Re: I tip my hat to the New (Year's) resolution

["Mark R. Leaman" <bushchoked@xxxxxxxxx>]

>Someone you know?

Scott:

Well, I fancy myself as somewhat of a critic, so...I guess that means I should have somewhat of a supermodel girlfriend. Yeah...that sounds fair...

>No evidence of global warming here in O-HIGH-O.  It's in the 20's

SEE! Our locations are not so far apart, yet I have summer weather and you have winter! A-HA! Talk about a smoking gun (as opposed to a smoking body on a supermodel)! Good thing there's no UN inspectors around here, huh?

>polar ice caps, polar bears might become extinct in about 100 years.  

Yeah, laugh it up while Vermont-sized chunks of the polar ice cap fall off (trying to get Kevin into the conversation again). We'll see who's laughing when it's Ohio-sized chunks...look, pal, I live on the coast!

>Nervous breakdown?  He didn't have one of those until '74/'75 when
he was working on the TOMMY film.

That was his 19th Nervous Breakdown (insert cool bass run). And for the record, he did have a NB during WN...or so he has said. Whether or not it was an "official" nervous breakdown or not, I cannot say. What's the legal definition of a NB?

>Al-Qaeda's Magical Mystery Tour? 

I'm starting to wonder if there IS an Al Qaeda. Or even if there ever was.

>(reaching) Kenny was scared.  He was in a new band.

Yeah, being part of Faces (a more commercially successful band at the time) wouldn't put him at ease or anything. Nah.

>Bill Syzmckstkszcky, too.

That's "Mxyztplk." And yes, I had to look it up. But that's the correct spelling.

>Chicago: Kenny outplays a drunk Pete; keeps it together.

Pete WAS drunk. Why else would he wear that stupid-looking sweater?

>Toronto: Venue too big; makes *everyone* sound wimpy.

Not on the CD bonus tracks! And wait just a durn minute here...there IS no venue too big for The Who!

>Live Aid: Sound problems; another huge venue; Kenny wears funny shirt.

SEE! The funny shirt, trying to distract everyone from his poor playing! Like Kiss, with makeup and vomiting blood and all that to distract people from noticing how complete and utter crap they were playing! (now where's that somewhat of a supermodel?)

>Only after 1971, you mean.

NO, I mean after 1975. The last tour he had it all together. In 1976, he began collapsing on stage.

>Half of those songs are crap.

They're all fine songs, better than what anyone else was putting out that year. 1982? Can you say "Duran Duran?" "Bananarama?" "BOY GEORGE," fer flip's sake!

>Two words: "Moon" "movie."  

How about Who movie instead? WHAT ABOUT JOHN? Doesn't he deserve the same consideration?

>Well, they have final say, don't they?  It's not like people are going
to start releasing stuff without their knowledge.

BUT there is likely material they have no memory or knowledge of and without hearing it, how can they decide to release it?

>You sound like a conspiracy theorist.  Perhaps people are simply
fucking up, that's all.

Hey, there's only ONE group of people that incompetent (no need to mention any particular government). It's beyond coincidence that the Who organization would fuck up that long and that much.

>How would *that* benefit anyone? 

People like to shape things they have no control over to their point of view. Take critics, for instance...


"I am for Affirmative Action"
     Trent "Clinton is a liar" Lott

                                             Cheers             ML
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now