From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2005 #112 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 Saturday, March 12 2005 Volume 2005 : Number 112 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Re: Stills (NJC) [] Ruth Brown njc [jrmco1@aol.com] Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~SJC [Lucy Hone ] Re: Ruth Brown njc ["Gerald A. Notaro" ] Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~SJC now njc and spring-cleaning-y things [Catherine McKay ] Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors (NJC) [Chris Marshall ] Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~SJC [Em ] re: Death vs. Living in Iowa (NJC) [Christopher ] Re: Ruth Brown njc [Dflahm@aol.com] More about the Songs of a Prairie Girl ["Brian Hernandez" ] Re: Re: Stills (NJC) ["Mark or Travis" ] Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~ NJC [Smurf ] Re: Stills (NJC) [Randy Remote ] Re: Ruth Brown njc ["Mark or Travis" ] NJC iPod question NJC ["Lama, Jim L'Hommedieu" ] Re: Stills (NJC) ["Lama, Jim L'Hommedieu" ] RE: Stills (NJC) ["Richard Flynn" ] Having children NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Ruth Brown njc ["Mark or Travis" ] Re: Stills (NJC) ["Mark or Travis" ] RE: Stills (NJC) ["Richard Flynn" ] Whoops, to put it mildly (prob already been reported) and other ramblings [Justalittlebreen@aol.c] Re: Stills (NJC) ["Mark or Travis" ] Re: Stills (NJC) [Catherine McKay ] Re: Stills -- now with Joni content -- teeth & "Little Green" [Smurf Subject: Re: Re: Stills (NJC) Randy wrote: "Huh? If the child had not been born, there would be no child to regret not having been born." OK--maybe that's one of those "half full, or half empty?" things. You can choose to look at it that way, although that wasn't quite what I was saying. You can also say: for purposes of argument, let's just suppose that the child is already here. If you're making an argument based on the supposed detriments to that child of her particular existence, do you really think she would agree, when pushed: "Yeah, I'd rather not have existed at all than have had these parents, at this particular time in their lives?" To be sure, some might say "yes." But I suspect that many more would respond, "What?! Are you crazy??!" If so, then that points out, to my mind, that this argument is really about something other than concern for these children (or at least, that the concern may be misplaced). I agree with you, Randy, about the world's resources. We should all make the decision to parent carefully, and with our planet's finite resources in mind. However, my question then becomes: why does this seem to come up most often when certain types of potential parents are being discussed: e.g., older, single, gay, etc? Why is *everybody* not being held to this standard? And I agree with you, Bob, that the desire to procreate is very basic. It's also often inextricably tied to a particular relationship: to wanting to have a child with *this person.* It's all well and good to be concerned with, say, fossil fuels, but when you're in love, that's not likely to be the very first thing on your mind. Wanting to create a family with someone we love seems to be, for many, part of the essential rubric of what makes us human. I'm not saying that, as a species, we don't need to balance this impulse against, say, concern for the environment with more care than we may have in the past. I'd just hate to throw out the baby with the bathwater. So to speak. FWIW, peoples' views on this particular topic often tell me much more about their own values on things far removed from childrearing than they do about the supposed topic at hand. Mary. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 05:08:46 -0500 From: jrmco1@aol.com Subject: Ruth Brown njc Just got home from a lovely show at Yoshi's Jazz Club in Oakland, California USA. It was Tony Award winner, Grammy Award winner and Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductee...Ruth Brown! (Whom I had never really heard of heretofore, on account of she had her prime well before I was born). And by Luck of the Draw, Gail and I were seated next to one Ms. Bonnie Raitt, who Ruth told us had paid her rent and sent her food when she was ailing (she's 77). Bonnie is her best friend, Ruth said. Sweet set it was...a Dinah Washington tune, a couple of Billie Holiday numbers, and she jazzed up a Willie Nelson tune, though titles are escaping me presently. Blame the champagne. Nice night out on Jack London Square by the SF Bay. Puts me in mind of _Call of the Wild_ when I'm over there, there and I got the urge for howling. But politely, I demurred. See? You can take me places. Lots of them. I'll be good. :-) - -Julius ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:12:54 +0000 From: Lucy Hone Subject: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~SJC I have had a bit of a mad clean out... I stuck Hits on the stereo, cranked it up and as Chelsea Morning... most certainly my most "its almost Spring" Joni song came on I felt an unfamiliar urge to get things a bit more sparkly around the place... I always love the Larson cartoon where the bug eyed man in the vest stands with the paint pot, surveying that he has painted THE DOG, THE DOOR, THE CAT, THE TREE, THE HOUSE... on the various articles and says "That should sort a few things out round here" it was one of those moments........Also.........There had been sunshine, there had been some hail, and some strong winds blowing but for the main part the feeling was "yup, Chelsea morning is playing, the sun is out and it is almost spring..ye gods I have some energy, lets start cleaning"...those of you who have stayed here know that I am not worried too much about "Spotless" or "tidy" or cobwebs..But.... I looked at my oven doors and thought ...in a "Roy Lichtenstein-back of the hand to the forehead-comic book-woman on the verge of a nervous breakdown-drama queen-ish sort of way".."OH NO! the inside of the oven doors are awfully greasy looking and not just that but its INSIDE THE INSIDE OF THE DOORS.....