From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2003 #126 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, February 19 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 126 Sign up now for JoniFest 2003! http://www.jonifest.com ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Anti war in SF njc [Randy Remote ] Re: Anti war in SF njc [David Marine ] Re: Father writes about soldier son NJC [Randy Remote ] Re: Father writes about soldier son NJC [sl.m@shaw.ca] avril , vanessa, norah and a little joni [anne@sandstrom.com] njc anne debra wally [colin ] Re: change of mind NJC ["mike pritchard" ] RE: avril , vanessa (njc) ["Victor Johnson" ] Re: Anti war in SF njc [Randy Remote ] Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice [AzeemAK@aol.com] Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: NJC - Beck . . . Scientologist? - NJC [AzeemAK@aol.com] Re: NJC - Beck . . . Scientologist? - NJC [colin ] Father writes about Marine son NJC [vince ] Re: njc Regime Change made simple [vince ] Ben Taylor Band njc [Richard Goldman ] Re: Joni's guitars [Dan Olson ] Re: Anti war in SF njc ["gene mock" ] Re: Anti war in SF njc [Murphycopy@aol.com] Re: blurb on Wall to Wall Joni [] NJC Good Lord! [vince ] On War - NJC ["Suzanne MarcAurele" ] Re: Joni's guitars [Bobsart48@aol.com] RE: to patrick NJC ["patrick leader" ] Re: NJC Good Lord! [Murphycopy@aol.com] "There you go again ... " njc [FredNow@aol.com] Re: "There you go again ... " njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: change of mind NJC [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: Pazfest - a New Orleans tribute to Joni Mitchell - review [Michael Pa] Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice ["Christopher Treacy" ] Re: Tell the Truth njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 13:54:02 -0800 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: Anti war in SF njc FredNow@aol.com wrote: > Today our Glorious Leader said he wouldn't be deterred by global protests against war. "Democracy is a beautiful thing," Bush said, adding that "people are allowed to express their opinion." > > Not that he's listening. Yeah, it reminds me of a bumpersticker I saw as a kid: "The majority isn't silent. The government is deaf" Peace Randy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:08:57 -0800 From: David Marine Subject: Re: Anti war in SF njc Fred -- I too saw Bush, with his glib tone, smirking at those who voiced their wish for peace. Had he attempted to make an argument that the coming war will eventually bring a greater peace and stability to the region, i would have respected him. But his condescending dismissal was sickening. I had, until today, given him the benefit of the doubt (grudgingly, but with a glimmer of hope). But it's now clear to me that Mandella, Byrd, and others who have harshly criticized both his intellect and his arrogance are correct. Even if war IS the right thing, Bush should at best be leading a fraternity, not a nation. Best, David on 2/18/03 1:13 PM, FredNow@aol.com at FredNow@aol.com wrote: > Today our Glorious Leader said he wouldn't be deterred by global protests > against war. "Democracy is a beautiful thing," Bush said, adding that "people > are allowed to express their opinion." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:08:00 -0800 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: Father writes about soldier son NJC The article begins: "I don't support war, but I support my son" How does a father feel when his son goes to war? This man says he is opposed to military action in Iraq, but to protest would be to betray his 21-year-old-son, who has sailed to the Gulf with the Royal Marines I recently read a nearly identical article originating in the US. "I've always been a pacifist, but now..." ....kind of like Peaceniks Anonymous or something. I'm waiting for an article that starts-"My son enlisted and I think he's a fucking idiot," but I don't expect to see it real soon. "I'm in the unusual position of being for the war, but against the troops" - Bill Hicks btw this Friday Bill Maher will return to television with a new show on HBO sl.m@shaw.ca wrote: > Moving article written by a British man whose 21-year-old son has > gone off to war. > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-581431,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:06:00 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: Anti war in SF njc You presume that the views of peace demonstrators are representative in America. The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll showed that 57 per cent of Americans back an invasion of Iraq so long as some allies, like Great Britain, Australia or Italy, support it. Without that support, 50 per cent still back the invasion. You live in a representative democracy, not a direct one. You voted for Bush, albeit by the slimmest of margins. That means he gets to decide. That's what your democracy is. Sarah At 1:54 PM -0800 02/18/2003, Randy Remote wrote: >FredNow@aol.com wrote: > >> Today our Glorious Leader said he wouldn't be deterred by global >>protests against war. "Democracy is a beautiful thing," Bush said, >>adding that "people are allowed to express their opinion." >> >> Not that he's listening. > >Yeah, it reminds me of a bumpersticker I saw as a kid: >"The majority isn't silent. The government is deaf" >Peace >Randy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:12:04 -0800 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: Joni's guitars Randy Remote wrote: > Dan Olson wrote: > > > Note that > > it doesn't have the "name tag". > > If you are talking about the ebay sunburst, it does appear to have > her name inlaid in the last fret marker as the blond one does. They > don't show a close up, but that's sure what it looks like. Now the more I look at it, the more I think it says "George Benson". Bidding is up to $2550, still below the minimum bid (which is secret). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:12:42 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: Father writes about soldier son NJC Did you actually read the article? Doesn't sound like it. Sarah At 2:08 PM -0800 02/18/2003, Randy Remote wrote: >I recently read a nearly identical article originating in the US. >"I've always been a pacifist, but now..." ....kind of like >Peaceniks Anonymous or something. I'm waiting for an article that >starts-"My son enlisted and I think he's a fucking idiot," but I don't >expect to see it real soon. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:25:47 -0800 (PST) From: anne@sandstrom.com Subject: avril , vanessa, norah and a little joni Thanks for mentioning Avril Lavigne, Victor. I heard "I'm With You" on the radio, and immediately bought her CD on amazon. I don't like everything she does, but I particularly like IWY. To me it seems like this is the song Cherokee Louise would sing. That was my initial impression, too. I wonder what Joni thinks of her (probably not much...) I also like that she's a snowboarder. The Grammys should be interesting. I hope Norah Jones rakes in a ton of awards. I also have to admit to liking "1000 Miles" by Vanessa Carlton (who does the background vocals on the Counting Crows version of BYT), although I swear the piano lick that I like is actually from an old cigarette commercial featuring the Marlboro Man, who is also in Joni's Dreamland. Well, a little Joni content, anyway, at least indirectly. lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 22:42:02 +0000 From: colin Subject: njc anne debra wally I am up and runnign again but only after losing my mail agin! I think it is all sorted now. I know I got mail from you e and the list but have lost it all again. I also don;t have your addies. bw]colin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:48:20 +0100 From: "mike pritchard" Subject: Re: change of mind NJC Sarah wrote: >>But on the question of who the oil belongs to: Saddam Hussein nationalized it, by which I understand it's supposed to belong to the Iraqi people, but they have never seen the benefit of it, although Saddam and his family have, even with the sanctions. A democratic Iraqi government might de-nationalize it, and then the profits might benefit the Iraqi people. Whether they denationalise it or not, the Iraqi people have a right to some benefit -- they're living in what could be a wealthy country, yet there's a huge amount of poverty, and always has been under Saddam, which is absurd.<< So the oil either belongs to the Iraqi people or to Saddam and his family, right? Whichever way you look at it, it doesn't belong to anyone outside that territory, and certainly not to the US/West. That's what I mean(t). There are huge amounts of poverty in practically all countries, the UK, Spain, the USA, Argentina to name only a few western examples, leaving aside African and Asian countries. All these countries have huge material wealth, in terms of food and natural resources, but in no case is there a dictator in charge of these countries. Poverty is not always the result of dictatorships. I don't dispute that Saddam is a dictator and corrupt and a tyrant, but the west's looking with eager eyes at dividing up the spoils of war, especially the 3 oil companies mentioned earlier, does not suggest to me that the Iraqi people will benefit from the oil after the war ends. mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 17:53:58 -0800 From: "Victor Johnson" Subject: RE: avril , vanessa (njc) > Thanks for mentioning Avril Lavigne, Victor. I heard > "I'm With You" on the radio, and immediately bought her > CD on amazon. I don't like everything she does, but I > particularly like IWY. I'm really digging her. I borrowed her cd from Laura(Holley's daughter) and have been enjoying it quite a bit! I like that song a lot as well. I also have to admit to > liking "1000 Miles" by Vanessa Carlton (who does the > background vocals on the Counting Crows version of > BYT), I liked that song as well when I first heard it but they play it on the radio so much I'm pretty tired of it now, particularly tired of that lick. I didn't know that was her singing on BYT. I like the way they did the background vocals...it sounds very different, a fresh take on it... Victor NP: Avril again - --- Victor Johnson - --- waytoblu@mindspring.com Visit http://www.cdbaby.com/victorjohnson Look for the new album "Parsonage Lane" in March 2003 Produced by Chris Rosser at Hollow Reed Studios ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:15:44 -0800 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: Anti war in SF njc sl.m@shaw.ca wrote: > You presume that the views of peace demonstrators are representative > in America. The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll showed that 57 > per cent of Americans back an invasion of Iraq so long as some > allies, like Great Britain, Australia or Italy, support it. Without > that support, 50 per cent still back the invasion. Even 99% approval wouldn't make it moral to start this war. It's hard to go by polls, particularly by the big media giants. ABC is owned by Disney which also has a stake in crude petroleum and natural gas production company Sid R. Bass. The other 2 largest networks are owned by General Electric and Westinghouse, tits deep in defense interests. In the US, the 5 largest corporations own most of the media (TV, radio and newspapers) thanks to dismantling of monopoly laws, which have consistantly eroding since Reagan. Another aspect is that radio and television commentary are greatly slanted to the right. Left wing viewpoints are not represented on TV at all, where 90 something percent of Americans get their news, and only a very small percentage of radio commentary is left of center (much of it far right). So it can be argued that, were the American people to get a more balanced view of things, their reaction would be different. And to tell you the truth, what with the security act and all, if someone called my house and asked me whether I supported the drive to war, I would probably be paranoid of ending up on some kind of a gov't hit list or something, and I wouldn't answer at all. I don't think I am the only one who has distrust for the powers run amok in good-ol'-god-save-America. more = = = > You live in a representative democracy, not a direct one. You