Bill Clinton Digs Brötzmann
Pedro Moreno
brief interview with Bill Clinton about music.
p. 57
OA: What would people be surprised to know that you listen to?
Bill Clinton: Brötzmann, the tenor sax player, one of the greatest
alive.
This is pretty unbelievable....
Fabio Rojas
Y'see, accordin' to my pals Ken and Wynton, jazz is an American
art form. Dem Eur-O-Pee-ans can't do it right, cuz its all about
democracy and freedom. Lovin' the Brotzz shows us why
we needed to impeach the Bill.
Fabio
Matthew Snyder
<carb...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>OA: What would people be surprised to know that you listen to?
>
>Bill Clinton: Brötzmann, the tenor sax player, one of the greatest
>alive.
>
>This is pretty unbelievable....
Not really. Bill hosted the first big jazz party at the White House
since the Carter administration (which I guess makes it the second one
ever held at the White House, aside from Nixon's party for Duke).
Whitney Balliett also once wrote in the New Yorker that Bill loved
Zoot Sims He's a smart, cultured guy with a curious mind. Brötzmann
is somewhat of a stretch from Zoot, it's true, but not at all
unbelievable for Clinton to be a fan.
Matt Snyder
http://www.agoron.com/~msnyder
The rmb faq: http://www.agoron.com/~msnyder/rmbfaq.htm
The rmb troll faq: http://liquid2k.net/rmbtroll
Top Catt
msn...@alumni.indiana.edu says...
> On Fri, 03 Aug 2001 13:55:42 -0500, Pedro Moreno
> <carb...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> >OA: What would people be surprised to know that you listen to?
> >
> >Bill Clinton: Brötzmann, the tenor sax player, one of the greatest
> >alive.
> >
> >This is pretty unbelievable....
>
> Not really. Bill hosted the first big jazz party at the White House
> since the Carter administration (which I guess makes it the second one
> ever held at the White House, aside from Nixon's party for Duke).
> Whitney Balliett also once wrote in the New Yorker that Bill loved
> Zoot Sims He's a smart, cultured guy with a curious mind. Brötzmann
> is somewhat of a stretch from Zoot, it's true, but not at all
> unbelievable for Clinton to be a fan.
And of course he likes anybody who can *blow--*
T.C.
MusicMax
@mail.utexas.edu:
Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the election,
and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy of his tax and
budget policies. In eight years he was responsible for exactly zero
accomplishments and delighted in demonstrating at every possible opportunity
his disdain for the law and the people who gullibly elected him. Federal
government spending now accounts for nearly one in four GDP dollars (by
comparison, FDR never spent more than one of every TEN dollars of GDP), our
demoralized military has been reduced to an F-Troop of baby-sitters, and the
concepts of honor, responsibility and respect are now foreign to an entire
generation of young people. Yet sycophants like you continue to Lewinsky
the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.
Ira Chineson
> Pedro Moreno <carb...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in news:3B6AF3AE.89572D17
> @mail.utexas.edu:
>
> > In the latest special music issue of the Oxford American, there is a
> > brief interview with Bill Clinton about music.
> >
> > p. 57
> >
> > OA: What would people be surprised to know that you listen to?
> >
> > Bill Clinton: Brötzmann, the tenor sax player, one of the greatest
> > alive.
> >
> >
> >
> > This is pretty unbelievable....
>
> Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the election,
That's not the way I heard it.....
~JA's~ Richard
<Clinton is no longer in office, his
>hand-picked successor lost the election,
>and the country is now suffering a
[major snip of poorly executed Chris Matthews imitation]
Might I suggest that your self-indulgent proclivity for posting
political blather in a jazz newsgroup exhibits a certain personal
neediness that might be best fulfilled by your availing yourself of a
work-place blow-job at your earliest opportunity.
-Richard
Eric
> Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the election,
> and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy of his tax and
> budget policies.
[...snip]
Please move your political clap-trap to the appropriate newsgroup. This
thread started with jazz (sorry Zed) subject matter, not political. The
S/N ratio in this group is in the mud already. Don't make matters worse.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY POPS!!!
--
Better than hearing "Lady Day", or checking in at Monterey...
[Remove bodies from address for email.]