(.they are sort of double glazed???) .. forget the 4 foot long cobweb, labrador hair bunnies under the piano and windows that are less than shiny..but NO the over doors got my attention.... i have come to regret the ingress on my time, of this whole episode... Read on if you can be arsed..... Have you ever taken over doors apart? I have had these beauties OFF the oven before (easy job) but when you take them apart its a whole new ball game... Insulationy things and springy bits came away ............until I realised it was actually only a matter of undoing two screws... so then had to worry about putting the other bits back on (which I did prior to cleaning)... ANYWAY..... Recently in my supermarket there was a woman demonstrating this super duper de-greasant product with the most stupid name..... CILLIT BANG.... The C is pronounced like an S... It was going cheaply with money off voucher and the demo was pulling in crowds...(Gosport does not have a cinema at present) so I bought some. During the war we brits learned (so my mum told me) that if you see a queue you join it.... That is why we are so good at queuing....I DIGRESS AGAIN>>>>It looked like it would do the job (whatever that job might be when it came) so I took a bottle and added it to my shopping.... and it has been in my cupboard until this morning..... So I am at the counter in my kitcen with the bigger of the two doors in pieces, Cillit Bang sprayed on the glass interiors and the phone rang... natter natter natter natter...... 20 minutes later return to find that the parts of the paint finish on bits of the glass seems to have become "pickled" (there is a sort of black edging to the viewing panel)....and the Cillit Bang has dried on to the glass, is now almost impossble to remove.. I try scraping it but it was smearing, try to rub at tit with a cloth...worse .... so I dump the entire door into the sink and souse the lot in hot hot water...Incredible how the whole lot ran away..I wanted to do it again..so easy...... lovely clean glass... a delight... . Fantastic clean door....wonderful,,, Paint seems ok??? query optical illusion?? ANYWAY... I dried everything and put the door back together and put it back on the oven, and repeated the procedure wit the smaller top oven door.... I stood back to admire in a sort of "I love Lucy" pose only to see that hidden water from somwhere in the top door, had dripped down into the INSIDE of the lower one. Took the whole lot apart again and re-dried the doors... put them all back up again......... cloth marks and finger smudges........took them all apart again put them back together and now the doors look fantastic....... I am never going to cook again!!!! So that took my bloody ages and as a reward I have sat here with a cup of coffee, a slice of my left over birthday cake and written this tale to you. I have also been listening to CSN Greatest Hits that the kids gave me for my Birthday... "Long Time Gone" now playing loudly ....Life is OK Frank and I are going out for a motor bike ride this afternoon.. I have not ridden for a few weeks and the road is calling my name. He needs no excuse and the ZX6R has been sulking as the Triumph has been getting all the fun... Love to you all Lucy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:37:36 -0500 (EST) From: "Gerald A. Notaro" Subject: Re: Ruth Brown njc Lucky you, Julius. I saw Ruth in Black and Blue on Broadway where she was rediscovered after many years of obscurity. She and many other African American legends like Jimmy Scott and Alberta Hunter suffered the same fate of nonrecognition for their contributions to American music. I'm glad to see she is not forgotten. Jerry jrmco1@aol.com said: > Just got home from a lovely show at Yoshi's Jazz Club in Oakland, > California USA. It was Tony Award winner, Grammy Award winner and Rock > and Roll Hall of Fame Inductee...Ruth Brown! (Whom I had never really > heard of heretofore, on account of she had her prime well before I was > born). > > And by Luck of the Draw, Gail and I were seated next to one Ms. Bonnie > Raitt, who Ruth told us had paid her rent and sent her food when she > was ailing (she's 77). Bonnie is her best friend, Ruth said. > > Sweet set it was...a Dinah Washington tune, a couple of Billie Holiday > numbers, and she jazzed up a Willie Nelson tune, though titles are > escaping me presently. Blame the champagne. > > Nice night out on Jack London Square by the SF Bay. Puts me in mind of > _Call of the Wild_ when I'm over there, there and I got the urge for > howling. But politely, I demurred. See? You can take me places. Lots > of them. I'll be good. :-) > > -Julius ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:58:22 -0500 (EST) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~SJC now njc and spring-cleaning-y things You'd feel right at home in my less-than-Martha-Stewart home. I get the urge for cleaning (sort of Joni) maybe once or twice a year. The follow-through is the hard part. I am a woman of vision but not of practicalities. Now that I know you can take those oven doors apart (well, of course you can, but that doesn't mean you must), I'm going to have to do something about the grease between the two panes of glass as well. I've never understood how it gets there, but get there it does. Was up bright and early this a.m. because we had a new bed delivered for Matthew. There remains the problem of how to get the old one out of his room, which is over the garage, with a narrow stairway to get there. The bed itself is one of those captain's beds, a great big box of a thing that doesn't break down because it belonged to my parents, long before the IKEA and DIY days. Well, if it went up, it must come down, right? It's vaguely spring-like here, more of a promise-of-spring. After several days of bitterly January-like cold (-10 - -20 C) it's now hovering around 0 and the sky is kind of cloudy which suggests warmish, not