The amazement of Gene Burns
leansto...@democrat.com
Craigslist doing rants and raves. Even more shocking, someone would be
typing a rant at 2AM.
One could only wonder what Gene would think of the Adult Gigs on
Craigslist, let alone the personals. John would have to drive him to
the ER again!
David Kaye
<leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> One could only wonder what Gene would think of the Adult Gigs on
> Craigslist, let alone the personals. John would have to drive him to
> the ER again!
I suspect that Gene Burns is more worldly than he lets on. I'm sure
he's considering that his audience expects him to have certain
opinions and a certain naivete.
Not to put Rush Limbaugh in the same bag, but his audience does not
expect him to be a drug addict, thus he never mentioned his
situation. Even after he was brought up on charges, he blamed it on
"back problems." Had he been courting a liberal audience he could
have said that he got hooked and he made a mistake, and that would
have been that.
<Kelly>
> Not to put Rush Limbaugh in the same bag, but his audience does not
> expect him to be a drug addict, thus he never mentioned his
> situation. Even after he was brought up on charges, he blamed it on
> "back problems." Had he been courting a liberal audience he could
> have said that he got hooked and he made a mistake, and that would
> have been that.
That must by why Limbaugh is (according to some) still in the closet.
David Kaye
>
> That must by why Limbaugh is (according to some) still in the closet.
Eh? Oh, I hope he's not a member. But then again, he's never talked
about a wife, girlfriend, or children. Dang! Not another one. It's
like counting cockroaches in a diner. Well, at least I was the first
to come out on the air. All those interlopers. Sheesh.
leansto...@democrat.com
I think he is thrice divorced. Of course, lots of gays are married.
The rumor of Rush being gay stems from two different guys that said
they had sex with him. Of course, there are all sorts of kooks out
there trying to make a name for themselves, so you have to take any of
those stories with a grain of salt.
When Gene says he is a luddite, I tend to believe him. Recall how he
used to peddle those windows and say "if you don't want the window,
just turn the PC off and they won't know who you are." Well, you know
as soon as you hit the website, your IP is logged. Oh, and when is it
safe to turn the PC back on??? Now he says something like "a few
clicks of the mouse and their gone."
When Gene knows something, he likes to expound on it.
JD
> On Jun 20, 11:55 am, "leanstothel...@democrat.com"
>
> <leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> > One could only wonder what Gene would think of the Adult Gigs on
> > Craigslist, let alone the personals. John would have to drive him to
> > the ER again!
>
> I suspect that Gene Burns is more worldly than he lets on. I'm sure
> he's considering that his audience expects him to have certain
> opinions and a certain naivete.
Gene has admitted that technology is not his strong suit. This was
quite clear to any tech savvy person who heard him try to explain the
corporate firewall last night.
Oh, and he could remedy this if he had the interest.
JD
JD
> used to peddle those windows and say "if you don't want the window,
> just turn the PC off and they won't know who you are." Well, you know
> as soon as you hit the website, your IP is logged. Oh, and when is it
> safe to turn the PC back on??? Now he says something like "a few
> clicks of the mouse and their gone."
Oh, don't worry, the station still peddles those windows.
The point they are trying to make in the copy is that a sales person
won't call you. Even though it's technical nitpicking, Gene modified
his "read"... Well, he doesn't actually read the regular spots, he
does them from memory.
JD
David Kaye
<leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> The rumor of Rush being gay stems from two different guys that said
> they had sex with him.
Really? When they could have chosen, say, Raymond Burr or Merv
Griffin or David Ogden Stiers, or someone at least who had some
class. What kind of cache does Rush have? Sheesh.
> Of course, there are all sorts of kooks out
> there trying to make a name for themselves, so you have to take any of
> those stories with a grain of salt.
Unfortunately, my experience has been that when rumors go around about
someone's sexual dalliances, the rumors are usually right.
> just turn the PC off and they won't know who you are." Well, you know
> as soon as you hit the website, your IP is logged.
While my IP is logged, it is an IP shared by 11 computers in two
households.
David Kaye
> Gene has admitted that technology is not his strong suit. This was
> quite clear to any tech savvy person who heard him try to explain the
> corporate firewall last night.
I'm thinking in terms of the content not the technology. This is the
Bay Area after all. I'm sure he's aware that anything that can be
bought and sold *is* bought and sold somewhere in the Bay Area, from
sex to nuclear secrets. This ain't Boston.
JD
He wasn't talking about craigslist in general. He was surprised that
people use craiglist to rant using vulgar language. He barely uses the
Internet (for email and the occasional web search).