Hal Vickery
<mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> Pedro Moreno <carb...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in news:3B6AF3AE.89572D17
> @mail.utexas.edu:
>
> > In the latest special music issue of the Oxford American, there is a
> > brief interview with Bill Clinton about music.
> >
> > p. 57
> >
> > OA: What would people be surprised to know that you listen to?
> >
> > Bill Clinton: Brˆtzmann, the tenor sax player, one of the greatest
> > alive.
> >
> >
> >
> > This is pretty unbelievable....
>
> Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the election,
> and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy of his tax and
> budget policies. In eight years he was responsible for exactly zero
> accomplishments and delighted in demonstrating at every possible opportunity
> his disdain for the law and the people who gullibly elected him. Federal
> government spending now accounts for nearly one in four GDP dollars (by
> comparison, FDR never spent more than one of every TEN dollars of GDP), our
> demoralized military has been reduced to an F-Troop of baby-sitters, and the
> concepts of honor, responsibility and respect are now foreign to an entire
> generation of young people. Yet sycophants like you continue to Lewinsky
> the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.
You might want to chill out. This is a music discussion group. Take your
politics and your unfounded insults to other people who post here
elsewhere.
nsmf
steve edwards
> political blather in a jazz newsgroup exhibits a certain personal
> neediness that
No!
Mark Bradley
> the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.
Bravo!
But as you can tell... around this neck of the woods, this kind of
talk isn't tolerated-- they go after you like a pack of rabid dogs.
Anything remotely politically right is "political blather," but if any
"political" comments are made that lean to the left, this board is
oddly silent with people somnubulistically nodding their heads in
agreement like a heathrow of bobbing head auto deco French poodles.
To the liberal... tolerance of opposing views only applies to people
other than themselves. Veiwpoints other than the liberal agenda is
met with nothing but hostility, derision, and contempt. Go figure.
And by the way... who gives a rat's ass whether Clinton "says" he
likes Brotzman? Does that make it true? Put the dude to rest and get
over it... his era is over, thank goodness.
JC Martin
news:b2ca706d.0108...@posting.google.com...
We generally don't talk politics at all on this newsgroup...and for good
reason Obviously jazz fans differ in their political views...and probably
geography has much to do with that. But your idiotic posting was merely
meant to inflame folks, especially with your blanket assessments such as,
"To the liberal... tolerance of opposing views only applies to people other
than themselves". What kind of shit is that? Why bring this here? Do you
really judge a person and his character by the political views he or she
has? Nevermind however...that was a rhetorical question. Just please, keep
your political spins to yourself please.
-JC
Holger Weber
Mark Bradley <jazz...@netzero.net> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
b2ca706d.0108...@posting.google.com...
The happy trumpeter, LOL
MusicMax
news:3B6C34A3...@earthlink.net:
According to the Constitution (and praise be to those who for once looked
to that document for guidance, rather than to Congress or focus groups),
he did. We will never know the final popular vote totals - I understand
there are at least a half-million absentee votes in California alone that
were never counted because Gore had a substantial enough lead there that
Bush could not have caught up.
BTW, I did not vote for the man in the White House, I voted for Harry
Browne.
MusicMax
@storefull-615.iap.bryant.webtv.net:
1. Surely you meant this for the original poster.
2. Chris Matthews would probably love to Lewinsky the ex-president himself.
MusicMax
news:3B6C4C4F...@homebody.com:
> MusicMax wrote:
>
>> Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the
>> election, and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy
>> of his tax and budget policies.
>
> [...snip]
>
> Please move your political clap-trap to the appropriate newsgroup. This
> thread started with jazz (sorry Zed) subject matter, not political.
Really? What label does this "Clinton" cat record on? How many times
has he played Newport? Nice? Village Vanguard?
Eric
> But as you can tell... around this neck of the woods, this kind of
> talk isn't tolerated-- they go after you like a pack of rabid dogs.
And rightly so. This is *not* a political newsgroup. It is a
jazz/music newsgroup. Usenet has a plethora of groups tailored
just for political jawing, so why pollute this group?
Eric
> > Please move your political clap-trap to the appropriate newsgroup. This
> > thread started with jazz (sorry Zed) subject matter, not political.