voted > for Bush, albeit by the slimmest of margins. That means he gets to > decide. That's what your democracy is. Democracy is nominal. First of all, Bush was not elected, he lost by a slim margin, even before you go into the illegal purging of black voters from the rolls in Florida. This is exquisitely detailed in Michael Moore's NY Times bestseller "Stupid White Men". The right wing supreme court decided, among other things, to not allow sufficient time for the votes to be hand counted...they pretty much handed the presidency to Bush, one of their own. Secondly, a democracy is when a candidate represents people of his/her constituency. The millions of dollars required for public office ensure that, when you finally get to the ballot box, your choice is between moneyed interest #1 and moneyed interest #2. We do not have a labor party. We do not have a democracy. We have a corporacracy. If the people would wake up and get the money out of politics, we might have a chance to actually have a democracy. RR ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:23:51 EST From: AzeemAK@aol.com Subject: Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice In a message dated 18/02/2003 21:27:25 GMT Standard Time, waytoblu@mindspring.com writes: << It's nice to hear a joni song frequently on the radio, even if it's not her. >> I've just got back from seeing Two Weeks Notice, which was the only film I could get in to see at my local cinema. Not bad at all; I was waiting for the film to start asking "why have I wasted my money on such a piece of fluff?" (the same thought that must go through people's minds when they buy a Christina Aguillera record) - but actually I quite enjoyed it. That Hugh Grant will come to be recognised as a consummate light comedy actor and a master of split-second-perfect comic timing. Anyway, so, yes, Counting Crows covering BYT: I was pleasantly surprised, I must say, especially given that I've never liked them and had a particular distaste for Adam Duritz's voice (too whiny and self-pitying for my liking). I think they do a pretty good job making such a familiar song sound contemporary; it's certainly far better than the Janet Jackson and Amy Grant renditions. Shame the rest of the soundtrack was so predictable - great as they are, do we *really* need to hear I Feel Good or Respect again?? Nice to see a little cameo from Norah Jones, though. Azeem in London NP: Eleni Mandell - Thrill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:34:01 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice In a message dated 2/18/2003 6:24:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, AzeemAK@aol.com writes: > it's certainly far better than the Janet Jackson and Amy Grant > renditions. > But you know...Janet never really covered BYT - she sampled Joni's record and created her own original song "Got 'Til It's Gone". I'm sure that you knew that already...it's just that I've seen that reference a couple of times recently and it always bothers me a bit. Oh, & while I'm on the subject, I got a really nice recording of BYT from a UK (I assume) singer named Lorna Grant ( no relation to Amy) on a CD titled BBC: Star For A Night. Is this a TV or radio show or something? It sounds like the kind of thing where common folk get on TV and sing. Anyway, nothing common about her take on BYT. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:34:45 EST From: AzeemAK@aol.com Subject: Re: NJC - Beck . . . Scientologist? - NJC In a message dated 18/02/2003 21:06:18 GMT Standard Time, Murphycopy@aol.com writes: << Plus, Scientologists used to be all over Cambridge, Massachsetts and Boston's Back Bay offering "free personality tests." >> Haha!! Yes, I was "hubbarded" once! I was wandering around Geneva with not a lot to do and a lot of spare time on my hands. A woman with a clipboard (dread implement) asked if I'd be willing to answer a few questions for a survey, or some such story. What's to lose, I thought. When she led me round the corner into this large, sparsely furnished office-type building furnished with the complete works of L Ron Hubbard, I realised who they were. Anyway, they gave me an English version of the personality test, which had hundreds of questions, then "analysed" the results. Their schtick is that they give you your results in the form of a graph, with a horizontal line indicating "ok" - if your line dips below this "axis of ok", boy are you in need of saving! Anyway, I was pretty green, but not that green, so I had a nice little argument with the woman and left with my wallet unopened. Why superstars flock to worship at El Ron's altar god only knows. The words "sense", "more" and "money" spring to mind. Azeem in London NP: still Eleni Mandell - wonderful stuff PS I've just noticed that there are two "NJC"s in the headline - does this mean they will cancel each other out and this post will land with a thud in Joni-onlies' inboxes? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 00:22:39 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: NJC - Beck . . . Scientologist? - NJC AzeemAK@aol.com wrote: > >Why superstars flock to worship at El Ron's altar god only knows. > for the saem reasons anyone flocks to any alter I would suppose. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:27:31 -0500 From: vince Subject: NJC Randy - did you see the post that claimed Bush was elected by the slimmest of margins - I don't recall that in one way since he lost the popular vote - same post claimed that therefore Bush gets to decide - and that would be totally wrong since Congress is vested with the power to declare war and we have three co-equal branches of government. Technical points perhaps but one is important and the other is extremely significant, in fact vital and essential. "That means he gets to decide. That's what your democracy is." Very wrong on US constitutional law. I do doubt given American case law that the suit filed in federal court (to declare the congressional resolution unconstitutional) will prevail. But it is so important that the courts will decide that issue. That involves all three branches of our government and the fact that no one branch or person "gets to decide" is what our government is all about. I missed something about "the pacifist and my son enlisted and he is an idiot" or whatever - since my son is a Marine. I love my son and am very proud of him since he has made a decision to serve in the Marines out of his good conscience, which is all I ever asked of him. Vince ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:43:50 -0500 From: vince Subject: Father writes about Marine son NJC Randy, found the post - it was never unusual to support the troops and oppose the war. The people in the service are people doing what they are told. They have got to their thing. I have been and always be very supportive of the enlisted personnel. And I feel very supportive of my son when I protest this proposed war. In fact for months I have had my peace flag in the window with the "my son is a Marine" banner attached to it. A lot of parents of service people feel just as I do. And I know that many of us resent armchair warriors who talk big but don't have their ass on the line. A lot of veterans feel that way too. Because I hang with the recruiters in my community, because I am very popular at the VFW and American Legion Hall in my community, I can verify that this war and those who push it are not very popular with the military community, and there is no conflict between the peace community and the military community. No one should push war. War is hell and people will die. Those who know war best would undertake it with the greatest reluctance. If called to wage war my son and all in the service will give it all they have got, which is their job their duty, but they do so knowing how hellish it is, and with the greatest, greatest reluctance. I know you know all this. I feel compelled to say it however tonight. I hear cheerleading for war. I would like to hear anguish about the proposed course of action by those who support it, because that is what separates armchair warriors from people who I can listen to and respect. Peace out, Vince Randy Remote wrote: >The article begins: >"I don't support war, but I support my son" >How does a father feel when his son goes to war? >This man says he is opposed to military action in >Iraq, but to protest would be to betray his >21-year-old-son, who has sailed to the Gulf with >the Royal Marines > >I recently read a nearly identical article originating in the US. >"I've always been a pacifist, but now..." ....kind of like >Peaceniks Anonymous or something. I'm waiting for an article that >starts-"My son enlisted and I think he's a fucking idiot," but I don't >expect to see it real soon. > >"I'm in the unusual position of being for the war, but against >the troops" - Bill Hicks ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:53:22 -0500 From: vince Subject: Re: njc Regime Change made simple kakki wrote: > I think the advent of >TV really helped made a difference in bringing down the Soviet empire. >Despite the government's attempts at censorship and control, people were >eventually able to get a view into the outside world. They could see the >prosperity of much of the rest of the world and realized that they were >being fed propaganda all those years that their system was somehow superior. >The USSR at some point could not control its (mostly more industrious and >prosperous) satellites, nor its own people. Remember toward the end the >reports of no one going to work anymore and sitting around drinking vodka >all day? Lech Walesa was a brave man and what he started eventually >snowballed into mass resistance in the other countries. But it took a long >time to evolve. > You are right, my friend, and the technology is here, the time is now. Iraq is no threat to anyone right now. The have been basically quarantined by the world since 1991. They will roll over no one's borders. But we have the time and means while they are under almost 12 years of containment to do all that we can so that the people can do what they need to do for their own selves. It is not up to us to wage war to impose our ideas. Government is to be of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE - not for us to dictate. But we can surely influence.... No more than we would welcome another country coming in a nd toppling our government. What is Iraq anyway? It is a made up country that didn't exist until some Europeans started drawing maps after World War I. The Kurds were divided amongst various borders and so were other people. This whole proposed war is very similar to colonialism - white people deciding in our wisdom what the brown people need. The brown people can decide for themselves and our track record in the West with running other countries and other people's lives is dismal in the extreme. Like you, though, I believe that we have something to sell and we can sell it (one of the things we do best) so that it will be bought without reliance on war. Vince ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:58:35 -0800 From: Richard Goldman Subject: Ben Taylor Band njc Another folk-musical progeny emerges.... The 25 year old son of James Taylor and Carly Simon, Ben Taylor, whom some of you may have seen at The Bottom Line in Hollywood last night.... He's on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno TONIGHT/Tuesday February 18. His CD is quite good, you can actually listen to the whole thing on his website: http://www.bentaylorband.com Richard ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:35:18 -0700 From: Dan Olson Subject: Re: Joni's guitars To summarize and clarify: The blond one, to be sold next on ebay says "Joni Mitchell" The sunburst one on ebay now says "George Benson" The one I refer to below (without the tag) was from a web-site selling new ones, but the more I look (here's another link, http://www.geocities.com/xcvxcv65/ibanez/ibanez-gb.htm), the more I believe it's inconclusive - I couldn't find a good closeup of the area). Do a search for "Ibanez George Benson" and you'll find hundreds of sites. At 02:12 PM 2/18/2003 -0800, you wrote: >Randy Remote wrote: > > > Dan Olson wrote: > > > > > Note that > > > it doesn't have the "name tag". > > > > If you are talking about the ebay sunburst, it does appear to have > > her name inlaid in the last fret marker as the blond one does. They > > don't show a close up, but that's sure what it looks like. > >Now the more I look at it, the more I think it says "George Benson". >Bidding is up to $2550, still below the minimum bid (which is secret). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:02:16 -0800 From: "gene mock" Subject: Re: Anti war in SF njc thanks randy. maybe i'll go into the bumper sticker business. take care gene >> Some of my favorite signs: > War! Good God Y'all! > Bush Gives Vegetation a Bad Name > Collateral Damage Has a Face (Pic of a Middle Eastern Child) > First Strike Makes Us Terrorists > Not With My Taxes > Got Blood? > Stop Mad Cowboy Disease > If War is Inevitable, Start Drafting SUV Drivers > Save 2 Schools $3.5M....1 F22 Bomber $153M > How Did Our Oil Get Under Their Soil? > War Kills The Poor > Drop Bush Not Bombs > Blix Not Bombs > Bongs Not Bombs > (Flag) These Colors Don't Run Everything > George, Why Don't You Send The Twins? (Bush Girls Pic) > Who Would Jesus Bomb? > Impeach The Son of a Bush > God Bless The Rest of the World, Too > This is My Patriot Act > Resistance is Fertile > The King is a Fink > Fight Plaque Not Iraq ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:23:05 EST From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Anti war in SF njc sl.m@shaw.ca writes: << You voted for Bush, albeit by the slimmest of margins. >> Not true. Al Gore won the popular vote. Bush won under the Electoral College system and circumstances in Florida (where his brother is governor) that will always be suspect. Plus, the Supreme Court . . . but that is another story. --Bob, wishing to post about something else but the political content -- and misinformation -- has been taking over lately . . . ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:33:02 +0800 (PHT) From: Subject: Re: blurb on Wall to Wall Joni Thanks for the info, Deb. It would be great to see who among the diverse artists will pay tribute to Joni. I am more interested in the classical and cabaret performers as they are among those whose renditions of Joni's songs interested me more than any other artists (i.e. Michael Feinstein, Andrea Marcovicci, etc.) wow! Laurie Anderson, too? If only Mary Margaret O'Hara can make a very brief appearance. Joseph in Manila (not used to having 1/4 of an inch hair) > Got this from Google News: > > JONI MITCHELL TRIBUTE > "Wall to Wall," the annual day-long free concert celebrating the work of > a single artists, will examine the songwriting of Joni Mitchell at New > York's Symphony Space March 22. The 12-hour marathon will feature more > than 100 performers, including Laurie Anderson, Joan Osborne and the > Mingus Big Band. The concert will be presented in association with > WFUV, Public Radio from Fordham University, which will broadcast the > entire program live, along with a live audio stream on wfuv.org. The > 33rd annual Wall to Wall will explore in-depth this extraordinary > artist's continuing legacy. Participants are drawn from diverse > backgrounds including pop, jazz, classical/new music, international > music, cabaret, poetry, as well as the contemporary singer-songwriter > scene. The 12-hour presentation is divided into four three-hour > segments. Each segment will afford the listener a chance to hear some > well-known favorites, like "Circle Game" and "Both Sides Now," as well > as music from her less well-known albums such as "Don Juan's Reckless > Daughter" and "Night Ride Home." Mitchell's output, 21 albums over 30 > years, is widely regarded as one of the most significant and consistent > collections of work by an artist of her generation. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Deb Messling -^..^- > messling@enter.net > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 1/21/03 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:40:19 -0500 From: vince Subject: NJC Good Lord! Bob Murphy and political content? There is something serious going on here! When these precincts are being heard from, there is a message there - If Bob Ethel Murphy-Merman ever made a political comment that contradicted me I would immediately rethink everything that I ever thought because this is such a rare occasion - and I really mean that - the one who says the least on a subject often says the most when they do speak - Bob, have you ever had a political post before? I can't remember one going back to 1999. And thank you and God bless you and God bless Ethel! Vince still astounded but very grateful Murphycopy@aol.com wrote: >sl.m@shaw.ca writes: > ><< You voted for Bush, albeit by the slimmest of margins. >> > >Not true. Al Gore won the popular vote. Bush won under the Electoral College >system and circumstances in Florida (where his brother is governor) that will >always be suspect. Plus, the Supreme Court . . . but that is another story. > > --Bob, wishing to post about something else but the political content -- >and misinformation -- has been taking over lately . . . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 22:35:18 -0500 From: "Suzanne MarcAurele" Subject: On War - NJC I would like to take to task the people who persist in framing America as responsible for Sadaam and other pigs of the planet - we cannot live two lives, that is, we cannot pursue our lives here and live theirs there - get it? At some point I pray responsibility begins to be an understood word! S. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:07:10 EST From: Bobsart48@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni's guitars bass@flatironsjazz.com wrote > "brand new for $2169; certainly not relatively inexpensive, in fact, quite > expensive (certainly the same order of magnitude as fat Gibsons. ....... > > Do you suppose that with Joni's new electronic guitar that handles of her > tuning dilemnas, she has simply tired of all of these old analog guitars, > and just wants to get rid of them?" > > Well, maybe. Sounds like she must have had quite a few of them, if this is really a 1982. Still, if she toured with it, I would think it belongs in her museum. I wonder what arrangements she has begun in this regard (it is a burden, I suppose, to have to consider, confront and act on such a problem, but I would think that - given her contact with curators, etc. - she would have begun that process already. I certainly hope so. Sounds like the reserve price ought to be quite high - I agree on that. Bobsart ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:04:52 -0500 From: "patrick leader" Subject: RE: to patrick NJC kakki: i deeply appreciate the depth of your response to me. i have to let it percolate before i can answer, but the thought you put into your post really makes me want to read and reread. my post may have seemed harsh, but i did start out by describing one of the things i value about you. you've given it again: the urge to reread and rethink, if needed. i hope to write more fully tomorrow... patrick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:38:29 EST From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: NJC Good Lord! Vince asks: << Bob, have you ever had a political post before? I can't remember one going back to 1999. >> Yes, Vince, I did post some political stuff way back when, but it was mainly in response to some of Marcel's more outrageous daily posts. (For the record, I still don't believe the Clintons had Vincent Foster whacked.) The fact is, I have learned in my dotage that I prefer to think that my friends believe as I do about the political issues that I care most about. Naive, yes, but I don't see that political debate between friends -- even discussion list friends -- does much to change anyone's mind. If anything, the debates here about what people and the media are calling "the upcoming war with Iraq" have only made me more firmly antiwar than ever. When people ask about my political affiliations, I always answer that I am a "genetic Democrat." I am the great-grandchild and grandchild of immigrants who escaped horrible conditions in Ireland for a better life in the US. When I was seven years old, John Kennedy -- another Irish Catholic boy from Massachusetts -- was elected president and the world seemed to hold nothing but promises of better times ahead. As Joni says: We really thought we had a purpose We were so anxious to achieve We had hope The world had promise For a slave to liberty (Also, the song "Happy Days Are Here Again" -- the Democrat's traditional theme song before Clinton glommed onto "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow" - -- has always seemed appropriate to me. Is it a coincidence that my life has always been better when Democrats occupied the White House?) I have been a "Massachusetts-style Democrat" since I was a little boy, and I don't think anything's going to change that. Certainly not an Internet discussion list. I can look back now and see what happened to the glorious hope America once had. JFK was murdered. Then came the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert Kennedy. The horror of Vietnam broadcast into our living rooms, boys from our neighborhoods dead for no good reason. Of course there were flashes of hope along the way: the peace movement and Lyndon Johnson's support for civil rights come to mind. But America's great big heart seems to have grown colder as the years have passed, doesn't it? Nixon, Reagan, and George H. W. Bush all contributed to this, in my opinion. The lies. Dirty tricks. Money laundering. Secret wars. The destruction of the environment. The rise of corporate power and greed. More and more prisons built, more and more mental hospitals emptied. The heart-wrenching sight of homeless, insane human beings thrown onto the streets to fend for themselves. The list goes on and on and, of course, includes the misdeeds of Democrats too, but . . . well, I guess you understand why I'll never be a Republican. And as America's heart has grown cold, its brain has gone stupid, stupid, stupid. We have squandered the good will the world had for us after 9/11. Do you think the victims of slaughter on the planes and in the towers and in the Pentagon would want revenge or World War III to be their legacy? Or do you think they would want a peaceful world for the precious loved ones they left behind? I am afraid for us all. I am disheartened that we are being called to war by a born-again Christian former cheerleader. I wouldn't be surprised if he feels that it's his calling to cheer-lead us all to Armageddon. Say what you want about Clinton, but he was smart -- a Rhodes scholar -- and he seemed to have a lust for life and warm (even hot!) blood running through his veins. To me, President Bush is downright reptilian, calculating and soulless -- the epitome of everything I have disliked and feared of his Republican ilk. So -- now that you all know where I stand politically, I really feel that I need never participate in political discussions here again. I am not going to tell anyone what he or she can or cannot post, but I choose not to talk about politics or defend my views, so carry on! But next time someone asks you to participate in this demonization of "the enemy," please recognize that this trick has been played on good people since war was invented. Resist! Imagine the face of a loved one on "the enemy" and maybe the futility, stupidity and insanity of war will finally hit home. Peace, --Bob NPIMH: "Small World," by Ethel ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:42:32 -0500 From: FredNow@aol.com Subject: "There you go again ... " njc In a message dated 2/18/2003 6:06:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, sl.m@shaw.ca writes: >You live in a representative democracy, not a direct one. You voted >for Bush, albeit by the slimmest of margins. That means he gets to >decide. That's what your democracy is.