friggin' freezing.) Happy almost-spring to all in the Northern Hemisphere. Looks like it's time to go shopping for food, another thing I don't care for, because there are always too many people there and the kids fight over who gets to come with me. God forbid they both should. I can't believe they still both like me, most of the time, but I think it's more that they want some kind of say in what kind of food I buy. Lucy Hone wrote: the sun is out and it is almost spring..ye gods I have some energy, lets start cleaning"...those of you who have stayed here know that I am not worried too much about "Spotless" or "tidy" or cobwebs..But.... I looked at my oven doors and thought ...in a "Roy Lichtenstein-back of the hand to the forehead-comic book-woman on the verge of a nervous breakdown-drama queen-ish sort of way".."OH NO! the inside of the oven doors are awfully greasy looking and not just that but its INSIDE THE INSIDE OF THE DOORS.....(.they are sort of double glazed???) .. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:04:37 -0500 (EST) From: "Gerald A. Notaro" Subject: Ani Ani is on CBS this mornings Second Cup of Coffee Cafi. Tori was on last week. Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:17:51 +0000 From: Chris Marshall Subject: Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors (NJC) On 12 Mar 2005, at 13:12, Lucy Hone wrote: > ANYWAY..... Recently in my supermarket there was a woman demonstrating > this super duper de-greasant product with the most stupid name..... > CILLIT BANG.... The C is pronounced like an S... It was going cheaply > with money off voucher and the demo was pulling in crowds...(Gosport > does not have a cinema at present) so I bought some. I've got a bottle of the stuff waiting to deploy in my cupboard. It keeps calling to me every time I open the cupboard... "you know you want to use me: even if the advertising campaign was awfully camp and crap, and despite a /really/ silly name. Go on..." The inspiring thing about your story, Lucy, is that I'm fairly sure I can get away with cleaning the over door *only* and 95% of the time feel like I've got a spotlessly clean oven. It's the door that creates the first impression, after all. Just as long as no-one looks inside, I'll be fine. :) - --Chris ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 06:13:05 -0800 From: "Brian Hernandez" Subject: Songs of a Prairie Girl I think the reference to "tides" and "floating Javex bottles" has more to do with Joni's cabin on Half Moon Bay, which is on the Sunshine Coast, just north of Vancouver. [demime 0.97c-p1 removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had a name of winmail.dat] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 06:59:15 -0800 (PST) From: Em Subject: Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~SJC Ha! great post. I love the changes you went through. Glad the Cillit Bang was so effective in the long run, though scary at first. Hope you all have a WONDERFUL ride. Am hoping to swing a leg over Fidel myself today, but must get 2 dogs vaccinated first. :) vroooooooom!! Em - --- Lucy Hone wrote: > I have had a bit of a mad clean out... I stuck Hits on the stereo, > cranked it up and as Chelsea Morning... most certainly my most "its > almost Spring" Joni song came on I felt an unfamiliar urge to get > things a bit more sparkly around the place... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:20:47 -0800 (PST) From: Christopher Subject: re: Death vs. Living in Iowa (NJC) Walt wrote, "My apologies (sympathies) for those living in or near Iowa, and/or those who are dead." I have no idea what you were talking about, but no sympathies for me please, I LOVE Iowa and enjoy living here. I couldn't wait to come back after being gone for a year. So, whatever poll that was, it was obviously answered by people who had never been here! Sorry, just had to have my say. Christopher NP: The hum of the computer and click of dogs toe nails clicking down the hall Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:12:37 EST From: Dflahm@aol.com Subject: Re: Ruth Brown njc Did she happen to sing "Gloomy Sunday?" I haven't forgotten her performance of that at the Village Gate in NYC well over 30 years ago. DAVID LAHM ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:26:50 -0800 From: "Brian Hernandez" Subject: More about the Songs of a Prairie Girl The reason I think the reference to "Javex Bottles" has to do with Joni's cabin on the Sunshine Coast is because that's the kind of stuff that washes onshore. I've spent a lot of time in the San Juan Islands, which isn't all that far from Half Moon Bay, and I've seen the crud that washes up in a high tide. np-Light House, Sunny Days [demime 0.97c-p1 removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had a name of winmail.dat] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:35:42 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Muller Subject: Re: Ruth Brown njc Ruth's hit "Mama, He Treats Your Daughter Mean" lives on here in SC as a commonly-played Beach Music song. She used to host an NPR show called "Bluestage" that I listened to every Saturday night and turned me on to los of blues artists. Julius, very cool that you saw her and shared the air with Bonnie. Bob NP: Joni, "Come In From The Cold" (on the third & final episode of CKUA's "Portrait of Joni Mitchell) Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:23:45 -0800 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Re: Stills (NJC) blckcrow@chorus.net wrote: > To be sure, some might say "yes." But I suspect that many more would > respond, "What?! Are you crazy??!" If so, then that points out, to > my mind, that this argument is really about something other than > concern for these children (or at least, that the concern may be > misplaced). > > I agree with you, Randy, about the world's resources. We should all > make the decision to parent carefully, and with our planet's finite > resources in mind. However, my question then becomes: why does