Drug Wars, Starr Wars, & World Wars

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

> Taking the Acid Queen seriously?  Some people ate acid with no problems. 

> Of course all it takes is one bad trip...

Keets:

There are some who are unable to "lose control" and therefore cannot deal
with LSD's effect. There are (reportedly) some who REALLY do bad and
destructive things, so given that it's such a volitile drug I'd have to
"just say no" to legalization.
Townshend himself was no longer doing acid by the time TOMMY was being
written. The earlier song, Glow Girl, was inspired by the very acid-like
(but much stronger) drug STP...and the experience made Townshend decide
never to do acid again.
Or so he has said.

> If "Foxy Lady" sexist, then a bunch of Pete's stuff is too.

My point exactly. Think of how much trouble Sinatra would be in! "That's
why the lady is a tramp..." THAT'S why the lady is suing his ass!
Does this mean that the song Zelda is about pediphilia? (sp)
It is to the point where if you tell a woman she's beautiful, and she
doesn't like it, you are in trouble for harrassment. IMHO the meaning is
going to have to be legally defined, rather than up to the whim of one
involved party.

> Lying was the gentlemanly thing to do.  I actually saw a column this 
> week end where somebody was bad-mouthing him for not "protecting" the 
> women involved.  Ha.  Talk about a double standard!

Of course I was speaking from a purely self-serving (for Bill that is) POV.
He could have had more selfless reasons, but even at the most selfish it
isn't abnormal behavior...and IMHO we shouldn't throw the man out for doing
what most people would do. In fact, I think we should take a good look at
the laws in question here. If, as the GOP House managers claim, Clinton
didn't have to TELL anyone to lie but if they just "knew he wanted them to"
and he's guilty, there's something wrong with the law! In fact, to me it
seems the entire idea of "obstruction" is unrealistic and open to
definition by prosecutors. If Clinton spoke with Currie before she was on
any witness list (thereby not commiting any crime), and then it becomes a
crime when Starr finds out and puts her on the list, then there is definite
potential for abuse (which I believe occurred). It's like suddenly making
something which is legal illegal and then going back and prosecuting
everyone who has ever done it.
Is Starr attempting time travel here?

> Interesting bringing up WWII in Tommy because that war seems to me to be
in the
> background of a lot of Who songs.  "My Generation" is sort of an "up
yours" to
> the WWII generation that was chiding young Brits about their lack of
> responsibility  (see the city gent in "A Hard Day's Night" for a very
similar
> take; remember Lennon's "I'm bet you sorry you won?")

Brian:

And Townshend said, specifically about WHITE CITY, that Rock music was his
generation's "world war." The two generations began their clash there, and
it was superfically about hair, clothes, and music but in reality was about
lifestyle. That war goes on today, in the Senate.
But we will win. They won in the `60's/`70's, but as John Kay said about
this very same subject, it's time for them to: "Move over!" Hey, and before
I get too old to enjoy it!
I've never really thought of Townshend as a "champion" of the
counterculture. His most articulate song about the revolution (WGFA) was
actually anti-revolution. His countercultural hero, Jimmy in QUAD, actually
decides the lifestyle is unfulfilling and rejects it. Tommy is another
matter; he created his own lifestyle (one could say). And even then he
finds himself alone in the end, much like Jimmy.

> Sorry to rear my ugly head of corrections and contradictions, but no it's
not.

Brian McG:

Whatever you want to call it...it's illegal to conspire to bring down the
head of the US government. And that they did, by any standard you care to
name. Remember, at this point he hadn't testified to anything.

> >From what I've picked up, it seems that Tripp is the one who told both
Starr
> and the Jones people.  That is not only not a crime, but it is actually
> encouraged.

There is no evidence Tripp went to the Jones attorneys before Starr had
contact with them, which he should not have had BTW. It was a setup;
entrapment.

> Ironically one of the bigger legal problems of this whole mess is Starr
> himself.

He's certainly no genius. His actions are more than questionable. I believe
he broke the law, however since he was charged to investigate (and has the
CC to back him up) he'll never pay for his misdeeds.

> At this point I would just like to see Starr indict him, and then Clinton
> pardon himself.  It is legal, and it would just be the ultimate end to
this
> whole thing.

I'd bet you're wrong about this. It is going to continue, in one form or
another, through the 2000 election. The only correct outcome of this should
be Tripp, Goldberg, and Starr in prison and the GOP voted out.

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think you were joking around about
the
> legalistic stuff.

I am correct about the legal aspects of perjury and obstruction; Clinton
would NEVER be convicted in a real court trial. In fact, it would have been
dismissed (if even considered for prosecution, which is unlikely) because
it's mainly based on "if/then" evidence with no real basis in reality. 
I suppose I was wrong about calling what Tripp/Goldberg did Treason, but it
is still a crime for private citizens to try to oust the sitting President.
Call it what you will.
And no, I joke a lot but not this time. I'm angry about this. I've been
warning people about the Christian Coalition for years, and now I see I
underestimated the lengths they would go to. This is much like what
happened in Germany between the WW's, which resulted in TOMMY and WHITE
CITY so I suppose some good might come of it eventually.