T&N & the Free World & Who's the most British & Natural & Bad Judgement

L. Bird pkeets at hotmail.com
Thu Jul 8 10:39:21 CDT 2004

>>I wonder if they'll be on the new album when it finally comes out?  From 
>>the comments we've heard about the songs being "rushed", I'd wager no.

>I'm told they will be, and something's going to be done to them. I don't if 
>that means overdubs or
remixing or what.

I'm expecting that RGLB, at least, will be on the new album, as it seems to 
follow the announced theme of The Boy Who Heard Music.  ORW I'm not so sure 
of.  I believe Roger has mentioned that he considers the songs to be "works 
in progress."

>>That's exactly the sort of thing I hate about party politics, but what are 
>>you going to do?

>I know how you feel, Kerry's not my choice. But considering the alternative 
>there's really no choice
if we're going to save what's left of the ideals this country was built 
upon, and before we continue the path which led to the Soviets to ruin: 
overextending the troops and going deeply into debt.

I know I've mentioned here before that the Bush boys are all crooks, but let 
me elaborate a little.  They're members of what economicst Thorstein Veblen 
called the "leisure class," a socio-political group that feels one should 
"capture" wealth and not (crassly) work for it.  In other words, their main 
purpose is not the welfare of the US or of democracy, or even the free 
world.  Their main purpose is to channel taxpayer money (and Iraqi oil 
money, if possible) into the pockets of others of their class.  This is a 
groups without real national affiliation, as they will move to another 
country if the setting here becomes an unsatisfactory place to do business.  
The result of this as a national policy is that the rich get richer and the 
poor get poorer, and we're seeing that same aristocracy at work that the 
French and Russian revolutions brought down (a natural result of the rich 
get richer thing).

Clinton mentioned in his book interviews last week (followed by news 
articles on same) that Democrats are not supposted to be able to win in the 
US: The Republican party has tried to stack the deck in their favor.  It was 
a I'm glad to see a certain backlash against this type of corruption in 
business.  Lay was indited this week for presiding over the Enron scandal, 
but there seems to be little awareness that the same piracy is going on in 

>>"But he'll have to work very, very hard to convince me that a man with a  
>>camera is going to change the world more effectively than a man with a 
>>guitar. "
>Pete is a fucking genius...

>But not in this case. A picture is worth a thousand guitar riffs. I say 
>this as someone who participated when both were used to help end the Viet 
>Nam war.

Music was part of a larger social change in those days, and notice that 
Moore was still eagar to find the right music to support his credo.  I agree 
that Pete's individual music does not have that much influence now, and 
never equaled Bob Dylan's.  However, once we have a long term historical 
view, I think The Who will have had more influence on society and culture 
than Moore's movies.  F911 may turn out to be a biggie, though.  Regardless 
of inaccuracies, I think it will sway many people emotionally.

>>Naturally Republicans are going to counter it in some way, and attacking 
>>Moore's credibility is
one way to do that.

>Naturally, because they can't deny the facts brought out by the film. 
>Naturally because that's just how they operate.

As I said, democratic values are not their thing.  Self-interest is.

>>Have you got huge sub-woofers that would affect the
bass sound?

>My stereo doesn't have a sub. It doesn't need one.

So likely you got a good play out of the cd.

>>Besides the bass, what do you think about the balance of the music vs. 

>I think it was fine.

I haven't seen this cd in local store bins, so I may have to try ordering it 
again.  Maybe the iTunes audio files aren't a good representation.

>>Any other nits to pick?

>Already done, when the songs came out.

Do you mind briefly running down your opinion again?

>>But - I didn't want Saddam Hussein's regime to continue either - for the 
>>very same reasons.

>A missle would have done the trick. Invading the country meant dealing with 
>the aftermath, and it was obvious to many of us how that would turn 
>out...justas it has. You don't fight individuals by  invading countries, 
>and terrorists are individuals.

But it wouldn't have provided the money flow.  Saddam Hussein was another 
member of the leisure class, and the US aristocracy wanted what he had.  
We've gotten to see this game play out on an international level, and the 
folks pulling Bush's strings don't really care what shape it leaves Iraq in, 
or the US either.

Blair, as a leader of the Labour party, has seriously compromised his values 
to support the Bush administration.  Although I DO still think he had 
altruistic intentions, he seems to have been completely unable to influence 
the course of the plan.  I suspect that history won't treat him very well.


MSN Life Events gives you the tips and tools to handle the turning points in 
your life. http://lifeevents.msn.com

More information about the TheWho mailing list