this > seem to come up most often when certain types of potential parents > are being discussed: e.g., older, single, gay, etc? Why is > *everybody* not being held to this standard? Hi Mary! It's great to see you posting again. I hesitated about making any further comment on this subject but since I already put my foot in it I feel I should elaborate a bit. Although I agree with Randy that overpopulation is a concern on this overcrowded, ecologically fragile planet, that was not my chief reason for my comment that Stills is being selfish. And yes, Mary, I agree with you that it really isn't any more our business than Joni's reasons for giving up her baby for adoption are our business. But like Catherine said, that's never stopped us before! Biology pretty much dictates that only human males have the ability to procreate past a certain age. The females have a much smaller window of time to have children. So these cases of someone like Stills becoming a parent in their 60s or later are almost invariably going to involve an older man and a younger woman. In cases like these when the man intends being a father to the child, to be actively involved in the child's life, I do think it is a selfish act. In the case of Stephen Stills, it's probably pretty safe to say that financial security is not an issue but that isn't necessarily going to be true of every couple's situation. But even if Stills lives to be 80, the kid will be going through their teen years with a father who will be in his 70s. It's more than likely that Dad will have not have the energy or physical ability to participate in the kid's life that a younger man would have. Then it's pretty likely that Dad won't be around for too much of the child's adulthood and quite possibly won't even live that long. It's quite probable that this kid will have a father long enough to become emotionally invested in the relationship and then will lose that father at some crucial point of his or her development. I've been lucky enough to have both of my parents up until my 50th year of life. I do have several close friends, however, who lost their fathers when they were kids and I know it's left permanent impressions (I hesitate to use the word scars) on their lives. I have no doubt that each of their lives would have been different had their fathers lived long enough to see them grown up and on their own. I suppose whether their lives would have been better or not is pure speculation. I don't think that reproductive rights should be curtailed or legislated in any way. As others have pointed out, procreation is something too basic and I think I can understand that desire for two people who love each other to have a child together. But I do think humans should make responsible choices about creating new lives. And for the record, Mary, I do think that everybody should be held to the same standard. I would say the same about a same sex couple looking to adopt or have a child using a surrogate or donor. If two people are going to bring a child into the world and make the commitment to raise it together, I think they should both be young enough and healthy enough that there is a good probability that they will live long enough to at least get that child to adulthood. Edward wanted children. I was ambivalent about it and it caused some friction at an early stage of our relationship. But when we were both diagnosed with HIV, there was no doubt in either one of our minds that it was absolutely out of the question for us to even consider it. I apologize if I have offended anyone. It is not my intention to point fingers or to judge. As Mary pointed out, every case is different and I am sure there are people who have had an older parent or parents or who parented children in their later years and have had happy, emotionally healthy families. But my personal feeling is that the risk is too great and if the choice were mine, I would choose not to take that risk. Mark E. in Seattle (I love you too, Mary!) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:24:50 -0800 (PST) From: Smurf Subject: Re: Cillit Bang and the oven doors ~ NJC - --- Queen Lucy proclaimed: > try > to rub at tit with a > cloth... I even love your typos, QL! However, I originally thought the subject line referred to a new band fronted by a woman with a Brit name that sounds strange to American ears, like Cilla Black. "Lydees and gents, please give a proper welcome to ... Cillit Bang and the Oven Doors!" XO, - --Smurf, heading back out into the rain -- which is not snow, so that's okay with me __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:30:51 -0800 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: Stills (NJC) Woah, Richard, I never said anything about passing laws. As in China, it probably wouldn't work, and I would prefer that humans become enlightened enough about the problem of overpopulation that they can act on the problem before it is too late, and everyone is fighting over who's going to eat the cat. Although in China, the problem was one of male machismo-valuing male children more than female (aka stupidity), so they kill the baby girls, since the legal limit is 2 kids. Unfortunately, that kind of male worship is prevelant in many cultures. I don't think pro-choice has anything to do with it (I am pro-choice), and will go back to my pollution analogy- if the guy down the street has several SUVs and Hummers in his driveway, is that freedom of choice? Do you say, hey, that's his lifestyle? Richard Flynn wrote: > SO perhaps you'd like to have your congressman introduce some legislation to > regulate all of our reproductive choices? A quota for the number of births > we'll allow. Perhaps, as in China, we should limit the number of births > with particular attention to female children? > > I'm firmly pro-choice, but how do you justify that without a concept of > reproductive freedom? At least until W. has his way with the Supreme Court > we do have a right to such choices, at least in theory, in the