JD
Craf...@aol.com
Rush has been married three times. He is a serial monogamist.
leansto...@democrat.com
Well, news to me.
http://gayfortoday.blogspot.com/2007/05/raymond-burr.html
I see you can buy the whole series on DVD, but I can't see myself
finding the time to watch 48 DVDs.
http://www.dvdavenue.tv/movie/mystery/Perry_Mason.html
David Kaye
<leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> > While my IP is logged, it is an IP shared by 11 computers in two
> > households.
>
> Well, news to me
News that I use a shared IP or that Raymond Burr was gay? As to the
"intensely private" thing, he wasn't intensely private to people who
had met him or been to his parties. (No, they weren't orgies, just
dinner parties.) He was "intensely private" to a prying gossip mill.
It stands to reason, given that he had the debonaire rold of Perry
Mason and it's likely the countless women swooned over him every week
on TV.
I remember when Matthew Broderick kissed a guy in the movie "Torch
Song Trilogy". The girls who had gone to the movie because he was in
it were appalled. They kept screaming, "Don't kiss him, Matthew!
Don't kiss him!" Upon leaving I overheard one girl saying that she'd
never go see another Matthew Broderick movie again.
There's something to be said about keeping the illusion of being
straight alive in order to cash in on the audience crush factor.
<Kelly>
I don't think that's so much an issue anymore since being gay has
become somewhat chic. Brokeback Mountain didn't change the
heterosexual appeal of Jake Gylenhall or the late Heath Ledger, and
even before that, the biggies of Hollywood were clamoring to get a
spot playing gay or lesbian on TV shows like Will and Grace and ER.
Now, on the opposite side of the coin, I have a hard time taking those
that I know to be gay playing obviously straight roles complete with
movie sex...
leansto...@democrat.com
News regarding Raymond Burr. [I've set up a few routers.] I wonder if
Ironside was the first TV show to star a working disabled person?
David Kaye
> Now, on the opposite side of the coin, I have a hard time taking those
> that I know to be gay playing obviously straight roles complete with
> movie sex...
There's a term for that. It's called "acting". People have always
played roles outside their personal lives.
<Kelly>
> There's a term for that. It's called "acting". People have always
> played roles outside their personal lives.
Being a character actor myself, I understand what acting is, David. I
also still have a hard time with watching those I know are gay playing
it straight.
Unless the actor is superb at their craft and able to do more than act
(e.g., transporting you away from who they really are to what they are
portraying), I still find it hard to see someone I know is gay play it
straight (pun intended). The same goes for when I watch a Brit doing
an American dialect (unless it's a southern American accent - that
they tend to be able to pull of pretty accurately and consistently).
There are specific dialectic tells that are audibly detectible when a
Brit (including Aussies, Scots, and the Irish) plays an American.
When I act, I am pretty good at dialects (American and foreign), but
not so good yet that I don't slip on occasion and someone quite
familiar with that dialect wouldn't notice the flaw. In the same
vein, when I watch a gay or lesbian actor doing a straight role, there
are still the noticable tells that give them away.
Totally off-topic, I know...
Ciccio
> On Jun 22, 2:14 pm, David Kaye <sfdavidka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The same goes for when I watch a Brit doing
> an American dialect (unless it's a southern American accent - that
> they tend to be able to pull of pretty accurately and consistently).
> There are specific dialectic tells that are audibly detectible when a
> Brit (including Aussies, Scots, and the Irish) plays an American.
Mark Addy does an incredible job at that.
Ciccio
David Kaye
> Being a character actor myself, I understand what acting is, David. I
> also still have a hard time with watching those I know are gay playing
> it straight.
Having been an actor myself (very forgettable little theatre stuff) I
have no problem with gay actors playing straight roles, or someone of
German background playing Lebanese (Hans Conreid on the Danny Thomas
Show), or a Jew playing an Italian, etc.
> Unless the actor is superb at their craft and able to do more than act
> (e.g., transporting you away from who they really are to what they are
> portraying), I still find it hard to see someone I know is gay play it
> straight (pun intended).
Perhaps you've never heard of bisexuality? The Kinsey scale is a
continuum from 0 to 6 -- the numbers 2 through 5 are various degrees
of bisexuality. There are a lot of bi people out there, but for one
reason or another they choose to call themselves either straight or
gay, probably because America seems to be a binary culture,
recognizing only yes or no, on or off, us or them.