>
> Really? What label does this "Clinton" cat record on? How many times
> has he played Newport? Nice? Village Vanguard?
Sarcasm. How quaint.
The music of "Brötzmann", and Clinton's appreciation of it, was the
original subject. In case you are not familiar with Brötzmann, follow
this link:
http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Bit4uak1k5m3m
Top Catt
mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com says...
None, that I know of, but he's trying to get a gig at the Apollo
(honest--he said so)!
T.C.
Hal Vickery
<mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
<snip>
> BTW, I did not vote for the man in the White House, I voted for...
I said it before and I'll say it again. Who cares?
nsmf
Fabio Rojas
a while back. A friend of mine has a bootleg of him playing
Eastern Europe... he's HUGE in Eastern Europe.
Fabio
Top Catt
says...
> I swear to God, I saw that Clinton dude on the Arsenio Hall show
> a while back. A friend of mine has a bootleg of him playing
> Eastern Europe... he's HUGE in Eastern Europe.
>
> Fabio
Over here, too--you can thank his McDonald's diet for that!
T.C.
Ulf Åbjörnsson
club in Prague.
Ulf
Fabio Rojas <f...@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:9kkh0a$c3n$1...@agate.berkeley.edu...
Top Catt
> There is a CD of Clinton playing Summertime with Czech musicians at a jazz
> club in Prague.
>
> Ulf
And it's one of your favorites---right?
Clinton [sings]:
"Summertime,
And the livin' is sleazy,
Monica's suckin'
With my pants 'round my thighs--"
"Hill'ry hates my guts,
But she' get 'lected easy--
So, little Bill Clinton,
Do-on't you cry..."
T.C.
Tom Walls
subs...@NOSPAMearthlink.net says...
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus
http://www.arts.cornell.edu/zeus/
MusicMax
ya02408000R05...@news.supernews.com:
If you don't care, why are you compelled to ask twice?
Face it Vicki, you wish it had been YOU under the Oval Office desk.
Hal Vickery
<mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
So when you go off-topic in a newsgroup and get called on it, your first
response is to attack those who point it out? Very mature! Let me guess.
You're 15 years old.
nsmf
MusicMax
Nice attempt at spin, Vicki, but here's the true chronology:
1. Clinton groupie posts reference to Clinton.
2. I post response about Clinton - reproduced here:
Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the election,
and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy of his tax and
budget policies. In eight years he was responsible for exactly zero
accomplishments and delighted in demonstrating at every possible opportunity
his disdain for the law and the people who gullibly elected him. Federal
government spending now accounts for nearly one in four GDP dollars (by
comparison, FDR never spent more than one of every TEN dollars of GDP), our
demoralized military has been reduced to an F-Troop of baby-sitters, and the
concepts of honor, responsibility and respect are now foreign to an entire
generation of young people. Yet sycophants like you continue to Lewinsky
the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.
3. Vicki responds with blather about "unfounded insults". Vicki's silence
on the content of my post indicates her acknowledgement that it is factually
unassailable.
4. I post response to individual who claims that Mr. Gore did not lose the
election - reproduced here:
According to the Constitution (and praise be to those who for once looked
to that document for guidance, rather than to Congress or focus groups),
he did. We will never know the final popular vote totals - I understand
there are at least a half-million absentee votes in California alone that
were never counted because Gore had a substantial enough lead there that
Bush could not have caught up.
BTW, I did not vote for the man in the White House, I voted for Harry
Browne.
5. Vicki responds "I said it before and I'll say it again. Who cares?", an
indication that she wants to appear "cool" by projecting indifference, but
has a sick compulsion to remain in the dialog, probably an indication that
deep down she knows she needs to be educated by my profundity.
6. When called on #5, Vicki responds "You're 15 years old", which of course
begs the question: who is more the adolescent: myself or the one who
apparently cannot get enough of me? Seems my allusion to 'NSync groupies
was too tragically accurate. Does your ankle bracelet shock you each time
you hit "SEND"?