U.S. > > Unlimited freedom to spawn or not to spawn is a right I don't think we can > give up lightly. It needs to be addressed. Excessive spawning needs to be somewhere on the radar. Right now, it isn't. Bush has drastically cut funds for planned parenthood programs and birth control outreach for the impoverished. We need these programs. There is nothing less free than a poor African woman with 10 kids and no way of feeding them, or stopping the arrival of more. And, back to the original subject, rich Americans having kids impacts the global picture in terms of who gets their fair share of the earth's resources. RR 1/3 of the population growth in the world is the result of incidental or unwanted pregnancies. The World's Population Has Doubled Since 1960. The world's population is expected to grow from 6.3 billion to 8.9 billion by 2050 if we continue to slow our rate of reproduction. If fertility remains at present levels, the population could reach 12.8 billion by 2050. # The U.S. Census Bureau reported that hunger is a daily concern for 13.8% of Americans # There will be 125 million births in the world this year. By the time this group is ready to start school, there will have been another 625 million births. # Every 20 minutes, the human population grows by about 3,000. At the same time another plant or animal becomes extinct (27,000 each year). # According to the U.N., if fertility were to stay constant at 1995-2000 levels, the world population would soar to 244 billion by 2150 and 134 trillion by 2300. # The population of the U.S. tripled during the 20th century, but the U.S. consumption of raw materials increased 17-fold. * World population reached: 1 billion in 1804, 2 billion in 1927 (123 years later) 3 billion in 1960 (33 years) 4 billion in 1974 (13 years) 5 billion in 1987 (12 years) 6 billion in 1999 (12 years) 7 billion in 2013 (14 years - projected) 8 billion in 2028 (15 years - projected) 10.7 (high) or 8.9 (middle) or 7.3 (low) billion projected for 2050 * The world is adding about 78 million more people every year, the population of France, Greece and Sweden combined, or equivalent to a city the size of San Francisco every three days. Only 11% of the world's soils can be farmed without being irrigated, drained, or otherwise improved The world is adding a city the size of Los Angeles every two weeks. From 1980 to 1990, food production per person decreased 2%. http://www.overpopulation.org/faq.html In 1 second: 5 babies born,2 people die=increase of 3 humans every second. In the same second, 1.5 acres of rainforest get cut down. [I live in California-I watch the forests roll down the highway on the back of trucks every time I drive. My dad lives out by Sacramento, where huge tracts of open field are being turned into housing developments, as fast as they can be built. This is not sustainable by any stretch-RR] The amount of forests in California is fixed. The amounts of water and farmland are largely fixed. The amount fish and natural resources are fixed. As we increase our population, the amount of resources per person gets less. We all become poorer. We have to live with less water, less forests, less farmland, less space, less privacy, bigger traffic jams and more crowding everywhere, especially evident in our schools, our jails, our beaches and in our cities. As California population grows, Sacramento gets more like San Francisco. San Francisco gets more like L.A. EXPONENTIAL GROWTH - my cat has 7 kittens, each of them has 7 kittens, in 2 years becomes 49 kittens, in three years becomes 350, in 7 years becomes 1/2 million cats. The same laws apply to humans. Human population will quickly grow up to the starvation limit. http://www.overpopulation.org/paul.html#in1second http://www.overpopulation.org/faq.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:26:32 -0800 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Ruth Brown njc jrmco1@aol.com wrote: > Just got home from a lovely show at Yoshi's Jazz Club in Oakland, > California USA. It was Tony Award winner, Grammy Award winner and > Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductee...Ruth Brown! (Whom I had never > really heard of heretofore, on account of she had her prime well > before I was born). > > And by Luck of the Draw, Gail and I were seated next to one Ms. Bonnie > Raitt, who Ruth told us had paid her rent and sent her food when she > was ailing (she's 77). Bonnie is her best friend, Ruth said. > > Sweet set it was...a Dinah Washington tune, a couple of Billie Holiday > numbers, and she jazzed up a Willie Nelson tune, though titles are > escaping me presently. Blame the champagne. Wow, Julius! What a great show that must have been and what a charge you must have gotten sitting next to Bonnie! I'm envious! Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:36:51 -0500 From: "Lama, Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: NJC iPod question NJC Sure, Radio Shack has the cable you need. You might want to drag both the iPod and the boom box to the store, just in case you get a newbie who specializes in selling cell phones and doesn't know an RCA plug from an 1/8" stereo mini plug. (While at Radio Shack, you could also get a (different?) cable to hook the iPod to a computer soundcard.) You turn down the volume on the iPod, connect it up, then turn the volume up to suit. Playboy Advisor, Lama From: Em Subject: NJC iPod question NJC >I was wondering if someone could tell me if an iPod could be played through the "AUX" input of my boom-box? (with the proper cables/adapters) Going on vacay in a couple weeks and a friend wants to bring her iPod as a "source" for music. thx!> ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:40:46 -0500 From: "Lama, Jim L'Hommedieu" Subject: Re: Stills (NJC) RR & Richard, It's a pleasure to read posts from 2 adults who can debate in a civil manner. You rock. Lama ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:51:43 -0500 From: "Richard Flynn" Subject: RE: Stills (NJC) Randy, I don't but your analogy. Buying a Hummer or SUV is a not a basic human right like the right to control our own bodies and the right to our reproductive freedom, both rights very much endangered by the right-wing nutjobs currently in power. The right to own a gas-guzzling tank is safe for now. Governmental entities have an obligation to do things like insist on gas mileage standards, encourage development of alternative energy sources, etc. (not that they do under our present administration). Certainly governmental programs designed to educate us about how to take care of our planet with its limited resources, as well as incentives and disincentives designed to limit population growth are legitimate. But the decision whether or not to bring a child into the world is not a "lifestyle choice," and while a responsible person would legitimately consider such things as overpopulation, the numbers of unadopted children, etc. in the decision to bear and raise a child concerns primarily the parents and/or caregivers. When people discuss Stills's decision to become a father late in life as if it is tantamount to child abuse--as some have on the list--I think that's celebrity-bashing crap--and it's sexist crap to boot. Implicit--and even somewhat explicit--in the criticisms was the idea that Steve had no business taking up with a woman still in her childbearing years in the first place, and that he ought to find someone his own age. I know we all gossip about celebrities and that none of this was malicious, but we'd do well, I think, not to assail someone for his or her choice of partners. The pollution analogy, in my view, is a red herring that allows you to avoid addressing the main issue I was raising in the first place. Randy wrote, in part: - -----Original Message----- Unfortunately, that kind of male worship is prevelant in many cultures. I don't think pro-choice has anything to do with it (I am pro-choice), and will go back to my pollution analogy- if the guy down the street has several SUVs and Hummers in his driveway, is that freedom of choice? Do you say, hey, that's his lifestyle? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:52:13 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Having children NJC It is a complex issue but one that I feel is not mine to judge. It is not just about overpopulation but about quality of life & quality of the soul being born. Someone who has more than the acceptable 2 kids might have kids (or maybe that third or fourth kid) that go on to be exceptional human beings who contribute in some way to this planet's healing. Someone with two or less kids might have kids that grow up to be the opposite. So when it comes down to someone specifically, I just do not feel I have the ability to sit in judgment on someone else's choice to have a child. In a bit of synchronicity, here is part of a post someone sent me that relates to this discussion somewhat. (I don't know if its actually true but its food for thought): >Q If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion? A If you said YES, you just killed Beethoven. < ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:55:02 -0800 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Ruth Brown njc Dflahm@aol.com wrote: > Did she happen to sing "Gloomy Sunday?" I haven't forgotten her > performance of that at the Village Gate in NYC well over 30 years ago. > > > DAVID LAHM Gloomy Sunday. Ranks high on my list of the most depressing songs ever written. Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:18:56 -0800 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Stills (NJC) Richard Flynn wrote: > When people discuss Stills's decision to become a father late in life > as if it is tantamount to child abuse--as some have on the list--I > think that's celebrity-bashing crap--and it's sexist crap to boot. > Implicit--and even somewhat explicit--in the criticisms was the idea > that Steve had no business taking up with a woman still in her > childbearing years in the first place, and that he ought to find > someone his own age. I think I made it clear in my previous post, but just for the record and since you brought this up I want to state that neither Still's celebrity nor his gender has anything to do with my personal opinion on this subject. Age difference between two consenting adults has nothing to do with it either. If two people can find happiness in a genuine, lasting love for one another then any difference in their ages is irrelevant. But in the case where two people are bringing children into the world in the traditional, natural way with no kind of medical or outside assistance, nature pretty much dictates that the woman has to be under a certain age. When you get into adoption or surrogacy, that's a whole different ball game. I still think the parties involved should make a responsible decision and consider the longterm wellfare of the child rather than act merely for the gratification of their own desires. Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:40:27 -0500 From: "Richard Flynn" Subject: RE: Stills (NJC) But who's to say that they're being selfish? My father-in-law (the father to my late wife) had a second family--he's 74 now, and one of the younger children is a teacher and one is in law school. Was it mere selfishness that dictated the start of a second family with his second wife who is only a few years older than my late wife would be had she not died in 2000? When parents divorce is it mere selfishness? Is it selfish to raise a child as an unmarried single parent? I fail to see that the prospect of mortality makes it selfish to have a child. Certainly people do have children for selfish reasons, but how can you be so confident that Stills is being selfish, or acting merely for the gratification of his own desires? That's pretty presumptuous, isn't it? - -----Original Message----- From: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com] On Behalf Of Mark or Travis Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 