> The same goes for when I watch a Brit doing
> an American dialect
But you have no problem with Valerie Harper, a Portlander, doing a New
York Jewish accent? You do know that her normal speech was nothing at
all like her Rhoda character on "Mary Tyler Moore" don't you?
David Kaye
Watch your quotes. I did not write the part you quoted above.
<Kelly>
> Having been an actor myself (very forgettable little theatre stuff) I
> have no problem with gay actors playing straight roles, or someone of
> German background playing Lebanese (Hans Conreid on the Danny Thomas
> Show), or a Jew playing an Italian, etc.
When did I ever say I "had a problem with gay actors playing straight
roles"? I don't have a general problem with it, I just *personally*
have a more difficult time believing them if I know they are gay. And
FYI - that's one of the reasons why a number of gay actors have stayed
in the closet and continue to do so even today.
> Perhaps you've never heard of bisexuality? The Kinsey scale is a
> continuum from 0 to 6 -- the numbers 2 through 5 are various degrees
> of bisexuality. There are a lot of bi people out there, but for one
> reason or another they choose to call themselves either straight or
> gay, probably because America seems to be a binary culture,
> recognizing only yes or no, on or off, us or them.
Not all of gaydom buys into bisexuality, you know. There are plenty
who believe that bisexuality is a product of a few things - an
insatiable or non-discriminating sexual appetite for one, being a
victim of molestation as a child for another - just to name a couple.
> But you have no problem with Valerie Harper, a Portlander, doing a New
> York Jewish accent?
Nope. Just like I don't have a problem with doing four different
accents in a show I'm currently in, David. Making it believeable is
what it's all about. If you can't do it - either work on it or forget
it. But honestly, I don't see what there is to argue about here
(which what I sense you are now doing) - some people have a more
discriminating ear and/or eye, and some don't. Some people are just a
little more picky. I probably fall into all three categories.
> You do know that her normal speech was nothing at
> all like her Rhoda character on "Mary Tyler Moore" don't you?
Yep - so what? She pulled it off superbly.
And BTW - did you get my email?
Ciccio
> On Jun 22, 4:03 pm, David Kaye <sfdavidka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > But you have no problem with Valerie Harper, a Portlander, doing a New
> > York Jewish accent?
> > You do know that her normal speech was nothing at
> > all like her Rhoda character on "Mary Tyler Moore" don't you?
> Yep - so what? She pulled it off superbly.
Also, she was convincing as a Latina in Freebie and The Bean.
Ciccio
<Kelly>
Geez, I haven't thought about that movie for years. Decades maybe.
Valerie Harper is a good actress - too bad she got roped into doing
that stupid family sitcom with Jason Bateman.
David Kaye
> Not all of gaydom buys into bisexuality, you know.
Much of gaydom says "YECCCHHHH!" when even thinking about touching a
woman. Many, if not most gay men I've known have very purile sexual
development, I'm sorry to say.
> There are plenty
> who believe that bisexuality is a product of a few things - an
> insatiable or non-discriminating sexual appetite for one, being a
> victim of molestation as a child for another - just to name a couple.
There are plenty of people who are stupid and prejudiced. Having once
thought of myself as 100% gay and then 10 years ago realizing I was
attracted to women somewhat, I can personally refute every point above
-- excessive sexual appetite, molestation, etc. Being a member of a
bi community I can say that there are many others whose pasts are
similar to mine. Some even caused them to realize that they are
attracted to people who aren't the sex they though they were
exclusively attracted to.
I still contend that much of this straight-or-gay dichotomoy is based
on the American societal overlay that everything in our lives must be
either/or. It does seem to be a big American thing. People in other
countries don't seem to have as many problems with this and can more
easily accept middle grounds.
>
> And BTW - did you get my email?
Yes. Thank you.
Eric C. Weaver
<leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> News regarding Raymond Burr. [I've set up a few routers.] I wonder if
> Ironside was the first TV show to star a working disabled person?
IIRC, Burr was not chairbound. I read an article about him walking on
to the set and sitting down in the wheelchair...
leansto...@democrat.com
I didn't mean Burr in real life was in a wheel-chair, but rather the
character he portrayed. I always assumed Burr was able-bodied, but now
you have me wondering?
c319...@aol.com
I read somewhere that in a post-Ironside remake of Perry Mason, Burr
actually was chairbound but it is never shown on film. He was always
shown sitting or leaning on something, but never standing or walking.
BayAreaB...@gmail.com
>
> Now, on the opposite side of the coin, I have a hard time taking those
> that I know to be gay playing obviously straight roles complete with
> movie sex...
Unless they come out, you don't know anything.