Hal Vickery
<mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> hvic...@svs.com (Hal Vickery) wrote in news:hvickery-
> ya02408000R06...@news.supernews.com:
>
> > In article <Xns90F55FDE448BEm...@24.93.67.41>, MusicMax
> ><mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >
> >> hvic...@svs.com (Hal Vickery) wrote in news:hvickery-
> >> ya02408000R05...@news.supernews.com:
> >>
> >> > In article <Xns90F49CB213553m...@24.93.67.41>, MusicMax
> >> ><mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> ><snip>
> >> >
> >> >> BTW, I did not vote for the man in the White House, I voted for...
> >> >
> >> > I said it before and I'll say it again. Who cares?
> >>
> >> If you don't care, why are you compelled to ask twice?
> >>
> >> Face it Vicki, you wish it had been YOU under the Oval Office desk.
> >
> > So when you go off-topic in a newsgroup and get called on it, your first
> > response is to attack those who point it out?
>
> Nice attempt at spin, Vicki, but here's the true chronology:
Note ad hominem. If you think that bothers me, it doesn't. It just shows
your lack of a cogent defense for your going off-topic.
> 1. Clinton groupie posts reference to Clinton.
*Your* interpretation of the poster. Note the ad hominem in point 1.
> 2. I post response about Clinton - reproduced here:
>
> Clinton is no longer in office, his hand-picked successor lost the election,
> and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy of his tax and
> budget policies. In eight years he was responsible for exactly zero
> accomplishments and delighted in demonstrating at every possible opportunity
> his disdain for the law and the people who gullibly elected him. Federal
> government spending now accounts for nearly one in four GDP dollars (by
> comparison, FDR never spent more than one of every TEN dollars of GDP), our
> demoralized military has been reduced to an F-Troop of baby-sitters, and the
> concepts of honor, responsibility and respect are now foreign to an entire
> generation of young people. Yet sycophants like you continue to Lewinsky
> the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.
An off-topic response if I ever saw one. So you are the one getting off
topic, as more than one person has told you.
> 3. Vicki responds with blather about "unfounded insults". Vicki's silence
> on the content of my post indicates her acknowledgement that it is factually
> unassailable.
I'm a "him," not a "her." As far as the content, it is off-topic, and I'm
not going to go into it here. As you've been told, there are political
forums on Usenet. This is not one of them.
> 4. I post response to individual who claims that Mr. Gore did not lose the
> election - reproduced here:
>
> According to the Constitution (and praise be to those who for once looked
> to that document for guidance, rather than to Congress or focus groups),
> he did. We will never know the final popular vote totals - I understand
> there are at least a half-million absentee votes in California alone that
> were never counted because Gore had a substantial enough lead there that
> Bush could not have caught up.
>
> BTW, I did not vote for the man in the White House, I voted for Harry
> Browne.
>
> 5. Vicki responds "I said it before and I'll say it again. Who cares?", an
> indication that she wants to appear "cool" by projecting indifference, but
> has a sick compulsion to remain in the dialog, probably an indication that
> deep down she knows she needs to be educated by my profundity.
That would be "he." And I told you in my original post that I don't care
what your politics are. This is not a political newsgroup. You have no
idea what my politics are, and I don't feel compelled to tell you. And why
do you think anyone would care who you voted for.
>
> 6. When called on #5, Vicki responds "You're 15 years old", which of course
> begs the question: who is more the adolescent: myself or the one who
> apparently cannot get enough of me? Seems my allusion to 'NSync groupies
> was too tragically accurate. Does your ankle bracelet shock you each time
> you hit "SEND"?
You started the ad hominem attacks, and it's obvious that mine are quite
mild compared to yours. You are now killfiled. I don't have the time to
waste on people who get off on insulting others.
nsmf
Tom Walls
mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com says...
> Nice attempt at spin, blah, blah, blah...
Yeah, and how do you rationalize the gay baiting? Get on topic, or
get out. Jerk.
MusicMax
news:MPG.15d89c63f...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu:
> In article <Xns90F57C273BA92m...@24.93.67.42>,
> mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com says...
>
>
>> Nice attempt at spin, blah, blah, blah...
>
>
> Yeah, and how do you rationalize the gay baiting?
Do you ever have a thought that didn't originate as a bumper sticker or
focus group-vetted talking point?
> Get on topic, or get out.
Make me, big boy.
> Jerk.
I really don't care what you do when you're posting...