1:19 PM To: Richard Flynn; 'Randy Remote'; joni@smoe.org Subject: Re: Stills (NJC) Richard Flynn wrote: > When people discuss Stills's decision to become a father late in life > as if it is tantamount to child abuse--as some have on the list--I > think that's celebrity-bashing crap--and it's sexist crap to boot. > Implicit--and even somewhat explicit--in the criticisms was the idea > that Steve had no business taking up with a woman still in her > childbearing years in the first place, and that he ought to find > someone his own age. I think I made it clear in my previous post, but just for the record and since you brought this up I want to state that neither Still's celebrity nor his gender has anything to do with my personal opinion on this subject. Age difference between two consenting adults has nothing to do with it either. If two people can find happiness in a genuine, lasting love for one another then any difference in their ages is irrelevant. But in the case where two people are bringing children into the world in the traditional, natural way with no kind of medical or outside assistance, nature pretty much dictates that the woman has to be under a certain age. When you get into adoption or surrogacy, that's a whole different ball game. I still think the parties involved should make a responsible decision and consider the longterm wellfare of the child rather than act merely for the gratification of their own desires. Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:17:35 -0500 From: Justalittlebreen@aol.com Subject: Whoops, to put it mildly (prob already been reported) and other ramblings Hi gang -- Unless I got a very unusual copy -- I may know later today, when I check my mailbox -- the blurb for Miles Davis on the Joni artists' pick album is very intriguing indeed: "With their innovative fusion of country and gospel, the Louvin Brothers rose to become perhaps the most influential duo in the history of country music. Ira's high tenor and Charly's low baritone thrilled audiences and inspired legions of musicans. Patterning their harmonies after their idols, the Delmore Brothers and Blue Sky Boys, the Louvins brought salvation-minded passion and rock 'n' roll energy to every song they sang." This is either an intriguing attempt at dada by Starbucks, or someone should be looking for work at their nearby Moonbucks Tea Monopoly Emporium, no? Other odds and ends: I was "watching" Comcasts' "Music Choice" (their "adult alternative" is pretty good, but they don't play enough of a certain flaxen-haired Canadian's work, if you catch my drift) when Elvis C's "Watching the Detectives" came on, and in the "random facts about the artists" box came the following: "Elvis Costello's influences have included Miles Davis and Debussey." Does this ring a bell with anyone? The guy who wrote the EC/JM Torch Tradition book (sorry, can't locate it at the moment) would be pleased. Anyone else a fan of the Cartoon Channel's Night Swim? Robert's totally addicted, and I watch some of their better entries. Certainly gives very disturbed individuals (some of whom may recently have lost jobs at Earthbuck's Total World Cornering of the Marker in Water) a place to express themselves. Take "Aqua Teen Hunger Force", which could best be described as Hip-Hop Dada. A meatball (the naif), a shake (a morally bankrupt character), and a fries (the moral center, who tries to control events spinning out of control) live nextdoor to an overweight man with hairy shoulders in a deteriorating urban neighborhood. Hilarity ensues. Anyway, during the commercial breaks, they air random thoughts of the programmers and techs at CN, including this one, which is probably a leftover from The World War I Best Intellectual Jokebook, but it amused Robert and me: "What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Speaking of twisted tooners, Parker and Stone of South Park still have the ability to shock -- the opening salvo of the ninth season started with what certainly looked like real footage of a certain kind of surgery. That's all I'm going to say, since some of you may haven't seen the episode yet. Those with weak stomachs should abstain, as should anyone under the age of 40. Anybody know anything about Jack Johnson, the musical guest on SNL tonight? (And what's his *real* name? Something like Oddmund Kaarevik, I bet -- Hi, Oddmund!) I don't care if he can sing, I'd buy his CDs just to look at the covers -- yowsa!!! -- but better still if he's like, say, Duncan Sheik, a dreamboat with musical talent. I've got to get used to the fact that I have a Mac that doesn't pee itself when I ask it to do something, and (swoon) D...S...L, and get used to googling people, places and things before I bother you good people, but I still appreciate your input. Hugs all around, and a cup of Universebuck's We're the Only Brand of Oxygen's "Morning Gasp, hold the nitrogen" to everyone! Walt ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 11:45:23 -0800 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Stills (NJC) Richard Flynn wrote: > But who's to say that they're being selfish? My father-in-law (the > father to my late wife) had a second family--he's 74 now, and one of > the younger children is a teacher and one is in law school. If the youngest children are old enough to have completed the education necessary to enter those professions then it sounds like your father-in-law was at least 10 years younger when he started his second family than Stephen Stills is now. But I don't want to get into the splitting of hairs. I certainly don't want to arbitrarily pick an age limit for human beings to conceive children. As I said before, you can always find exceptions to every rule. But that doesn't change my opinion that odds and probabilities should be taken into consideration and I think age and health are factors that should be considered when people decide about bringing children into the world. I also happen to believe that there are some people