How Tall *IS* Sheldon? And has anybody ever acheived the yeild of cookies stated?

[Sqwertz]

Never. Not even close. I did it scientifically this time. The
recipe was from JoC and was to yield 36 cookies when formed by
hand into 1.5" balls. I followed the recipe amounts perfectly,
substituting 3 ts baking powder for 2 ts cream of tartar and even
adding 25% more flour than was called for. And the dough was still
too wet to ball up 1.5" rounds. So I used a 1.5" disher that was
slightly heaped with cookie dough/batter. Which means each was
LESS than a 1.5" round ball since dishers are half-rounds.

36 cookies... MY ASS! I got 23.

https://i.postimg.cc/2yM8HwTw/Mystery-Cookies.jpg

Name the cookie: I have 4 syllables in my name which can be in
one or two words. My first name is not "Yankee".

-----

Next morninfg, I take out two eggs for breakfast and then decided
I needed English Muffins, too. And the cookbook is still here on
the counter... A recipe from the same book for English Moofins was
to yield 20 moofins at 3" wide and 1/2" deep before rising. I
used a 3" cutter and they were rolled 5/8" thick. I got 24 rather
than 20 (and ate breakfast 6 hours later than I originally
planned).

Why don't recipes yield what they say they do - ESPECIALLY
cookies?!?!

English "MOOfins" since I was out of butter and cooked them in
rendered 48.75% genetic wagyu beef fat instead (not that butter
isn't beef fat too, but... MOOOOOO!)

https://i.postimg.cc/NMN0XYHZ/English-Moofins-Rising.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/28L51s8X/English-Moofins.jpg

From the scraps I made garlic pepper knots and one little tittie
roll for the midget Sheldon (bottom left). Let them rise,
par-froze, basted with beef fat, and then fully frozen and bagged
for dinner rolls at a later date.

https://i.postimg.cc/RCDFVS9H/Garlic-Pepper-Knots-and-a-Tittie.jpg

The nipple of the boobie was rolled in sugar before attaching to
the breast ball. When baked, the nipple will darken more than the
rest of the roll. And the sugar that melts off the nipple will
darken slightly less, creating the areola on an otherwise white
breast. <sigh> The things I do for my arch-enemy Sheldon... who
now can't even remember the poster he always called a runt.

Now that he'll never know (or remember) I said anything, Sheldon
is 5'4" tall. Confirmed independently by 2 very unlikely
sources. One of whom formerly owned a liquor store in Greenviile
NY with a height strip on the front door and sold a lot of bulk
Crystal Palace Vodka to a very small subset of town residents who
drove old Land Cruisers and brought their own bags to unbox and
carry out 10+ liters of cheap vodka at a time.

Yes, I'm very resourceful, convincing, and conniving. And I doubt
Sheldon ever got his 1.75L bottle of Tito's that I pre-paid $40
for and with an implied wink. Finding a way to contact the [now
former] owner, and when, was much harder than making him talk. I
think he's a drunk, too.

And he hasn't gotten any taller, I'd wager another $40 on that to
break even.

Dinner was shrimp rolls (minus the lubster this time) and a pile
of roasted asparagus with Reggiano cheese topping.

https://i.postimg.cc/rsKwCbGs/Shrimp-Rolls-Asparagus.jpg

-sw

[Sqwertz]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 13:39:03 -0000 (UTC), heyjoe wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote :

>
>> 36 cookies... MY ASS! I got 23.
>>
>> https://i.postimg.cc/2yM8HwTw/Mystery-Cookies.jpg
>>
>> Name the cookie: I have 4 syllables in my name which can be in
>> one or two words. My first name is not "Yankee".
>

> <snicker>

You win a dozen cookies.

I needed cookies and flipping through the JoC, this was the first
one that I had all the ingredients to make. I never knew what
they were until now. The recipe is too wet.

-sw

[Dave Smith]

On 2023-02-28 8:39 a.m., heyjoe wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote :

>
>> 36 cookies... MY ASS! I got 23.
>>
>> https://i.postimg.cc/2yM8HwTw/Mystery-Cookies.jpg
>>
>> Name the cookie: I have 4 syllables in my name which can be in
>> one or two words. My first name is not "Yankee".
>

> <snicker>
>

Is the snicker a hint that they are snicker doodles?

I bought myself a Christmas present this year, a cookie dough scoop. I
have used it a couple times and it was great. I get the same size ball
of dough every time. I made oatmeal cookies a couple days ago and got 36
out of the batch.

[Cindy Hamilton]

I'm a little mystified why the yield of cookies matters. If you were
selling them, perhaps, but if a recipe yields slightly fewer but larger
cookies (or vice versa), I don't see a problem.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-02-28, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote :

>>> Name the cookie: I have 4 syllables in my name which can be in
>>> one or two words. My first name is not "Yankee".

> Is the snicker a hint that they are snicker doodles?

Boy, was I out in left-field! I tried to make a cookie name out of
"Steve Wertz", but that is two syllables. So I thought, "Steven Wertz"
as possibly three syllables. Then I thought, "Steven<space>Wertz" which
is kind of four syllables.
I couldn't come up with a cookie name to save my life! :-)

[Sqwertz]

I knew you would pipe up about something here.

If a recipe writer doesn't know how many cookies a recipe makes,
how I can trust any other measurements in the recipe? Are are the
rest of the measurements flippant, too? It's literally the first
measurement in most recipes, and it's patently wrong.

Yes, *I* see a problem. And YOU see a problem too. And that's me.

-sw

[Dave Smith]

There could be a number of reasons. If you are making them for a pot
luck or cookie exchange you would want a specific number. If you wad
wondering about the cost of ingredients you might want to know how many
you are getting for your money. If the recipe tells you to roll them
into a particular size ball you should get the number they tell you to
expect. If not, if some are too big or too small it is going to affect
the cooking time.

[Sqwertz]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 12:16:43 -0500, Dave Smith wrote:

> On 2023-02-28 8:39 a.m., heyjoe wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote :
>>
>>> 36 cookies... MY ASS! I got 23.
>>>
>>> https://i.postimg.cc/2yM8HwTw/Mystery-Cookies.jpg
>>>
>>> Name the cookie: I have 4 syllables in my name which can be in
>>> one or two words. My first name is not "Yankee".
>>
>> <snicker>
>>
>
> Is the snicker a hint that they are snicker doodles?

Well, it started with "My first name is not Yankee". And then we
had pretty fart smeller who figured it out from that without
giving up the actual answer.

No, they're not snicker doodles.

> I bought myself a Christmas present this year, a cookie dough scoop. I
> have used it a couple times and it was great. I get the same size ball
> of dough every time. I made oatmeal cookies a couple days ago and got 36
> out of the batch.

Impressive.

They're called dishers and come in all sorts of sizes and used for
all sorts of things. There's a uniform set of numbered sizes whcih
correspond to ounces, but I can never find where those stamps are
located so I just pick one that looks right. Except last night
where I did measure it.