Eric
> You started the ad hominem attacks, and it's obvious that mine are quite
> mild compared to yours. You are now killfiled. I don't have the time to
> waste on people who get off on insulting others.
I killfiled him/her/it after his/her/its initial post, but you'all
keep quoting him/her/it.
Stop it! <g>
Walter Davis
>
> Pedro Moreno <carb...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in news:3B6AF3AE.89572D17
> @mail.utexas.edu:
>
> > In the latest special music issue of the Oxford American, there is a
> > brief interview with Bill Clinton about music.
> >
> > p. 57
> >
> > OA: What would people be surprised to know that you listen to?
> >
> > Bill Clinton: Brötzmann, the tenor sax player, one of the greatest
> > alive.
> >
> >
> >
> > This is pretty unbelievable....
>
> and the country is now suffering a recession as the legacy of his tax and
> budget policies. In eight years he was responsible for exactly zero
> accomplishments and delighted in demonstrating at every possible opportunity
> his disdain for the law and the people who gullibly elected him. Federal
> government spending now accounts for nearly one in four GDP dollars (by
> comparison, FDR never spent more than one of every TEN dollars of GDP), our
> demoralized military has been reduced to an F-Troop of baby-sitters, and the
> concepts of honor, responsibility and respect are now foreign to an entire
> generation of young people. Yet sycophants like you continue to Lewinsky
> the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.
Not that it matters, but federal spending as % of GDP in
1991 was about 23%. When Clinton left office, it was
19.5%, the lowest since 74. Some suggest that the GDP
was actually larger than government estimates due to
increased productivity, which would make it the lowest
%age since LBJ.
Hal Vickery
> Hal Vickery wrote:
>
> > You started the ad hominem attacks, and it's obvious that mine are quite
> > mild compared to yours. You are now killfiled. I don't have the time to
> > waste on people who get off on insulting others.
>
> I killfiled him/her/it after his/her/its initial post, but you'all
> keep quoting him/her/it.
>
> Stop it! <g>
He's now killfiled here, too. Sorry.
nsmf
JC Martin
news:Xns90F58F0964429m...@24.93.67.42...
> Tom Walls <tw...@REMOVEcornell.edu> wrote in
> news:MPG.15d89c63f...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu:
>
> > In article <Xns90F57C273BA92m...@24.93.67.42>,
> > mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com says...
> >
> >
> >> Nice attempt at spin, blah, blah, blah...
> >
> >
> > Yeah, and how do you rationalize the gay baiting?
>
> Do you ever have a thought that didn't originate as a bumper sticker or
> focus group-vetted talking point?
Are you that delusional that you can determine where one's thoughts derive
from merely by engaging in a single usenet exchange?
That's another rhetorical BTW. I care not the answer! Be gone! *PLONK*
-JC
MusicMax
$nb4.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
> That's another rhetorical BTW. I care not the answer! Be gone! *PLONK*
I just LOVE the open-mindedness of the American leftist.
MusicMax
> You are now killfiled.
I just LOVE the "open-mindedness" of the American leftist.
Richard Thurston
wrote:
Not one of your better efforts.
Richard Thurston
Holger Weber
MusicMax <mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
Xns90F5B7719A565m...@24.93.67.41...
GFYand *PLONK*
Top Catt
rcthu...@worldnet.att.net says...
Oh well... nobody bats .1000, eh?
T.C.
David Ewing
>
> Oh well... nobody bats .1000, eh?
Lots of people bat .100(0). They're called pitchers. But nobody bats 1.000, at
least not for long.
Dave Ewing (baseball fan and smart ass)
--
*****************************************************
David A. Ewing
Xilinx Boulder d...@xilinx.com
*****************************************************
jules ryan
this seems to sum it up so well:
from this week's "This Modern World":
Are You a Left Wing Wacko?
Take this simple test and find out!
1. Do you believe that large corporations may, on occasion, behave in
ways which are detrimental to society as a whole?
2. Are you disturbed by conservative policies such as welfare
"reform" -- even when they are enacted by democrats?
3. Do you believe full time employees in low-wage jobs should make
enough money to afford both rent AND food?
4. Are you in ANY WAY troubled by the though that tens of millions of
Americans have no health care coverage whatsoever?