And there are no leading male movie stars that have come out...
BayAreaB...@gmail.com
According to Savage, Gene's real passion is in wining and dining and
he only feigns interest in politics.
<Kelly>
> Unless they come out, you don't know anything.
Oh? And you know what I know because you think you know what,
exactly?
> And there are no leading male movie stars that have come out...
Gee, were we talking only about men? Hmmm...well, I guess you are.
Now the question is "why"?
<Kelly>
<spits beverage I was drinking all over the keyboard>
LOL! And because Savage said it, it must be true?
<wiping off keyboard, shaking head and chuckling>
BayAreaB...@gmail.com
>I have a hard time taking those
> that I know to be gay playing obviously straight roles complete with
> movie sex...
Don't be obtuse. Which "gay" movie stars in a straight sex scene do
you have difficulty watching?
BayAreaB...@gmail.com
I've listened to Gene for years and he does a great job talking
politics, but I wouldn't be surprised if food and wine were his
favorite topic.
Savage started out on KGO and knows Gene.
<Kelly>
> I've listened to Gene for years and he does a great job talking
> politics, but I wouldn't be surprised if food and wine were his
> favorite topic.
I wouldn't be, either. But that wasn't the crux of what you claimed
Savage said.
> Savage started out on KGO and knows Gene.
Savage is a one-trick pony with a penchant for jealousy and envy - he
loves to run his mouth in order to make others look bad and himself
look important. I don't trust anything he says - especially about
others in radio and/or tv.
David Kaye
> Gee, were we talking only about men? Hmmm...well, I guess you are.
> Now the question is "why"?
Probably because nobody said "lesbian". The term "gay" is now assumed
to mean male only.
David Kaye
> IIRC, Burr was not chairbound. I read an article about him walking on
> to the set and sitting down in the wheelchair...
In an old Dean Martin TV show (I forget the premise for the joke) he
shows an expression of shock on his face and gets up from the
wheelchair and runs away.
He was clearly not chairbound.
Hawkeye Joe Scott
> He was clearly not chairbound.
No, but tv lore notes that Raymond had bad legs. In fact, an entire
season of Perry Mason had guests stars for most of the hour, with a
short bit w/ RB on a hospital bed.
As far as his personal life, what's the big deal???
Patty Winter
In article <ecfdb0ec-0cd5-4b72...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
That may be the ideal situation, with a different word for
women, but as with many other words, the male descriptor is
often used to include women, too. I suspect we could even
go back in ba.broadcast and find places where you have used
the term more generally.
Patty
<Kelly>
> That may be the ideal situation, with a different word for
> women, but as with many other words, the male descriptor is
> often used to include women, too.
Even apart from the world of gaydom, the term "mankind" or just "man"
was meant to be inclusive of women, and men found that to be fine
while the more feminist-minded wanted to have a separate identifier.
Now, amongst gay men (I assume it's gay men), when the word "gay" is
used, they take umbrage to it being inclusive of women and prefer a
separate identifier.
Can't we all just get along and make up our minds? ;-)
news...@fuzzyfaraway.com
because of his legs.
JT
--
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
John Higdon
<bc048825-f3b8-4a34...@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
BayAreaB...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've listened to Gene for years and he does a great job talking
> politics, but I wouldn't be surprised if food and wine were his
> favorite topic.
The key is "he does a great job talking politics". That's what counts
if that's the topic of discussion, is it not?
--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400
John Higdon
<b59fb3a7-ea63-4c86...@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
BayAreaB...@gmail.com wrote:
> Unless they come out, you don't know anything.
> And there are no leading male movie stars that have come out...
Sir Ian McKellen isn't exactly an unknown hack. All-inclusive statements
should be used very carefully.
David Kaye
> I suspect we could even
> go back in ba.broadcast and find places where you have used
> the term more generally.
Yeah, but I'm old school and use the term "gay" as all-inclusive. Not
many people do this anymore.
David Kaye
> Now, amongst gay men (I assume it's gay men), when the word "gay" is
> used, they take umbrage to it being inclusive of women and prefer a
> separate identifier.
Actually, I remember when the term "gay" was separated off to include
only men. I was a member of the Daughters of Bilitis (yes I was) in
SF, and there was a big controversy over use of the word. So, this
goes back to the 70s. The DOB started sending out letters
"correcting" people such as reporters and TV anchors to use the term
"gay men and lesbians".
Of course, the DOB always had their bizarre controversies, such as
when it was revealed that their leader, Beth-somebody, was actually an
MTF that few people knew about. But that's another bag o'worms....