Dishers as far as the eye can see...
https://www.webstaurantstore.com/2903/food-dishers.html

-sw

[Sqwertz]

How about Steven Skaaaa....WERTZ!

But don't call me Steven.

-sww

[Dave Smith]

Don't feel bad. I missed the Yankee Doodle reference. I claim being an
alien as an excuse for that.

[Michael Trew]

On 2/28/2023 2:43, Sqwertz wrote:
> Never. Not even close. I did it scientifically this time. The
> recipe was from JoC and was to yield 36 cookies when formed by
> hand into 1.5" balls. I followed the recipe amounts perfectly,
> substituting 3 ts baking powder for 2 ts cream of tartar and even
> adding 25% more flour than was called for. And the dough was still
> too wet to ball up 1.5" rounds. So I used a 1.5" disher that was
> slightly heaped with cookie dough/batter. Which means each was
> LESS than a 1.5" round ball since dishers are half-rounds.
>

> 36 cookies... I got 23.

I usually get more than the recipe states, when I make cookies. Perhaps
I'm making them small.

[Sqwertz]

You snipped "... MY ASS" from the middle of the quote!?!?!?!

This the like the 4th time (on me) you've violated the #1 rule of
Usenet: Don't Change Quotes. And you even cross-posted your last
huge edit of my post to other groups to which I do not
participate. Making it out of context.

WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU!?!?!?! What is the nature of your
malfunction? Why do you insist on doing this? I choose my words
carefully and for a reason. It's not up to you to change them.

I'll need an answer on this. OR ELSE. You fake little prick.

-sw

[Bruce]

On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 01:57:13 -0600, Sqwertz <sqwe...@gmail.invalid>
wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 00:30:07 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:
>
>> On 2/28/2023 2:43, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> Never. Not even close. I did it scientifically this time. The
>>> recipe was from JoC and was to yield 36 cookies when formed by
>>> hand into 1.5" balls. I followed the recipe amounts perfectly,
>>> substituting 3 ts baking powder for 2 ts cream of tartar and even
>>> adding 25% more flour than was called for. And the dough was still
>>> too wet to ball up 1.5" rounds. So I used a 1.5" disher that was
>>> slightly heaped with cookie dough/batter. Which means each was
>>> LESS than a 1.5" round ball since dishers are half-rounds.
>>>
>>> 36 cookies... I got 23.
>>
>> I usually get more than the recipe states, when I make cookies. Perhaps
>> I'm making them small.
>
>You snipped "... MY ASS" from the middle of the quote!?!?!?!

Michael leans Presbyterian. Presbyterians don't have asses. The most
progressive ones have behinds.

[Sqwertz]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 23:36:22 -0000 (UTC), heyjoe wrote:

> but with Steve, even the obvious can be wrong.

Thank you for my new .SIG!

And honestly... it's kinda weird hearing somebody call me "Steve"
on Unenet. I'm called a lot of things, but never "Steve". I need
more processing time for this weirdness.

And yes, I'm eating snickerdoodle cookies right now. Dunked in
2% milk.

-sw

[Gary]

On 2/28/2023 5:23 PM, Leonard Blaisdell wrote:
> On 2023-02-28, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>> Sqwertz wrote :
>
>>>> Name the cookie: I have 4 syllables in my name which can be in
>>>> one or two words. My first name is not "Yankee".
>
>> Is the snicker a hint that they are snicker doodles?
>
>
> Boy, was I out in left-field! I tried to make a cookie name out of
> "Steve Wertz", but that is two syllables. So I thought, "Steven Wertz"
> as possibly three syllables. Then I thought, "Steven<space>Wertz" which
> is kind of four syllables.

4 syllables - Steve Quincy Wertz

[Dave Smith]

I got mine at Lee Valley and they call them cookie scoops.

https://www.leevalley.com/en-ca/shop/kitchen/bakeware/73524-cookie-scoops

Bon Appetit calls them cookie scoops:
https://www.bonappetit.com/story/cookie-scoop

Wilton sells cookie scoops:
https://www.wilton.com/cookie-scoop-small-stainless-steel/191007351.html

Oxo makes cookie scoops:
https://www.williams-sonoma.ca/products/oxo-cookie-scoop/

[Michael Trew]

On 3/1/2023 2:57, Sqwertz wrote:
>
> This the like the 4th time (on me) you've violated the #1 rule of
> Usenet: Don't Change Quotes. And you even cross-posted your last
> huge edit of my post to other groups to which I do not
> participate. Making it out of context.
>
> WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU!?!?!?! What is the nature of your
> malfunction? Why do you insist on doing this? I choose my words
> carefully and for a reason. It's not up to you to change them.
>
> I'll need an answer on this. OR ELSE. You fake little prick.
>
> -sw

I left everything of relevance, simply snipping out garbage, usually
vulgar, that I didn't care to quote in *my* post. It takes literal
seconds to check back to prior read posts and find your original post
for clarification. You're acting like I'm forging posts under your
name, or something. Still, I didn't alter anything to change the
*context* of what you posted.

Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.

[Hank Rogers]

That won't work. He craves attention almost as much as kuth.

[Sqwertz]

Yes, it will. Since you can't seem to control yourself. If "My
ASS!" offends you, then don't be a'comin around sniffing it.

You don't edit words out of other peoples posts on Usenet just
because they hurt your pussy, virgin ears.

Mikey Trew... an adult? MY ASS!

-sw

[f...@sdf.org]

On 2023-03-02, Michael Trew <michae...@att.net> wrote:

> Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
> simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.

i've seen you do it to a few of my posts and thought nothing of it. i
just make an effort to not use any profanity when replying directly to
you.

no big deal.

editing quotes in a reply to me to change the meaning of what i said
though, that would likely elicit some sort of negative response from me.

ymmv.

--
SDF Public Access UNIX System - https://sdf.org

That which does not kill you makes you stranger.
-- Trevor Goodchild - AEon Flux

[Bruce]

On Thu, 02 Mar 2023 16:49:40 GMT, f...@sdf.org wrote:

>On 2023-03-02, Michael Trew <michae...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
>> simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.
>
>i've seen you do it to a few of my posts and thought nothing of it. i
>just make an effort to not use any profanity when replying directly to
>you.
>
>no big deal.
>
>editing quotes in a reply to me to change the meaning of what i said
>though, that would likely elicit some sort of negative response from me.
>
>ymmv.

I thought Americans were used to censorship. Don't y'all constantly
hear beeps on TV unless you're watching Little House on the Prairie?

[%]

Bruce wrote:
> I thought Americans
>
You spend most of your time in here thinking
about how to fuck with Americans.

Too bad, so sad.

[Bruce]

But isn't it true you show all kinds of violence on TV, but one "fuck"
or one nipple on TV and y'all go catatonic?

[%]

That sort of depends on if you have pay TV, and which
channel you're watching.

Btw, a friendly suggestion:

Stop spending most of your time... in here trying to fuck
with Americans.

[%]

Sqwertz wrote:
> Mikey Trew... an adult? MY ASS!
>
> -sw
>

You're too short to reach most ass, dwarf.