5. Does the possibility of executing an innocent person cause you,
however BRIEFLY, to question the wisdom of the death penalty?
6. And finally -- despite everyone's best efforts to portray him as a
competent and knowledgeable leader, do you still suspect that George
Bush is a complete buffoon?
If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you are undeniably a
left wing wacko, completely out of touch with mainstream thought in
this country. The rest of you are normal Americans.
Congratulations, and God help up all.
Jules Ryan
jul...@nxps.com
MusicMax <mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<Xns90F57C273BA92m...@24.93.67.42>...
Bobby Knight
>Pardon me for perpetuating this pointless (albeit amusing) thread, but
>this seems to sum it up so well:
>If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, you are undeniably a
>left wing wacko, completely out of touch with mainstream thought in
>this country. The rest of you are normal Americans.
>Congratulations, and God help up all.
Damn! I'm a communist!
bk
Simon Weil
>> >
>> >"Summertime,
>> >And the livin' is sleazy,
>> >Monica's suckin'
>> >With my pants 'round my thighs--"
>> >
>> >"Hill'ry hates my guts,
>> >But she' get 'lected easy--
>> >So, little Bill Clinton,
>> >Do-on't you cry..."
>> >
>> >T.C.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Not one of your better efforts.
>>
>>
>> Richard Thurston
>
>Oh well... nobody bats .1000, eh?
>
>T.C.
>
I thought it was pretty good (not exactly in good taste, but pretty good).
I think Clinton said a few years ago that a Russian player was his favourite
saxophist...
I guess he must be listening to different stuff ( i.e. what the quote
implied).
Simon Weil
Mark Bradley
this board" on this one? Do we have some double standards here
perhaps? It is unbelievable how some of you try to act like censors
(stay away, you whine) when views are expressed that you don't like,
but you line up to cheer on your own view of "proper thought." Some
of you actually put your hands to your ears like a school girl and
refuse to listen (kill file)-- I find this incredible. There isn't
much interesting on this board jazz-wise lately so please allow this
evil (somewhat)convservative responce:
jul...@nxps.com (jules ryan) wrote in message
>
> 1. Do you believe that large corporations may, on occasion, behave in
> ways which are detrimental to society as a whole?
Why don't you feel people can feel the same way about this whether you
are Rebublican or Democrat? Use common sense-- Americans work and
own these large corportions (many are Democrats). Corporations should
not be treated as an advesary unless it is proven that they are out to
"destroy society." This may be difficult to admit, but our country is
pretty much built on large corporations-- it's called free enterprise.
They shouldn't be assumed to be the enemy. Now about Phillip
Morris... I'll help you nuke the bastards.
> 2. Are you disturbed by conservative policies such as welfare
> "reform" -- even when they are enacted by democrats?
So you're saying NO reform is necessary? The current welfare system
that has been in place for decades has proven to be a total failure.
Human nature being what it is, if you pay people not to work-- they
won't work. The old welfare system has destroyed the family unit in
the poor urban population handcuffed many decent human beings to a
life of subserviance-- which ultimately fosters resentment and
violence. Big reforms are needed-- unless you are happy with the way
things are (I'm not).
> 3. Do you believe full time employees in low-wage jobs should make
> enough money to afford both rent AND food?
This is a common variation on the "convervatives want to starve your
children" routine. People should be paid a fair wage, but forcing
companies to pay an abnormally high wage for menial and non-skilled
jobs drives companies out of business, and then there are even MORE
unemployed. Any small business owners out there? You know what I'm
talking about. An inflated minimum wage also diminishes the worth of
individuals that work hard, go to school, etc. to attain higher
wages-- why train if you can make $18 an hour pushing a broom?
> 4. Are you in ANY WAY troubled by the though that tens of millions of
> Americans have no health care coverage whatsoever?
Our health care system, even with its flaws, is the best in the world.
