! I am! KIDDING!!!!! I also enjoy the opposite of pro abortion, what the right like to label themselves: "pro life" Since I'm pro choice, does that mean I'm not pro life but pro death?? (Pro death penalty still, yes, but that's a different topic.) How about pro QUALITY life?? Can that be my label instead? "Pro life, pro choice, every child a wanted child." Lori in MD ~ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:20:37 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Rich Republicans, and Democrats (NJC) > 1. "I didn't inhale." > > 2. "I never had sex with that woman." #1 is entirely possible, as I smoked cigarettes for 3 years without inhaling. I only swallowed the smoke. Yes, there is a difference. #2 is true if Clinton believes it's sex only if intercourse is involved. I know people who actually believe that. It seems to be a Southern thing. (I've written about this before.) Lori in the technically southern "free state" of Maryland (Please vote for Kathleen Kennedy Townsend for Governor) ~ ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2002 #452 ***************************** ------- 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? (http://www.siquomb.com/siquomb.cfm)