[Bruce]

Only occasionally. And you're not supposed to like it. After all,
you're American! I can tell!

[%]

Nothing gets past you, Mannix.

[Sqwertz]

On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 23:20:27 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:

> Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
> simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.

And you edited the title, too!

If you owned a bookstore, would you change the titles of book and
white out passages you find "vulgar"?

You probably would. Asshole. Wipe that jizz off your face, you
god-damned prissy bible thumper.

-sw

[%]

Sqwertz wrote:
> Wipe that jizz off your face
>

> -sw
>
Little Stevie doesn't even have to kneel to get
his facial.

[Hank Rogers]

Not true. When Popeye was sent to the nursing home, The Squirtz
inherited his step stool. The stool is US navy issue from the
1950's so it will be around long after squirt has decomposed.

That stool will almost allow the squirt to stand 5 ft.

[Dave Smith]

A year or so I was reading a book I had borrowed from the local library
and someone had crossed out all the profanities. You might think that
someone who is prim and proper enough to be upset about profanity would
not be defacing library books.

[Bruce]

I once saw that too in a book I borrowed. Words like "Gee" and
"Sheesh" were crossed out. Because they're derived from "Jesus".

[f...@sdf.org]

the same peple that complain about that are the same people who watch
FauxNews talk shows to see women in short skirts and refuse to admit it.

[Gary]

On 3/3/2023 6:40 AM, f...@sdf.org wrote:
> On 2023-03-02, Bruce <Br...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 17:14:08 -0500, % <per...@yohoo.net> wrote:
>
>>> Bruce wrote:
>>>> I thought Americans
>
>>> You spend most of your time in here thinking
>>> about how to fuck with Americans.
>
>>> Too bad, so sad.
>
>> But isn't it true you show all kinds of violence on TV, but one "fuck"
>> or one nipple on TV and y'all go catatonic?
>
> the same peple that complain about that are the same people who watch
> FauxNews talk shows to see women in short skirts and refuse to admit it.

Umm, no? I watch many news channels including Fox News.
Never seen women in short skirts there.
Have you ever actually watched it?

For women in short skirts, try the game show, "Deal or No Deal."
Plenty of eye-candy there. :)

[f...@sdf.org]

On 2023-03-03, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:
> On 3/3/2023 6:40 AM, f...@sdf.org wrote:
>> On 2023-03-02, Bruce <Br...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 17:14:08 -0500, % <per...@yohoo.net> wrote:

>>>> Bruce wrote:
>>>>> I thought Americans

>>>> You spend most of your time in here thinking
>>>> about how to fuck with Americans.

>>>> Too bad, so sad.

>>> But isn't it true you show all kinds of violence on TV, but one "fuck"
>>> or one nipple on TV and y'all go catatonic?

>> the same peple that complain about that are the same people who watch
>> FauxNews talk shows to see women in short skirts and refuse to admit it.

> Umm, no? I watch many news channels including Fox News.
> Never seen women in short skirts there.
> Have you ever actually watched it?

yes, i have. there's no denying they put women with short skirts showing
lots of leg on their talk shows to appease their audience. an audience
which consists largely of closet perverts and pedophiles as well as people
with strong family values like incest. you know, typical right wing
conservatives.

> For women in short skirts, try the game show, "Deal or No Deal."
> Plenty of eye-candy there. :)

nah. i wear my perversions openly preferring hardcore pornography and
live adult entertainment.

[Gary]

On 3/3/2023 7:44 AM, f...@sdf.org wrote:
> On 2023-03-03, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:
>> On 3/3/2023 6:40 AM, f...@sdf.org wrote:
>>> On 2023-03-02, Bruce <Br...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 17:14:08 -0500, % <per...@yohoo.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> Bruce wrote:
>>>>>> I thought Americans
>
>>>>> You spend most of your time in here thinking
>>>>> about how to fuck with Americans.
>
>>>>> Too bad, so sad.
>
>>>> But isn't it true you show all kinds of violence on TV, but one "fuck"
>>>> or one nipple on TV and y'all go catatonic?
>
>>> the same peple that complain about that are the same people who watch
>>> FauxNews talk shows to see women in short skirts and refuse to admit it.
>
>> Umm, no? I watch many news channels including Fox News.
>> Never seen women in short skirts there.
>> Have you ever actually watched it?
>
> yes, i have. there's no denying they put women with short skirts showing
> lots of leg on their talk shows to appease their audience. an audience
> which consists largely of closet perverts and pedophiles as well as people
> with strong family values like incest. you know, typical right wing
> conservatives.

You just sound very biased about conservatives and Fox News.

Name one or a few of Fox News shows that show women in short skirts. I'm
seriously curious to what you see. I've never seen one (but I don't
watch it all that often).

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-03, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:
>
> Name one or a few of Fox News shows that show women in short skirts. I'm
> seriously curious to what you see. I've never seen one (but I don't
> watch it all that often).

Google broken at your house?

https://www.google.com/search?q=fox+news+short+skirts&tbm=isch&chips=q:fox+news+short+skirt,online_chips:anchors:zPUcGZAN6MU%3D&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjAsOja9b_9AhWFwckDHWHiBukQ4lYoBHoECAEQNA&biw=989&bih=847

It looks like Basic Instinct in there.

--
Cindy Hamilton

[Ed Pawlowski]

I find that appalling. I only watch the Amish News station where they
dress properly.

[f...@sdf.org]

FoxNews CEO Roger Ailes and his successor Suzanne Scott enforced a mini
skirt dress code for staff and hosts. Scott replaced Ailes after he was
ousted for sexual harassment. lawsuits were filed and settlements were
reached. it's not as pervasive as it was then, but FoxNews does indeed
still use sex for ratings. they know their viewers.

[GM]

Nothing at all wrong with attractive gal newscasters...

FAR preferable to ugli dykes like Rachel Maddow, or the dogs on "The View"...

Heck, in Europe and Canada they even had nude newsgals:

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5686016

Naked News takes off in Europe

Starting nightly on Aug. 16, Get Lucky TV will broadcast via satellite to European audiences the daily news
read by a series of nubile young women who will gradually -- but tastefully -- remove their clothes on camera.

It aims to be, literally, the naked truth.

Starting nightly on Aug. 16, Get Lucky TV will broadcast via satellite to European audiences the daily
news read by a series of nubile young women who will gradually -- but tastefully -- remove their clothes on camera.

“We are quite sensitive to certain issues, one of course being death,” anchor Samantha Page told
Reuters Television Wednesday. “We try to be as respectful as we can, and what we tend to do is
we leave our clothes on.”

Just in case people get the wrong idea, Page pointed out that she has a degree in psychology and
zoology and a black belt in karate.

The phenomenon of nude news reading first started in Russia and spread to Canada where Naked
News started in 1999. The Toronto-based firm is now hoping to emulate its North American success
this side of the Atlantic.