It is a federal law that anybody that goes into an emergency room
cannot be refused treatment. People need to be accountable for
themselves, however, and do what is necessary to get their own health
care (like getting a job). I've had a lot of experience with the
European health care sytems (in Germany, Switzerland and Italy) and
the overal care can't compare with the US. In countries with public
health care it's like being helplessly controlled by the HMO from
hell... a bunch of faceless bastards decide whether you desearve to
get the expensive treatment or medication you need-- more often than
not you won't get it, and there's not a darn thing you can do about
it. It's all in the interest of saving money, you see. I agree that
there needs to be some major reform in the US health care system but
from what I've seen so far a national health care system would be a
nightmare-- the overall health care to Americans would get worse.
> 5. Does the possibility of executing an innocent person cause you,
> however BRIEFLY, to question the wisdom of the death penalty?
A lot more innocent people have died serving life prison terms than
those that have been executed-- does that mean we should abolish "life
terms" too? It is horrible if any innocent person has been wrongly
accused, but in the case of the death penalty, these are VERY rare
instances. One U.S. serviceman being killed by friendly fire is "one
too many"-- but that doesn't mean we should give our armies paper
bullets. You may not agree, but the death penalty is a huge
deterrent, and if it makes you feel any better... if some scum bag
tortures, rapes, and murders your Momma the chances are over 95% that
the criminal won't face the death penalty-- it's reserved for the
REALLY nasty ones.
>
> 6. And finally -- despite everyone's best efforts to portray him as a
> competent and knowledgeable leader, do you still suspect that George
> Bush is a complete buffoon?
The left insists on portraying "Dubya" as a caricature... something
almost non human. This makes it very convenient-- so you can ridicule
him without any real reason. While I agree that it is compelling to
view Bush as some sort of Chauncey character (from the execllent movie
"Being There), you again use double standards-- Clintons failings were
"just being human," but with Bush you try to remove his humanity. The
kicker is, of course-- that if Bush is so stupid, why is he the most
powerful man on earth? You probably feel Clinton became President
because he was so smart. How can you go on to logically deduce that
Bush became President because he is so stupid? And please, spare me
any of your brain-dead jearing on this one-- some fat piece of slim
pointlessly trying to attack my character, only because they disagree,
i.e. "The happy trumpeter, LOL." The irony is that a few of you (not
all, mind you) are the real morons here-- not Bush.
The rest of you are normal Americans.
> Congratulations, and God help up all.
You're referring to the western Judeo-Christian god here, aren't you?
How dare you be so non inclusive! Don't you know you've got to say
"your god" and to be sure you don't leave anybody out include, "or
your satan, your sacred animal, your idol of choice, and for those non
belivers-- your own innate sense of goodness." The ACLU feeds on
itself like a pack of sharks... they're going to be after your hind
end on this one.
Look dude, I'm not calling you names. I'm not saying you're evil
because we disagree on some things... I'd just like to see the same
attitude back. That's what really pisses off some of us that lean
towards the so-called right. That's why I said on an earlier post that
(to paraphrase) the liberal demands respect for their views but in
turn gives NO respect back-- only ridicule. I fail to see much of a
logical thought process in the liberal agenda because of this
arrogance. You must recognize that Conservatives and Liberals alike
have basically good intentions and the best interests of humankind and
our country at heart. It's simply a matter of viewing things from
different perspectives... don't be demonizing my ass, ya-all! Keep
your minds open...
...now about this excellent new album "An Afternoon In Harlem" by Hugh
Ragin... the cat can play.
Thank you, thank you very much,
Mark
http://jazztrpt.freeservers.com
JC Martin
I fail to see much of a
> logical thought process in the liberal agenda because of this
> arrogance.
Every person who fronts for a group shows arrogance. And every group has an
agenda.
>You must recognize that Conservatives and Liberals alike
> have basically good intentions and the best interests of humankind and
> our country at heart.
Which is the bottom line. Why don't you stick with that line of reasoning
instead of making blanket statements.
>It's simply a matter of viewing things from
> different perspectives... don't be demonizing my ass, ya-all! Keep
> your minds open...
Go back on the thread. Be honest with yourself. Who started the
deamonizing? And where do you see a post of a liberal deamonizing anyone.
And BTW, the assumption that I'm a lefty liberal would be incorrect. Both
parties bring some decent ideas to the table and many of those ideas are
worth debating. But the hate-Clinton agenda is pretty pathetic IMO. It's
getting old.
-JC
jules ryan
> Where's all the people crying to "keep your policitcal messages off
> this board" on this one? Do we have some double standards here
> perhaps?