who should not have children. Not because or any considerations of physical health, defects, class, gender, sexual orientation, race or whatever but simply because some people just aren't cut out to be parents. Unfortunately that doesn't stop a lot of people from having children anyway. When parents divorce is it mere > selfishness? Is it selfish to raise a child as an unmarried single > parent? I don's see that divorce or single parenthood is relevant to this discussion. Not discounting the devastating emotional and psychological ramifications that divorce can have on children, it is not the same as the death of a parent. And as far as single parenthood is concerned, if I am interpreting that term correctly in your context here, one parent is never in the picture to begin with. Although the child will most probably feel at least some sense of being differrent from other children as a result of this, since they have only had one parent to begin with, how can they feel any loss? I fail to see that the prospect of mortality makes it > selfish to have a child. Certainly people do have children for > selfish reasons, but how can you be so confident that Stills is being > selfish, or acting merely for the gratification of his own desires? > That's pretty presumptuous, isn't it? Yes I suppose it is being presumptuous. But quite honestly I can't see any other motivation in this case. Maybe it all boils down to the question of why anybody decides to have children in the first place. Is it always a selfish choice? Is it based solely or partly on the primal urge to procreate and thus guarantee the continued survival of the species? Who knows? But I still maintain that as humans we have reached a point in our development where we should be able to set aside our emotional and primal responses and consider the long term wellfare of the lives we may or not bring into being and make a responsible choice. Sort of on the same subject but not really, has anybody read or seen Eugene O'Neill's play 'Strange Interlude'? I just finished reading it last night. Strange play! Mark E. in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:15:02 -0500 (EST) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: Stills (NJC) Well, I don't have a lot of faith in the human race, so I'm going with primal urge. All the other rationalizations we use are just illusions. When it all comes down to it, we're animals. We like to think we're using logic and rational thought to make big decisions in life, but I'm convinced that we act emotionally most of the time and just talk ourselves into believing it's something higher than that. Those that consider the long-term welfare of future generations are, unfortunately, few and far between. Spoken like a cynic, maybe, but that's my view of reality. Mark or Travis wrote: Maybe it all boils down to the question of why anybody decides to have children in the first place. Is it always a selfish choice? Is it based solely or partly on the primal urge to procreate and thus guarantee the continued survival of the species? Who knows? But I still maintain that as humans we have reached a point in our development where we should be able to set aside our emotional and primal responses and consider the long term wellfare of the lives we may or not bring into being and make a responsible choice. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 12:33:47 -0800 (PST) From: Smurf Subject: Re: Stills -- now with Joni content -- teeth & "Little Green" For me, the issue isn't whether or not Stills is selfish for bringing a baby into the world now that he's past 6o -- it's whether or not he's nuts. - --Smurf, with a Jonifest Giveaway DVD on in the background that has a segment from 1967 when Joni had her original teeth. She had a real purdy mouth! Now I just stopped to watch her perform "Little Green" (in 1967?) and she looks so heartbroken in parts, that I can't believe so many fans -- me included -- were clueless about the fact that "LG" was about Joni having given up a baby girl for adoption. God, now Johnny Cash is introducing the sweet young thing. Sigh. So many things I would have done, indeed ... __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:05:44 -0500 From: jrmco1@aol.com Subject: Re: Ruth Brown njc Yes, I think the fog is lifting now and I do recall her doing a spirited "Mama...," Bob. She didn't reprise "Gloomy Sunday" this time, David. Maybe she'll do it tonight in the last 2 of her 6 shows (2 nightly) at Yoshi's. I should go back, huh? That Willie Nelson song she jazzed was "(You Were) Always On My Mind." Nicely, nicely... And speaking of johnsons, I forgot to tell you all how funny this lady is in concert. (I heard she had a big comedic role in the movie "Hairspray.) She started telling a story about how she owned a second-hand furniture store and how cheap fellas would come in there trying to drive a bargain on a chair she had for sale. Then she went into song, which went something like, and this is just from memory: If I can't sell it/I'm going to sit right back down on it/But I 'sho ain't going to give it away! It's built for comfort/and wear and tear/And ain't it easy on the eye? If I caint sell it/I'm just gonna sit back down on it/but, mister, I ain't just gonna give it away! I didn't roll in the aisles laughing or anything, but I certainly let fly a few chortles. I love to hear R&B divas sing about their vaginas, don't you? People were yelling stuff from the floor like "I love you, Ruth Brown!" And she would be all: "Oh, I love you too, Lady, and lord knows I need this job." She's a gem. - -Julius >Ruth's hit "Mama, He Treats Your Daughter Mean" lives on here in SC as a commonly-played Beach Music song. >Did she happen to sing "Gloomy Sunday?" I haven't forgotten her performance of that at the Village Gate in NYC well over 30 years ago. DAVID LAHM ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2005 #112 ***************************** ------- 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)