From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #220 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Sunday, June 23 2002 Volume 02 : Number 220 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [loud-fans] More evil actions from the record companies ["Ian Runeckl] Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) [JRT456@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) ["John Sharples" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] More evil actions from the record companies Stewart says: > Same reason people pay four bucks for a gallon of milk at the > 7-11 on the corner rather than drive two blocks to the > supermarket where it costs $2.25. Never underestimate the > profit to be made from people's laziness. ...or maybe they don't have the wheels to make it to the supermarket? Perhaps this is unthinkable in the US... Anyway, enough of this whinging about CD prices - here in the UK they're the same price in pounds as you lot pay in dollars so that makes them, what, 40% more? Very impressed with The Negro Problem's Stew who I saw Thursday night supporting Television. Great stage presence, funny, sad songs about sex, drugs and gay dolls - what could be better?! Television were infuriating, could have been fantastic - Richard Lloyd playing incendiary stuff but Verlaine's noodling which pulled all the energy out of the songs, endless tuning up, no communication with the audience let the side down - he even muffed the start of Marquee Moon for gawds sake. But, picking up on an old thread started by Miles some time back, why would you pay #20 for a seat to see a legendary band then spend the whole evening walking back and forth to the bar - some folks even walked out halfway through Marquee Moon, which after the false start was terrific. Ian ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 08:38:08 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) In a message dated 6/21/02 11:00:44 PM, jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu writes of homicide bombers: << They have a colorable claim to have been robbed of their homeland. They have clearly stated goals. In short, we know what the hell they want, problematic as it is. Their actions, reprehensible as we might find them, have a stated purpose other than merely creating terror.>> As the Palestinians clearly state and celebrate, a homicide/suicide bomber's goal is to disrupt any peace process...and, of course, to kill as many Jews as possible, with civilians as preferred targets. A Palestinian bomber's intent is to cause terror and chaos, just like the WTC hijackers. At best, the Tribune and Inquirer (and others) are practicing neutral reporting reduced to moral equivalency. Personally, I prefer the responsible reporting (or "bias," if you will) of "homicide bomber" downplaying a murderer's martyrdom. And, of course, I'd have no complaints if the Inquirer and Tribune also refused to refer to the WTC hijackers as terrorists. Speaking of moral equivalency, did anyone get suckered into paying money for that Puffy AmiYumi release on Bar/None? A few ELO influences don't give corporate Japanese disco any kind of moral equivalency to a pop scene. On the other hand, at least the Japanese recently reissued Milk 'N' Cookies on CD. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 11:41:54 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) J.R.: Personally, I prefer the responsible >reporting (or "bias," if you will) of "homicide bomber" downplaying a >murderer's martyrdom. Hooooookay, J.R., but just remember, the next time you're complaining to the list about a perceived liberal bias (or any bias you object to) in the press, please be prepared to satisfactorily explain how that "bias" is not the "responsible reporting" that you praise. My sense is now that you've adopted a double-standard, a purely subjective principle, you'll find this almost impossible. JS ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 17:54:18 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) In a message dated 6/22/02 8:37:05 AM, jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu writes: << Hooooookay, J.R., but just remember, the next time you're complaining to the list about a perceived liberal bias (or any bias you object to) in the press, please be prepared to satisfactorily explain how that "bias" is not the "responsible reporting" that you praise. My sense is now that you've adopted a double-standard, a purely subjective principle, you'll find this almost impossible. >> As I recall, it was John Sharples who decided to complain to the list about a perceived bias in the media. You'll have a hard time finding an example of when I've ever broached a political topic here. If I ever do, rest assured that I'll first consider the origin and meaning of any controversial terms or perceived biases. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 21:27:54 -0700 (PDT) From: me@justanotherfuckin.com Subject: RE: [loud-fans] More evil actions from the record companies > Stewart says: > > > Same reason people pay four bucks for a gallon of milk at the > > 7-11 on the corner rather than drive two blocks to the > > supermarket where it costs $2.25. unless you're in WA, just north of seattle, where milk is half as much if you buy it at a convenience store. never figured that one out... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 01:55:41 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) >As I recall, it was John Sharples who decided to complain to the list about a >perceived bias in the media. Yes....and your point is...? > You'll have a hard time finding an example of >when I've ever broached a political topic here. What does that mean? What are you trying to say? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 23:40:44 -0700 From: "Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) >While there remains some doubt as to whether Bush actually said this, >Pedreira is well-placed to have heard it from Cardoso himself - and I'm >not sure what political purpose it would serve him to make it up. >If I were at snopes2.com, I'd give it a yellow light. That's more or less what they did. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/brazil.htm After a day or two of dyspepsia, www.snopes.com seems to be back up and running. Dig the giant dead bear, Andy "Honey, you should have seen him when he was breathing." - --Sharon Seeley, Eddie Cochran's fiancie, in response to a young music business secretary sighing over Cochran's visage, circa 1998. Seeley, who was injured in the same car wreck that killed Cochran and re-mangled Gene Vincent, co-wrote the rockabilly standard "Somethin' Else" with her beau; she also wrote "Poor Little Fool," a number one hit for Ricky Nelson. Seeley died May 18, 2002, at 62. She is buried next to Cochran in the Forest Lawn Cemetery at Cypress, California. ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #220 *******************************