--
GM

[jmcquown]

There are sanctimonious idiots everywhere who will always manage to find
something offensive. The person who redacted the perceived profanities
should have simply closed the book and returned it, unread. Books are
expensive to replace!

Recently there was an attempt to ban certain books in the local public
school system. ('Farenheit 451', anyone?) I read about it in a local
freebie newspaper. We're talking about high school age kids. Cooler
heads prevailed; it was decided the books would not be part of school
*assignments* but the students could certainly choose to read them if
they want to. The article also mentioned many of the people who were on
the "committee" to review the proposed banned books hadn't bothered to
read them. Heh.

Hey, they don't have to purchase these books to stock the school
library, ya' know. One would think they would be glad to know kids are
still interested in *reading*.

One title on the proposed banned list caught my eye: 'Go Ask Alice'.
There was an attempt to ban that book when I was in high school, too.
It was felt if students read the book they'd all suddenly decide to
start taking drugs. ('Valley of the Dolls', anyone?) Naturally the
first thing many of us did was go to a bookstore and buy a copy. It was
a rather boring book.

Jill

[jmcquown]

On 3/3/2023 9:00 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

LOL Cindy!

Jill

[Dave Smith]

There is a special sort of irony to banning Farenheit 451 since so much
of the book is about banning books. I don't remember much about it but
it was one of our high school texts 60+ years ago.

> Hey, they don't have to purchase these books to stock the school
> library, ya' know.  One would think they would be glad to know kids are
> still interested in *reading*.

Mein Kampf was banned for a long time. I had read it many years ago
when it was still felt that it was important to see what sort of crap
Hitler and the Nazis were getting so worked up about. It was only
recently available in our local library and I borrowed it to read it
again. I didn't make it too far because it was just a lot of repetitious BS.

>
> One title on the proposed banned list caught my eye: 'Go Ask Alice'.
> There was an attempt to ban that book when I was in high school, too. It
> was felt if students read the book they'd all suddenly decide to start
> taking drugs.  ('Valley of the Dolls', anyone?)  Naturally the first
> thing many of us did was go to a bookstore and buy a copy.  It was a
> rather boring book.
>

It's a book about all the things that a lot of teens go through. LOL
thinking back to the 1960s when X rated movies were first being shown at
cinemas and how so many people raced out to see them. Most of them
turned out to be really bad movies than no one would bother to see had
it not been for the X rating. Curiously, most of those movies are now
shown on prime time TV and they are relatively tame compared to the
contemporary programming.

[Sqwertz]

On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 14:00:59 GMT, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> Google broken at your house?
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=fox+news+short+skirts&tbm=isch&chips=q:fox+news+short+skirt,online_chips:anchors:zPUcGZAN6MU%3D&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjAsOja9b_9AhWFwckDHWHiBukQ4lYoBHoECAEQNA&biw=989&bih=847
>
> It looks like Basic Instinct in there.

Lets be fair here - A few of those are guys in short skirts.

-sw

[Sqwertz]

Like Bruce, I only watch the Muslim Anti-American Propaganda
Channel. I can't even tell if they're men or women the way they
dress.

-sw

[Bruce]

On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 08:16:57 -0500, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:

>On 3/3/2023 7:44 AM, f...@sdf.org wrote:
>> On 2023-03-03, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Umm, no? I watch many news channels including Fox News.
>>> Never seen women in short skirts there.
>>> Have you ever actually watched it?
>>
>> yes, i have. there's no denying they put women with short skirts showing
>> lots of leg on their talk shows to appease their audience. an audience
>> which consists largely of closet perverts and pedophiles as well as people
>> with strong family values like incest. you know, typical right wing
>> conservatives.
>
>You just sound very biased about conservatives and Fox News.

I've watched them once and it was dumb, childish and, of course,
extremely biased. That was before they dumped Trump.

[Bruce]

On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 14:00:59 GMT, Cindy Hamilton

One could always watch it with the sound off.

[Bruce]

LOL, Ed!

[Bruce]

On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 12:00:08 -0600, Sqwertz <sqwe...@gmail.invalid>
wrote:

lol

[Michael Trew]

On 3/2/2023 11:49, f...@sdf.org wrote:

> On 2023-03-02, Michael Trew<michae...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
>> simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.
>

> i've seen you do it to a few of my posts and thought nothing of it. i
> just make an effort to not use any profanity when replying directly to
> you.
>
> no big deal.
>
> editing quotes in a reply to me to change the meaning of what i said
> though, that would likely elicit some sort of negative response from me.
>
> ymmv.

Thank you, my thoughts exactly. If I ever come across as trying to
change the context of what someone said, I apologize, that is not my intent.

Of course, sometimes I just snip because I don't want to quote an entire
4 paragraph reply, with 3 quotes behind it.

[Michael Trew]

On 3/3/2023 11:03, jmcquown wrote:
>
> Recently there was an attempt to ban certain books in the local public
> school system. ('Farenheit 451', anyone?) I read about it in a local
> freebie newspaper. We're talking about high school age kids. Cooler
> heads prevailed; it was decided the books would not be part of school
> *assignments* but the students could certainly choose to read them if
> they want to. The article also mentioned many of the people who were on
> the "committee" to review the proposed banned books hadn't bothered to
> read them. Heh.
>
> Hey, they don't have to purchase these books to stock the school
> library, ya' know. One would think they would be glad to know kids are
> still interested in *reading*.

The funny thing is, when they try to "ban" books, that just makes kids
more interested as to what is inside of them... most probably wouldn't
have even to attempted to read said book until it was "banned".

[jmcquown]

That was rather my point. They tried to ban at least one of the same
books on the list when I was in high school. It's stupid. The book was
boring and certainly didn't cause anyone to suddenly become drug
addicts. At some point you have to let kids learn to think and make
choices for themselves. Free-thinking people don't let a book force
them to do anything.

Jill

[Michael Trew]

On 3/2/2023 18:20, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 23:20:27 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:
>
>> Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
>> simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.
>
> And you edited the title, too!

How was Sheldon of relevance to what I replied to? Why would I leave
something completely off-topic? Most people here do that, are you blind?

It's cute how you piggy-backed a bunch of my posts after my first quoted
post above, attempting to provoke interaction out of me.

> If you owned a bookstore, would you change the titles of book and
> white out passages you find "vulgar"?
>
> You probably would. Asshole. Wipe that jizz off your face, you
> god-damned prissy bible thumper.
>
> -sw

I'll leave this so you don't cry about it being snipped out. Fats
Domino can cover the rest of the response for me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6JZW7zMDfY

"Ain't that a shame..."

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-03-03, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> It's a book about all the things that a lot of teens go through. LOL
> thinking back to the 1960s when X rated movies were first being shown at
> cinemas and how so many people raced out to see them. Most of them
> turned out to be really bad movies than no one would bother to see had
> it not been for the X rating. Curiously, most of those movies are now
> shown on prime time TV and they are relatively tame compared to the
> contemporary programming.

