Re:Artificial Hippies (and what causes them); Lyrics which make sense; Progressive Who

["L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>]

>The US was less oppressive in the `60's than it is now. Thanks to Ronald 
>Reagan's so-called "drug war," a LOT of civil rights were disposed of. It 
>became legal for the government to sieze your property,

I'm getting worried about the property siezure thing.  I couldn't believe 
the court system let them get away with it in the first place, and now the 
trend is spreading.  Anybody notice that pharmacist that got caught diluting 
cancer drugs?  He worked at one store in a company, and they're talking 
about siezing the company assets.  I'm not clear as to whether he's an 
employee, a stockholder or an owner.  Did anybody else catch it?  What's the 
deal?


> > 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.

But many did go to work, because the trend was already to evaluate women 
based on their career goals, rather than their mothering abilities.  
Actually, many of the pre-Boomer moms went to work, too.  Once they'd worked 
in the factories during the war, it was hard to get them out.


>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...

Immigrants have always been a large part of the US economy, and have filled 
the lower end jobs that were too menial for more affluent workers.  The 
Irish did it, and the Italians, etc.


>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.

That wasn't me, but I will comment.  I do think The Beatles played it safe 
to a point by staying on the pop side of rock, but they also took very 
creative risks once they had the security of initial success.  I agree that 
it's good music, but for some reason I've never been much interested in it.


>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.

Do you think TOMMY is a straight narrative?  Some of the songs follow from 
the timeline, but others seem to only make particular points and could be 
switched around without much affecting the flow.


keets

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp