[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

No Subject



> Okay, so this is pretty much a total loss.

No it's not!

> dads. Then the Boomer moms went out and did that same thing, so their kids
> have been abandoned by both parents.

Actually, you're leaping ahead here. The boomer Moms stayed home because
pre-Nixon the economy was good enough for one parent to work.

> Okay, here it is--the word play. A front suggests war and "dress to kill"
> suggests social backstabbing.

But "a front" also suggests someone is putting up a front instead of coming
across, as they really are...something the Disco age brought back from the
dead, and it still exists today. Nowadays you don't have to BE something if
you can make people think you're something (re: last election). BTW, the
Internet fuels this behavior.

> Come on join the party
> Dress to kill
> Dress yourself, dressed to kill.

Come on and pretend you're more important (more "eminent") than you really
are.
Really, it's all very simple...

> >What do you want? Van Halen?

Van Hagar? Van Zeppelin?

> I *will not* say anything bad about Carly Simon. Never!

Scott:

Yeah. That's MY job.

> Reagan may have started it but Clinton certainly embraced it as well.

Alan:

Publicly, but he wasn't really behind it. Nor is Bush, so far. The only real
way to fight drug use is prosperity, though...

> I'm not clear on who the "we" is and when we were ground under

Well, I meant "we" the counterculture. You may or may not have been part of
that. I was, though.

>, but it was
> Kennedy and Johnson, Democrat stalwarts both, who ramped up Vietnam into

Sorry; you're only half right. Johnson certainly did, but Kennedy had only
advisors over there and was about to withdraw all US officials when he was
killed. For that matter, the advisors were there when he became President.

> Anyone else remember, "Hey, hey LBJ, how may kids did you kill today?"

I do indeed. It's entirely possible those words came out of my mouth at that
time.

> do. Nixon, a Republican, was the one who removed our troops (admittedly by
> surrendering, but at least not tossing any more lives into the abyss).

Except he did send more lives into the abyss by not ending when he was
elected (as he promised to do) but only when he saw it as the ONLY way to
win a second term. I can't count that, and he was pro-war before he ran for
Prez in `68.

> I've said before, I realize both major parties have severe flaws. You'd be
> more credible if you weren't such a Republican basher/Democrat
cheerleader.

I'm not, although my detractors would certainly paint me so. See my
reference to Johnson above. Carter was no hero to me either. But
Micropublicans by their very agenda earn my contempt. Notice how they
nit-pick every detail about their rivals whereas the Dems do not do this.
Me, I feel like "sauce for the goose" as they say. We should be
investigating Cheney's connections to the oil companies and his stock
portfolio. You KNOW the GOP would if the situation was reversed!

> Just read an article today claiming quite the contrary: posted it at
> http://www.nur.utexas.edu/eco-surprise.htm for (all) your edification.

Thanks; there are those who claim "we still don't know the cause of global
warming" but I've known for 20 years or more so basically I have to
disregard such self-serving articles. I've read where people actually said
internal combustion engines are GOOD for the environment...then again,
cigarette manufacturers claimed the same about cigarettes at one point.

> Not sure what you mean by this. Any place that has running water is pretty
> much out of the "third world" category.

I mean that as the number of uneducated low income people grows (as it is),
the more resources will be taken away from those who truly belong in this
country. Already we're paying a large majority of their medical bills, and
in a time when education needs more money per student they are contributing
nothing...demanding we teach their kids in another language...

> And "the elite" is so nebulous as to be content-free.

Not really. It's those who have set themselves beyond worrying about dealing
with the lower levels of society except as employees (not understanding its
in their best interests to have educated employees), who prefer uneducated
workers as they demand less and are grateful for what they get, who
essentially care nothing for anyone but themselves.

> There's no inherent dichotomy between making a lot of money and doing what
> one knows is right.

Although one can easily see almost all who have succeeded have done so at
the expense of others. And BTW this includes all political parties, all
religions, all races, all creeds.

> Sorry, I just don't get it if you hear these as similar.

Well, to take up this argument. These are certainly similar:

> And I Love Her
> Yesterday

And these:

> I Want to Hold Your Hand
> She Loves You

> Paperback Writer
> Eight Days a Week

> Tomorrow Never Knows
> She's So Heavy

Not to mention:

> Helter Skelter
> She's So Heavy

> Crap? Strikes me as evocative impressionistic poetry capturing
> frustration, alienation, spirituality, and quite risky for the time with
> the dissonances.

I agree with you here (sorry Keets), and also disagree that the White Album
was the risk-taking album. Hardly. Sgt. Peppers, on the other
hand...although one could certainly argue that nothing the Beatles did
constituted a risk at that time.

> I think The Who is progressive, among many other things, as well (of
> course). It's the "other things" that confuse the prog fans.

Keets:

I would say it's because they weren't progressive in the traditional sense,
incorporating classical or jazz.

> Do you think "Baba O'Riley" is a carefully constructed song? Did Pete
> spend several weeks developing the concept and the lyrics? Has he
> carefully chosen each word for meaning or weight or color?

I'd say Yes. I think you have to realize the song was part of a story which
is not given us completely, and the visual might have filled in the gaps you
find in the lyrics. Lifehouse (from what I gather) was never meant to be a
narrative in the way Tommy was. Quad isn't completely either, but it
certainly leans toward it more than Lifehouse. Why do you think we're still
debating the order of the songs? Events in a story tend to follow a pattern
which completes a cycle. And we can't get that out of Lifehouse because
there's a lot missing from the songs
themselves.


"I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I
believe and what I believe-I believe what I believe is right."
George "My IQ is 91" Bush

Cheers ML