The first, and best, X-rated movie, shown in theaters here, was "Midnight
Cowboy". Now, it's on TCM.
I watched real X-rated stuff in a small room with a bunch of frat-boys,
once. I felt extremely awkward and uncomfortable.
Now, one can just fire up the computer or other "device", et voilà!
Seriously...a backwards accent mark! That's the French for you.

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-03-03, Michael Trew <michae...@att.net> wrote:

> Thank you, my thoughts exactly. If I ever come across as trying to
> change the context of what someone said, I apologize, that is not my intent.

> Of course, sometimes I just snip because I don't want to quote an entire
> 4 paragraph reply, with 3 quotes behind it.

I only quote what I'm responding to. It may be smack in the middle of
ten paragraphs. I've done that since the day I entered Usenet.

[Bruce]

On 3 Mar 2023 22:47:50 GMT, Leonard Blaisdell

<leobla...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 2023-03-03, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>> It's a book about all the things that a lot of teens go through. LOL
>> thinking back to the 1960s when X rated movies were first being shown at
>> cinemas and how so many people raced out to see them. Most of them
>> turned out to be really bad movies than no one would bother to see had
>> it not been for the X rating. Curiously, most of those movies are now
>> shown on prime time TV and they are relatively tame compared to the
>> contemporary programming.
>
>The first, and best, X-rated movie, shown in theaters here, was "Midnight
>Cowboy". Now, it's on TCM.

I liked that movie. Midnight Express too.

>I watched real X-rated stuff in a small room with a bunch of frat-boys,
>once. I felt extremely awkward and uncomfortable.
>Now, one can just fire up the computer or other "device", et voilà!
>Seriously...a backwards accent mark! That's the French for you.

Chapeau!

[Bruce]

On 3 Mar 2023 22:57:25 GMT, Leonard Blaisdell

But if I use an expletive (Blimey!) and you respond, would you cut the
expletive out of the quote?

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-03-03, Bruce <Br...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Chapeau!


Gesundheit!

[Dave Smith]

On 2023-03-03 5:47 p.m., Leonard Blaisdell wrote:
> On 2023-03-03, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>> It's a book about all the things that a lot of teens go through. LOL
>> thinking back to the 1960s when X rated movies were first being shown at
>> cinemas and how so many people raced out to see them. Most of them
>> turned out to be really bad movies than no one would bother to see had
>> it not been for the X rating. Curiously, most of those movies are now
>> shown on prime time TV and they are relatively tame compared to the
>> contemporary programming.
>
>
> The first, and best, X-rated movie, shown in theaters here, was "Midnight
> Cowboy". Now, it's on TCM.

That is a great film. It is one of the classics that I make a point of
watching at least once a year.

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-03-03, Bruce <Br...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> But if I use an expletive (Blimey!) and you respond, would you cut the
> expletive out of the quote?

No, I don't edit a quote with expletives. I didn't say it. I don't edit
anything that I'm quoting, but I'll edit everything up to and after what
I'm quoting.

[Bruce]

On 3 Mar 2023 23:11:22 GMT, Leonard Blaisdell

:)

[Bruce]

How boring.

[Bruce]

On 3 Mar 2023 23:22:24 GMT, Leonard Blaisdell

Yes, me too, if I don't forget.

[Leonard Blaisdell]

On 2023-03-01, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:

> 4 syllables - Steve Quincy Wertz


Yabbut, the combined letters just give me "sweet quince" which might make a
cookie, but that leaves tvyrz, I think. Sweet quince tryvz?
I may have done something wrong.

[Sqwertz]

On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 15:04:01 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:

> On 3/2/2023 18:20, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 23:20:27 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:
>>
>>> Tell you what, since it's such an issue, I'll do both of us a favor, and
>>> simply stop replying to your posts, if that will appease the Sqwertz.
>>
>> And you edited the title, too!
>
> How was Sheldon of relevance to what I replied to? Why would I leave
> something completely off-topic?

Its the title *I* chose for my topic and the accompanying text.
It's not up to you to change my decisions.

> Most people here do that, are you blind?

People here change the title, but initially leave the old title in
tact, when the thread is no longer about the original topic.

Nobody here except for asshole trolls change the subject, replay
directly under the OP, and edit their sentences inline. That has
ALWAYS been a Usenet etiquette crime since day #1. No reasonable
person here is going to support you on this as this has always
been a Usenet etiquette rule.

> It's cute how you piggy-backed a bunch of my posts after my first quoted
> post above, attempting to provoke interaction out of me.

WTF are you talking about now? Piggyback? I did a lot of catching
up last night before I deleted 1200 posts unread. I responded to
many people in threads in which *I* started or participated in
(Mr. "I have a can opener copyrighted 1911" - heh). Don't think
I'm not going to challenge that when everybody else missed it. I
didn't even call you any names in that post, you sphincterless
asshole!

Plus when you edit titles, it often starts a new thread for most
people, which just clogs up the interfaces if it's still the same
topic.

Now stop your whining, STFU, and get a fucking clue upside the
head - you prissy little piece of shit!

ObFood: Leftover spicy beef (and shrimp) chow fun.

-sw

[Hank Rogers]

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 15:04:01 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:
>
>> On 3/2/2023 18:20, Sqwertz wrote:

I thought you guys agreed to never speak to each other again.

[Bruce]

On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 18:43:35 -0600, Sqwertz <sqwe...@gmail.invalid>
wrote:

>On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 15:04:01 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:
>
>> How was Sheldon of relevance to what I replied to? Why would I leave
>> something completely off-topic?
>
>Its the title *I* chose for my topic and the accompanying text.
>It's not up to you to change my decisions.
>
>> Most people here do that, are you blind?
>
>People here change the title, but initially leave the old title in
>tact, when the thread is no longer about the original topic.
>
>Nobody here except for asshole trolls change the subject, replay
>directly under the OP, and edit their sentences inline. That has
>ALWAYS been a Usenet etiquette crime since day #1. No reasonable
>person here is going to support you on this as this has always
>been a Usenet etiquette rule.
>
>> It's cute how you piggy-backed a bunch of my posts after my first quoted
>> post above, attempting to provoke interaction out of me.
>
>WTF are you talking about now? Piggyback? I did a lot of catching
>up last night before I deleted 1200 posts unread. I responded to
>many people in threads in which *I* started or participated in

*I* is a narcissist's favourite word, hence the ** :)

[Gary]

That's what I do, yet I've sometimes been accused of snipping to make my
point. I've never done that on purpose.

Only Jill claims that, and often.
For that reason, each time I respond to the Princess now, I make sure to
quote everything.

Ophelia often got picked on for quoting everything.

[GM]

Princess Jill had a special "Netiquette Tutor" in The Palace whilst growing up, hence she follows Royal Protocol in all her posting activities...

--
GM

[Dave Smith]

On 2023-03-04 5:57 a.m., Gary wrote:

> That's what I do, yet I've sometimes been accused of snipping to make my
> point.  I've never done that on purpose.
>
> Only Jill claims that, and often.
> For that reason, each time I respond to the Princess now, I make sure to
> quote everything.
>
> Ophelia often got picked on for quoting everything.
>
>

Yeah. With good reason. She would quote 100 plus lines from 3-4 previous
posts in the threat only to add a half line comment, usually something
reinforcing the impression that she is clueless.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 4:57:47 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
>

> Ophelia often got picked on for quoting everything.
>

And she richly deserved it. Only idiot I know that would quote 200 lines
of text just to add :-).

[Michael Trew]

On 3/3/2023 19:43, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 15:04:01 -0500, Michael Trew wrote:
>
>> On 3/2/2023 18:20, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>> And you edited the title, too!
>>
>> How was Sheldon of relevance to what I replied to? Why would I leave
>> something completely off-topic?
>
> Its the title *I* chose for my topic and the accompanying text.
> It's not up to you to change my decisions.

So you own the thread, moderate it, and will smite anyone who dare let
the topic drift in *YOUR* thread?

>> Most people here do that, are you blind?
>
> People here change the title, but initially leave the old title in
> tact, when the thread is no longer about the original topic.

I swear that I've seen you whine, on multiple occasions, about people
who continue to reply OT in John threads, yet leave John's title in
tact. On a different occasion, you thanked me for changing it, because
you saw a topic drift that interested you in a thread which you KF'd.

I think that you are just bi-polar.

[Dave Smith]

I started to realize what a nit wit she was when she was replying to
Peter Lucas' posts only to add a short comment that his post was
offensive. The idiot would quote the entire offensive post only to add
that one short comment, and she would reply to every one of his
offensive posts the same way.

[Bruce]

And both poles are negative.

[Gary]

Bi-polar bear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIkMe7QcA48

[GM]

Ah, settle down, Michael...

Steve is just "being Steve"... just accept that and all will be okay...

I used to abhor Steve, but I now think he's an interesting and useful poster...

You should live your life the way Unca Tojo and I live ours, happiness will follow...!!!

"Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I
do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14 I press on toward the
goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus..."

Philippians 3:13-14

--
GM

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

She tried her best to control this group, but she failed mightily. If she wanted
to control people's posts, she should have turned her attention to being a Sunday
school teacher.

[Bruce]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 14:38:46 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"

<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 11:27:55 AM UTC-6, Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 2023-03-04 11:58 a.m., itsjoan...@webtv.net wrote:
>> >
>> > On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 4:57:47 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Ophelia often got picked on for quoting everything.
>> >>
>> > And she richly deserved it. Only idiot I know that would quote 200 lines
>> > of text just to add :-).
>> >
>> I started to realize what a nit wit she was when she was replying to
>> Peter Lucas' posts only to add a short comment that his post was
>> offensive. The idiot would quote the entire offensive post only to add
>> that one short comment, and she would reply to every one of his
>> offensive posts the same way.
>>
>She tried her best to control this group, but she failed mightily. If she wanted
>to control people's posts, she should have turned her attention to being a Sunday
>school teacher.

This would have been a perfect post about Jill.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

No, it was a spot-on post about OhFeelMe.

[Bruce]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 22:49:06 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"

<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 4, 2023 at 5:05:17 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 14:38:46 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >She tried her best to control this group, but she failed mightily. If she wanted
>> >to control people's posts, she should have turned her attention to being a Sunday
>> >school teacher.
>> >
>> This would have been a perfect post about Jill.
>>
>No, it was a spot-on post about OhFeelMe.

Strange hatred, but I guess that's how you are.

[Gary]

This is odd to me also, Joan.
Please explain why you feel that
"She tried her best to control this group."

?

[Gary]

On 3/3/2023 10:18 AM, GM wrote:

> Naked News takes off in Europe

I've seen a few of the Naked News shows many years ago.
Not on American tv but on the internet. Didn't that start in
Canada?

Anyway, why label Fox News with the short skirts issue?
Just another reason to pick on them and so lame.

I watch FN to hear opinions. If I want to see women in
short skirts, there are many better options.

Heck, just watch any episode of the original Star Trek shows to see
short skirts.

[Bruce]

The Sisterhood are so biased that they live in an alternate reality.

[Bruce]

On Sun, 5 Mar 2023 07:31:13 -0500, Gary <g.ma...@att.net> wrote:

>On 3/3/2023 10:18 AM, GM wrote:
>
>> Naked News takes off in Europe
>
>I've seen a few of the Naked News shows many years ago.
>Not on American tv but on the internet. Didn't that start in
>Canada?
>
>Anyway, why label Fox News with the short skirts issue?
>Just another reason to pick on them and so lame.
>
>I watch FN to hear opinions.

Fox News is for dumb people. You're not dumb.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

I do loathe people who are incredibly stupid, won't change how they post
even though several have complained. Net nannies also are in for loathing
as well as people ask the same question every time a subject has been
explained to her dozens of times.

[Bruce]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 08:36:44 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"

Lots of people complain about the endless bitching about Kuthe. You're
still going.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 10:53:36 AM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
>
> Lots of people complain about the endless bitching about Kuthe. You're
> still going.
>

Just call me the Energizer Bunny, I keep going and going and going.

[Bruce]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 10:43:58 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 10:53:36 AM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:

>> Mon, 6 Mar 2023 08:36:44 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>>> I do loathe people who are incredibly stupid, won't change how they post
>>> even though several have complained. Net nannies also are in for loathing
>>> as well as people ask the same question every time a subject has been
>>> explained to her dozens of times.
>>

>> Lots of people complain about the endless bitching about Kuthe. You're
>> still going.
>>
>Just call me the Energizer Bunny, I keep going and going and going.

Yes, "even though several people have complained", as you said above.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

Cry me a river. Julie London sang it quite well.

[Bruce]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:10:35 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"

<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 1:52:49 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 10:43:58 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Just call me the Energizer Bunny, I keep going and going and going.
>> >
>> Yes, "even though several people have complained", as you said above.
>>
>Cry me a river. Julie London sang it quite well.

Whoever that is.

You're blaming someone for doing something minor, while you're doing
something major yourself.

RFC, For All Your Hypocrisy

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

Sorry, I've never felt the need to attempt to be a net nanny as dodo OhFeelMe.

>
> RFC, For All Your Hypocrisy
>

Bruce, for all your rec.food.cooking hypocrisy. Careful you don't turn into
Oaf.

[Bruce]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 19:06:26 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"

<itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:

>On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 6:43:59 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:10:35 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>
>> You're blaming someone for doing something minor, while you're doing
>> something major yourself.
>>
>Sorry, I've never felt the need to attempt to be a net nanny as dodo OhFeelMe.

You and Sister Jill ignore dozens if not hundreds of requests to stop
turning rec.food.cooking into rec.john.kuthe. Find yourself a real guy
in downtown Nashville, for crying out loud.

[Michael Trew]

On 3/6/2023 19:43, Bruce wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:10:35 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>> Cry me a river. Julie London sang it quite well.
>
> Whoever that is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkD_kYkRk3c

[Bruce]

Thanks. Sounds good.

[dsi1]

Julie London sings it smooth, real smooth. She's quite the dish too. Inexplicably, I like this ugly guy better. He's rough, real rough.

https://www.geocities.ws/NapaValley/1284/geo_recipes.html

[Bruce]

On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 22:08:23 -0800 (PST), dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net>
wrote:

That goes to MM recipes.

[dsi1]

Oh crap - I gots to get me a Windows 11 machine!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggmwTTWwUaA

[Bruce]

On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 00:30:55 -0800 (PST), dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net>

wrote:

>On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 9:07:23 PM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 22:08:23 -0800 (PST), dsi1 <dsi...@hawaiiantel.net>
>> wrote:
>> >On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 7:47:32 PM UTC-10, Michael Trew wrote:
>> >> On 3/6/2023 19:43, Bruce wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:10:35 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>> >> > <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Cry me a river. Julie London sang it quite well.
>> >> >
>> >> > Whoever that is.
>> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkD_kYkRk3c
>> >
>> >Julie London sings it smooth, real smooth. She's quite the dish too. Inexplicably, I like this ugly guy better. He's rough, real rough.
>> >
>> >https://www.geocities.ws/NapaValley/1284/geo_recipes.html
>> That goes to MM recipes.
>
>Oh crap - I gots to get me a Windows 11 machine!
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggmwTTWwUaA

Hard to believe it's the same song. Here's another one:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djRx0SVc_0Q>

[Michael Trew]

I looked it up because I hadn't heard it in a long time. Youtube is
pretty good about picking similar music to play next, and I let it run
for a while in the background.

[Bruce]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 16:38:29 -0500, Michael Trew

<michae...@att.net> wrote:

>On 3/7/2023 1:00, Bruce wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 00:47:28 -0500, Michael Trew
>> <michae...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/6/2023 19:43, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:10:35 -0800 (PST), "itsjoan...@webtv.net"
>>>> <itsjoan...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cry me a river. Julie London sang it quite well.
>>>>
>>>> Whoever that is.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkD_kYkRk3c
>>
>> Thanks. Sounds good.
>
>I looked it up because I hadn't heard it in a long time. Youtube is
>pretty good about picking similar music to play next, and I let it run
>for a while in the background.

The following people have covered Cry Me A River:

Julie London
Jill Corey with Percy Faith & His Orchestra
Kitty White
Eileen Barton
Annie Ross with Tony Crombie and his orchestra (Annie Ross)
Roberta Sherwood with Orchestra under the direction of Jack Pleis
The Pia Beck Trio
Meri Ellen and Her Cohorts featuring Don Elliott
Dinah Washington
Janice Harper
Shirley Bassey
The Barry Sisters
Scotty McKay
Julie Wilson [US]
Jorge Foster con Valentín Trujillo y su orquesta
Maria Thereza
Ray Martin and His Orchestra
Vic Damone
Ella Fitzgerald
Vic Dana
Don Barbour
Anita Bryant
Barbara Russell
Cab Calloway with orchestra directed by Henry Jerome
Barbra Streisand - Arranged and conducted by Peter Matz
Sam Cooke
Steve Alaimo
Lesley Gore
Ray Charles
Bobby Goldsboro
Chris Connor with The Michel Colombier Orchestra
Sammy Davis Meets Sam Butera and The Witnesses
Marie Knight
Skeeter Davis
Dinah Shore with Orchestra conducted by Jack Elliot
Linda Bennett
Hu and The Hilltops
Long John Baldry
The Note-Cracker Sweets
Miss Lorraine Ellison - Arranged & Conducted by Oliver Nelson
Tina Mason
Barbara Moore
Byrdie Green
Irene Reid
Eddie Forehand
Claudine Longet
Patty Pravo
The Steampacket
Joe Cocker
Carolyn Franklin
Ken Henderson
Dakota Staton
Martha Miyake, Kazuo Yashiro Trio
The Singers Unlimited
Joan Baez
Karen Pree
Candy Sylver
Crystal Gayle
Paula Lockheart
Sylvester
Judy Willing
Tânia Maria
Heather Bishop
Martha Miyake meets Sera Yuzuru Trio
Aerosmith
Mari Wilson with The Wilsations
Helen Shapiro
The Star Sisters
I'm Talking
Del Rey and The Blues Gators
Judy Kreston and David Lahm
Rosa Maria
Aaron Neville
Maaike Nicola
Kate Ceberano and Wendy Matthews
Skin [US]
Diane Schuur
Leata Galloway
Patti Austin
Ben Webster
George Adams
Edgar Winter
Marc Hunter
Barbra Streisand
Rita Lee
Zé Maurício
Jack McDuff & Friends
Mina [IT]
Vlasta Průchová Swingin' Quintet
Jane Duboc
Isabelle Aubret
Natalie Cole
Combustible Edison
Anne Murray
Brian Lynch Quintet/Sextet featuring Melvin Rhyne
Michael Ball
Lowri Blake
Elkie Brooks
Grace Knight
Lils Mackintosh
Pete York
Mike Reid [GB]
Christine Elisabeth Jaccard, Dave Ruosch
Kyo Inaba Trio
Michelle Willson
Márta Téli
Barbara Manning
Ithamara Koorax
Kasia Kowalska
Richard Hindman Trio
Lisa Ekdahl - Peter Nordahl Trio
Marit Sandvik
Denise Welch
Célia Vaz
Quinn Lemley
Kim Parker & Håkan Rydin Trio
Sandra Cross Meets Alan Weekes
Marie Bergman
Alexia [GR]
The Recliners
Jennifer Heaney
Margareta Evmark
Sue Raney
Rhonda Burchmore
Mike Nock Trio
The Cliff Adams Singers with The Jack Emblow Quartet
Betty Buckley
Jai
Joe Mavety
Denise Lawrence and Storeyville Tickle
Beckie Menzie
Swing City Express
Søren Sko
Günther Neefs
8+ Jazz & Dance featuring Anneli Axelsson
Harry Connick Jr
Frankie Lee
John Martyn
The BB Band
Ron Kaplan
Linda Satin
Sweet 'n' Jazzy
Mary Starr
Jan Daley
Rita Reys
Andrea Benanti
Kaylé Brecher
Chie Ayado
Melissa Kassel Quintet
Ann Crumb with Harry Allen and His All-Star Jazz Band
Illumination
Laura Taylor
Doreen Smith
Bobby Rydell
Lorna Willhelm
Erna Ferry
Cheryl Serio
Eddy Doorenbos
Manfred Krug & Charles Brauer
Doug James
Etta James
Diana Krall
Rebecca Kilgore & David Frishberg
The Satin Doll Trio
John Greaves
Cecilia Dale
Paulien van Schaik & Hein van de Geyn
June Korneliussen Trio
Wendy Foam Jesús
Palmyra & Levita with João Donato
Rory Stuart with T.J. Graham (Rory Stuart)
Scott Coulter
Noel Freidline Quintet
Heather Myles
Bonnie Bramlett
Stefanie Schlesinger
Rosalynn Robinson
Francie Zucco
Tony Lee Trio
John Hasbrouck
Bruce Abbott with the North Star Jazz Ensemble
Jerry Grillo with Barry Velleman
Tribesmen featuring Pete Wyoming Bender
Shaynee Rainbolt
Karin Krog/Jacob Young
Umi
Trish Ramsten
Zoë Schwarz
MIBB
Jim Kweskin Band with Samoa Wilson
Barbie Anaka with David Loy
Sonja Kristina
Masha Bijlsma Band
Jacintha
Melanie Stace
Slava
Cold Chisel
Thom Allison
Lynette Washington
Adi Braun
Julie Keim
Sheila Cooper
David Nathan
Richard Thompson [GB]
Janet Seidel
Lisa Yvonne Ferraro
Chantal Chamberland
Brenda Reed
Ligia Piro
Peggy King
Stan Urban
Judy Akin
Janiece Jaffe
Monique Argent
Carlos Mejuto
Patricia O'Callaghan
Rene Froger
Johanne Blouin, Vic Vogel
Caetano Veloso
Alison Moyet
Yuki Murakami
Olivia Newton-John
Michael McCloud
Linda Ronstadt
Lera Gehner Band
Susan Getz
Jeff Hedberg
Hanna Richardson & Phil Flanigan
Kyle Esplin
Torsten Goods
Merle Haggard
Elaine Paige
Nashville Jazz Orchestra featuring Annie Sellick
Tierney Allen
Nicole Henry with Eddie Higgins Trio
Veronica Klaus
Debra Stephenson
Rita Coolidge
Rick Astley
Susan Wong
Kayla Taylor Jazz
Susan Marshall
MBM Trio
Adele Zane
Maci Miller
Suss von Ahn
Aimée Allen [US2]
Frank Sinatra Jr.
Bobby Darin
Jim Campilongo Electric Trio with Norah Jones
Meegan Samantha Coleman
David Owe
Cheryl Bentyne
Monique Klemann
FourPlay String Quartet
Joy Peters
Ilse Huizinga
Michael Alf
Lise Haavik
Joe Traina
Johnny Dorelli
John Cocuzzi
Marlena Studer
Julie Anne
Cherry Lee Mewis
Nicki Parrott
Naoko Mizuki
Michaele [1]
Janet Seidel Trio
Alison Burns
Pery Ribeiro
Ralph Napolitano
Marilyn Scott
Nina Ebbenhout
Ruby and the Rednecks
Alana [BE]
Yots.K
Lisa Donahey
Lisa Hearns
Sarah Bettens
Beth McDonald
Teresa Doyle
Heather Report
Mark Kershner
Sue Moreno
Jaimee Paul featuring The Beegie Adair Trio with The Jeff Steinberg
Orchestra
Tierney Sutton Band
China Moses & Raphael Lemonnier
Linda Stevens [FR] (Wagram Lounge Artists)
Sylvia Brooks
Lynda Carter
Ike Moriz
Jill Schoelen
Voxtasy a cappella
Diane Shaw
Michael Bublé
Susan Boyle
The Wolfgramm Sisters
Sienna Dahlen
Palladium
Nancy Harms
Margie Notte featuring Don Braden & Cecil Brooks III
Dolores Duran
Pepe Lienhard Big Band
Flavia Gabizo
Robin McKelle
Judith Owen
Halie Loren
Richard Sanderson
Yelena K & The Love Trio
Mika Ohashi
Shanti
The Hit Co.
Lica Cecato
Paul Capsis
Natasha Miller
Rita Bolton
Alexis Cole with One for All
Robin Phillips
Mandy Harvey
Chinaza
Ruby Wilson
Vincent Wolfe
Chelsey Forrest, Kirk Smart
Indra Rios-Moore
Pam Saulsby
Lizzie Thomas
Trish Hatley
Barbara Ireland
Mike Clark [US2]
Johnny Favourite
Julie Wilson [AU]
Lisa Ekdahl - Rikard Wolff
Josh Dubovie
Jeff Beck featuring Imelda May
Kristin Callahan
Kama Ruby feat. Ezekiel Victor
Hilary Kole
Candye Kane & Sue Palmer
Sarah Shea
Yolo Mambo
Bettina Graziani e Luciano Alves
Claudia Pereira & Francis Demange
Bob Welch
Ali McGregor
Joanie Samra - Jesse Green
David Shannon [IE]
Marky Quayle
Elisa Rodrigues
Mel Carter
Colleen Raye
Fried Pride
akiko
Yuki Yamada
八代亜紀 (Aki Yashiro)
Marwie
Cynthia Basinet
Tina Arena
Christine Hart
Hugo Race
Lia Giorgi
Joni Wilm
Yvonne Moore
Cheryl Jewell
Feigeli Prisor & Prisor Jazz Band
Pam Lauffer
On the Rocks
João Senise
Elaine A. Small
Billy Ocean
Angie Miller
Natalia Bedoya
Theresa Spanke
Chanté Moore
Alexis Cole
Daniele Scaglioni
Erin Parra
The King's Singers
Blue Champagne
Joan Chamorro & Eva Fernández
Sharlee Davis – Will Devitt
Kathryn Hettel
Lana Stamen
Scott Chapman
Ché & Charlie
Josh & Larkin
Bob Blakeley
Hetty Kate
Barbara Nelson
Shameia Crawford
Oliver Darley
Lyn Stanley
Colin Hunter & Joe Sealy Quartet
Rose Kingsley
Dutch Swing College Band featuring Margriet Sjoerdsman (The Dutch
Swing College Band)
Isabel Ventura Jazz Quarteto
Her Name & Mine
Carla Chomer
Aurélia O'Leary
The Hot Club Of Philadelphia (Hot Club of Philadelphia)
Matthew Tyler
Chris Cortez
Tianna Hall
Jaclyn Guillou feat. Jon Bentley
Laurin Talese
Natasha Hoeberigs
Natasha Bure & Riley Elmore
Deborah Brown Quartet + Sylwester Ostrowski
Paul Baker [GB]
Marsha Bartenetti
Vito Di Modugno c/ Lisa Manosperti
Danny B. Harvey & Annie Marie Lewis
Alma Micic
Matt Forbes
Talisha Karrer
Dami Im
Bonnie Bowden & The Angel City Big Band
Cris Delanno & Nelson Faria
Thomas Quasthoff - NDR Bigband
Eddie Brewer & The Manic Episodes
Matthew Ford & His Big Band
Ana Gazzola
Karen Souza
Carolyn Martin
Ida Landsberg
Angelina Jordan - Forsvarets stabsmusikkorps
Dina Blade
Grace Haggerty
Scharf Club
Pia Zadora
Zeitkratzer & Mariam Wallentin
Marcela Tarifeño
Emm Gryner
Susie Vanner
Clare Teal
Rebecca DuMaine and The Dave Miller Trio
Ray Stevens
Melanie Bengoechea
Kathy Ingraham
Jeff Beck
Sunday Night Big Band