Anyhow, I can say that it wasn't men who decided to separate out the
terms. It was women.
<Kelly>
> Actually, I remember when the term "gay" was separated off to include
> only men. I was a member of the Daughters of Bilitis (yes I was) in
> SF, and there was a big controversy over use of the word. So, this
> goes back to the 70s. The DOB started sending out letters
> "correcting" people such as reporters and TV anchors to use the term
> "gay men and lesbians".
>
> Of course, the DOB always had their bizarre controversies, such as
> when it was revealed that their leader, Beth-somebody, was actually an
> MTF that few people knew about. But that's another bag o'worms....
>
> Anyhow, I can say that it wasn't men who decided to separate out the
> terms. It was women.
Okey doke. And thinking it about it, I'm not surprised that it was
the women who decided to make a distinction.
JD
> he only feigns interest in politics.
This is hilarious. Anyone who knows Gene is familiar with his
intellectual curiosity. Gene couldn't fake an interest in politics,
just like he doesn't fake an interest in computer technology (he's not
all that interested). His intellectual curiosity in the realm of
politics and his passion for food/wine coupled with his command of the
English language are what make him successful on the radio. He doesn't
have to spew hate in order to get ratings. As someone who talks to
Gene for hours every weekday I can authoritatively express that your
source is clueless. If you want to evaluate your source, talk to ANY
of his former board ops. Seriously.
JD
David Kaye
>
> As far as his personal life, what's the big deal???
My point was that there are plenty of celebrities someone could have
claimed to do the nasty with with a lot better stature than Rush
Limbaugh, and their stories would have been more credible, given that
the the stars I mentioned were well-known to be gay. Rush is not.
Stan de SD
> On Jun 20, 11:55 am, "leanstothel...@democrat.com"
>
> <leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> > One could only wonder what Gene would think of the Adult Gigs on
> > Craigslist, let alone the personals. John would have to drive him to
> > the ER again!
>
> I suspect that Gene Burns is more worldly than he lets on. I'm sure
> he's considering that his audience expects him to have certain
> opinions and a certain naivete.
>
> expect him to be a drug addict, thus he never mentioned his
> situation. Even after he was brought up on charges, he blamed it on
> "back problems." Had he been courting a liberal audience he could
> have said that he got hooked and he made a mistake, and that would
> have been that.
Actually, he said exactly that, and his audience for the most part
understood. It was the foaming-at-the-mouth lefty crowd that wanted
his head....
As much as you obsess about all those nefarious right-wing talk show
hosts, you should try to get your information first-hand.
Stan de SD
> On Jun 20, 3:41 pm, "<Kelly>" <316k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > That must by why Limbaugh is (according to some) still in the closet.
>
> Eh? Oh, I hope he's not a member. But then again, he's never talked
> about a wife,
He has mentioned his ex-wives on occasion. Geez, if you don't like the
guy, fine, but don't sit there and mention stuff that's patently
false. It only shows your ignorance...
Stan de SD
> On Jun 20, 9:07 pm, "leanstothel...@democrat.com"
>
> <leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> > The rumor of Rush being gay stems from two different guys that said
> > they had sex with him.
>
> Really? When they could have chosen, say, Raymond Burr or Merv
> Griffin or David Ogden Stiers, or someone at least who had some
> class. What kind of cache does Rush have? Sheesh.
>
> > Of course, there are all sorts of kooks out
> > there trying to make a name for themselves, so you have to take any of
> > those stories with a grain of salt.
>
> Unfortunately, my experience has been that when rumors go around about
> someone's sexual dalliances, the rumors are usually right.
Uh, did Mr. "I'm not gay, you homophobe!" jsut put his foot in his
mouth or what? ROFL!
David Kaye
> As much as you obsess about all those nefarious right-wing talk show
> hosts, you should try to get your information first-hand.
Obsess? I hardly mention them at all, and oddly enough I've given
props to both Rush and Michael Savage for putting on entertaining
shows.
Stratum
> This is hilarious. Anyone who knows Gene is familiar with his
> intellectual curiosity.
To me, Terry Gross's interview with Seymour Hersch yesterday
was interesting enough to listen to twice. Last week Sedge
Thompson had Salman Rushdie on.
Your intellectually curious guy would not make even an
average interviewer on public radio. And what investigative
story has he broken? There could be hantavirus from
rat droppings in a Sonoma B&B and your guy would
miss the story entirely.
Of course I don't know that Terry Gross is all that good with
interlocking paving systems either, which I assume your
guy is. I don't listen to him.