>>Sarah No, no, no ... Bush was not elected ... not by popular vote, not by electoral college, and it's got nothing to do with chads, hanging, pregnant, or otherwise. Here are some facts that have been reported by the BBC, the Washington Post, the L.A. Times, as well as others. Go ahead, check it out for yourself. In 1999, Katherine Harris, Florida Secretary of State in charge of elections and, in a neat coincidence, George W. Bush's presidential campaign co-chairwoman, hired an independent accounting firm, Database Technologies, to purge Florida's voter rolls of not only actual former felons, but anyone *suspected* of being an ex-felon (rehabilitated felons are not allowed to vote in Florida, this is a law that varies from state to state; incidentally, in the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic). DBT was instructed to scan for people with similar names to those of actual felons, with the same birthdate as actual felons, or a similar social security number; they were instructed to scan for an 80 per cent match of relevant information. The inevitable result was that thousands of legitimately eligible voters would be barred from voting. DBT, although generally sympathetic to Republicans, at least had enough integrity to warn Harris' office that "programming in this fashion may supply you with false positives." The State of Florida, however, was unconcerned and told the firm to go ahead; in Harris elections office files, next to the DBT's recommended cross-check and verification plan, there is a handwritten note: "DON'T NEED." In Miami-Dade, Florida's largest county, 66 per cent of the disenfranchised voters were black; overall, black voters went 90 per cent for Gore. You do the math. But that's not all ... an additional 8000 Floridians were barred because their names were on a list of former felons who had moved from another state; they had done their time and their voting rights had been reinstated. Some on this list had committed only misdemeanors, even parking violations or littering. What was that other state? Of course, it was Texas ... another neat coincidence. All told, more than 180,000 registered voters in Florida were permanently wiped from the voter rolls. Were some of these legitimately barred, at least according to Florida law? Yes. But Linda Howell, the elections supervisor of Madison County, was just one of several thousand with squeaky clean records who were barred from voting on Election Day. Remember, Bush "won" Florida by a mere 537 votes; is it safe to say that of 180,000 disenfranchised voters (many of them questionably), many of them black, at least 538 had the dumb luck to simply have had the same name as a felon, or the same birthdate, or a similar social security number, and would likely have voted for Gore? I think so. But forget about all that for a moment ... no one could possibly believe that thousands of Jewish voters would have intentionally voted for Pat Buchanan, not even Pat Buchanan himself believes this. So, all this hanky-panky (and, really, much more ... just for instance, the head of the Fox network's election coverage, who went way out on a limb and declared Bush the winner before any other network, before the polls had closed in California, before the massive irregularities had even begun to be resolved, is none other than a first cousin of George and Jeb) goes down in a state where the "winner's" brother just happens to be governor, where the secretary of state in charge of elections just happens to be the "winner's" Florida campaign manager (how is that fact alone not an egregious conflict of interest that automatically invalidates all her shenanigans?), where thousands of legitimate voters are disqualified because of a faulty list that came from the state where the "winner" just happened to be governor, where the "winner" was declared prematurely by a media executive who just happened to be the "winner's" first cousin ... this was all just coincidence? Yeah, right. It was a coup, that's what it was, enabled with the help of a partisan Supreme Court decision led by judges appointed by the father of the "winner," and, no, I won't "get over it." Our emperor -- the man who told the Swedish prime minister, "It's amazing I won. I was running against peace, prosperity, and incumbency" -- is wearing no clothes. - -Fred (no, not that one ... the other one) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:05:15 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: "There you go again ... " njc Fred, I didn't know a lot of this - thanks for sending it. I didn't know that former felons weren't allowed to vote in some states (seems very undemocratic), nor about the 80 per cent match in the search for suspected former felons. I also didn't know the woman in charge of the election in Florida was co-chair of Bush's campaign team. Seem a clear conflict of interest regardless of any other suspicions. What was the reasoning of the Supreme Court when they upheld the results? (if you have time to explain) Sarah At 11:42 PM -0500 02/18/2003, frednow@aol.com wrote: >No, no, no ... Bush was not elected ... not by popular vote, not by >electoral college, and it's got nothing to do with chads, hanging, >pregnant, or otherwise. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:37:42 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: change of mind NJC Mike, it was French, Dutch and American oil companies that owned the Iraq Petroleum Company when Saddam nationalized it in 1972, so it could be said to belong to those companies. Regardless of that, Saddam ruined the Iraqi oil industry as he has ruined everything else. Analysts estimate that Iraq has been running at maximum one third of its production since sanctions, and before sanctions at 50 per cent capacity. Former officials in Iraq's oil ministry say there was exploration only in the 70s and apart from that, the Iraqi oil fields are described as like a ghost town, with wells sitting idle and pumping stations left unserviced. Just before Saddam nationalized it, the Western oil companies had discovered new fields which Saddam hasn't developed. The oil companies believe these fields could yield even more oil than Saudi Arabia, and it apparently has low lifting costs because it's near the surface. They believe Iraq could be producing 8 million barrels a day within 4 years, which will pay for the country to be rebuilt. So long as Iraq benefits, does it matter who owns the country's oil company? Perhaps you're arguing that privatization is always a bad thing, but I would say experience doesn't bear that out, and that privatized companies tend to perform better than nationalized ones. The political gain for the West would be that Saudi Arabia and OPEC would be weakened, as Iraq would probably not agree to limit production because it will need all the money it can get, and therefore the price of oil will fall. Not a good thing for the environment but that's a different argument - governments can still tax up to whatever price they choose to set for environmental reasons. I don't agree that there's real poverty in the UK - there's social alienation in the sense that many people don't have access to things that other people take for granted, but it's relative, whereas the poverty in Iraq is absolute. I take your point that you don't need a dictator to find poverty, but the inequality in Iraq is different in kind from the inequality in the countries you mentioned - where children die for the want of clean water while Saddam Hussein builds dozens of new palaces, one of them the size of central London. Sarah At 11:48 PM +0100 02/18/2003, mike pritchard wrote: >So the oil either belongs to the Iraqi people or to Saddam and his >family, right? Whichever way you look at it, it doesn't belong to >anyone outside that territory, and certainly not to the US/West. >That's what I mean(t). There are huge amounts of poverty in >practically all countries, the UK, Spain, the USA, Argentina to name >only a few western examples . . . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:40:55 -0800 From: Michael Paz Subject: Re: Pazfest - a New Orleans tribute to Joni Mitchell - review Don't be spreadin' no secrets bitch! Paz > Paz writes: > > << Have I told you lately that I LOVE you? >> > > No, not since that night up north between the trailers at Jonifest. > > Love you too, Michael. > > XO, > > --Bob ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 00:59:14 -0500 From: "Christopher Treacy" Subject: Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice Azeen wrote : "it's certainly far better than the Janet Jackson and Amy Grant renditions." I have to say I don't agree. It's AS generic as the Amy Grant version, which I liked anyway, but nobody beats Janet's take on the song. I LOVE what she did with it (as does Joni herself), and what's more, it pays tribute to Joni rather than merely covering her. Sensual, sexy, urban...Janet's vocal line is actually quite pretty. She took BYT and reworked it totally to fit her concept as opposed to just rehashing it. In all honesty, I've quite had enough of BYT...wouldn't shed a tear over never hearing it again. Just my opinion...I'm OVER the parking lot. I'd much rather dwell on serpents and eagles, that chick Edith and the coke dealer, Muslims sticking up Washington, that strange dry cleaner guy...plenty more interesting subject matter to choose from. "Joni Mitchell never lies...." - -Chris - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 6:23 PM Subject: Re: Big Yellow Taxi/Two Weeks Notice > In a message dated 18/02/2003 21:27:25 GMT Standard Time, > waytoblu@mindspring.com writes: > > << It's nice to hear a joni song frequently on the radio, even if it's not > her. >> > > I've just got back from seeing Two Weeks Notice, which was the only film I > could get in to see at my local cinema. Not bad at all; I was waiting for > the film to start asking "why have I wasted my money on such a piece of > fluff?" (the same thought that must go through people's minds when they buy a > Christina Aguillera record) - but actually I quite enjoyed it. That Hugh > Grant will come to be recognised as a consummate light comedy actor and a > master of split-second-perfect comic timing. > > Anyway, so, yes, Counting Crows covering BYT: I was pleasantly surprised, I > must say, especially given that I've never liked them and had a particular > distaste for Adam Duritz's voice (too whiny and self-pitying for my liking). > I think they do a pretty good job making such a familiar song sound > contemporary; it's certainly far better than the Janet Jackson and Amy Grant > renditions. > > Shame the rest of the soundtrack was so predictable - great as they are, do > we *really* need to hear I Feel Good or Respect again?? Nice to see a little > cameo from Norah Jones, though. > > Azeem in London > NP: Eleni Mandell - Thrill ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:00:53 -0500 From: ljirvin@jmdl.com Subject: Today in History: February 19 1965: Joni gave birth to a daughter, naming her Kelly. More info: http://www.jmdl.com/articles/reunion.cfm 1966: Chuck and Joni Mitchell perform at the Chess Mate in Detroit. 1976: Joni performed at the Boston Music Hall 1991: The album "Night Ride Home" was released today. 1992: The Pro Set L.A. Music Awards chose Night Ride Home as Best AOR album. - ---- For a comprehensive reference to Joni's appearances, consult Joni Mitchell ~ A Chronology of Appearances: http://www.jonimitchell.com/appearances.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 02:00:53 -0500 From: ljirvin@jmdl.com Subject: Today's Library Links: February 19 On February 19 the following item was published: 1972: "Joni's concert shows she should stick to recordings" - Detroit News (Review - Concert) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=940 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:32:11 -0800 From: David Marine Subject: Tell the Truth njc Sarah -- Here's a good OpEd piece which may help you to understand why many in the US have absolutely no faith in Bush or his regime: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/19/opinion/19FRIE.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 01:38:44 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: Tell the Truth njc It's a good article David, thanks for sending it. Yes, I see what you mean. Sarah At 11:32 PM -0800 02/18/2003, David Marine wrote: >Here's a good OpEd piece which may help you to understand why many in the US >have absolutely no faith in Bush or his regime: > >http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/19/opinion/19FRIE.html ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2003 #126 ***************************** ------- 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)