I merely meant this post as a humorous commentary to your initial
characterization of this thread as being nothing more than blind
Clinton worshipping. You did write "Yet sycophants like you continue
to Lewinsky
the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.". For what
it's worth, I would have found this post equally interesting if it was
George Bush, Jesse Helms, Ted Kennedy, Silvio Berlusconi, or Vaclav
Havel that digs Brotzmann.
And please note that I am not the author of the "left wing wacko" post
- I copied it from the weekly cartoon "This Modern World" - nor did I
imply a position regarding any of the questions. For that reason, I'm
going to decline answering your points in this public forum, however
if you wish to debate some of them privately by email, I'd be happy
to. Suffice it say that for the most part, I partially agree with
you, and partially disagree with you. But i do respect your opinion,
which seems well thought out.
> Look dude, I'm not calling you names. I'm not saying you're evil
> because we disagree on some things... I'd just like to see the same
> attitude back. That's what really pisses off some of us that lean
> towards the so-called right. That's why I said on an earlier post that
> (to paraphrase) the liberal demands respect for their views but in
> turn gives NO respect back-- only ridicule. I fail to see much of a
> logical thought process in the liberal agenda because of this
> arrogance. You must recognize that Conservatives and Liberals alike
> have basically good intentions and the best interests of humankind and
> our country at heart. It's simply a matter of viewing things from
> different perspectives... don't be demonizing my ass, ya-all! Keep
> your minds open...
I agree with this to a point. But folks on the right are not alone in
being "ridiculed" for their positions. Tune into any am talk radio
for evidence. It seems to me that your initial post was more guilty
of this than my response.
> ...now about this excellent new album "An Afternoon In Harlem" by Hugh
> Ragin... the cat can play.
ahh, yes! It's actually two years old now (his newest one is "Fanfare
& Fiesta", but it was one of my absolute favorites of '99. I was
particularly thrilled to hear how great Craig Taborn sounded on that
one... he was my piano teacher here in Ann Arbor before he made the
move to NY. He also sounds great on Tim Berne's newest one, The Shell
Game.
Jules
Hal Vickery
(jules ryan) wrote:
<snip>
> I agree with this to a point. But folks on the right are not alone in
> being "ridiculed" for their positions. Tune into any am talk radio
> for evidence. It seems to me that your initial post was more guilty
> of this than my response.
<snip>
I think the rule is this: "If I say it, it's not ridicule. If you say it,
it is."
nsmf
Mark Bradley
> jazz...@netzero.net (Mark Bradley) wrote in message news:<b2ca706d.01080...@posting.google.com>...
> to Lewinsky
> the evil bastard like so many Brownies at an 'NSync show.".
That was somebody else that wrote that; I only humbly responded to it.
Hey guys, let's have a group hug... believe it or not I actually like
and respect most everybody on this board (with a few exceptions-- the
obvious lunatics that I think we can all agree need some serious
counseling). I respect those on this board that respond in a somewhat
rational way, no matter what your political slant, it's a free
country-- there are some people here with an awesome knowledge of that
which is all important-- JAZZ! I'm just peeing into the wind-- trying
to get some points across that I think are rather important, that's
all. I don't "hate" anybody-- even Clinton-- hate wastes too much
energy. Come on... give me a hug... don't hold back...
Eric
> I agree with this to a point. But folks on the right are not alone in
> being "ridiculed" for their positions. Tune into any am talk radio
> for evidence.
LOL. For grins, try
http://www.non-sequitur.com/index.php3?previous=1&inday=28&inmonth=7&inyear=2001
Nazodesu
> > 1. Do you believe that large corporations may, on occasion, behave in
> > ways which are detrimental to society as a whole?
>
> Why don't you feel people can feel the same way about this whether you
> are Rebublican or Democrat? Use common sense-- Americans work and
> own these large corportions (many are Democrats). Corporations should
> not be treated as an advesary unless it is proven that they are out to
> "destroy society." This may be difficult to admit, but our country is
> pretty much built on large corporations-- it's called free enterprise.
Not so. It would be "free" enterprise if the corporate power in
question did not control the reigns of government, writing rules to
make things "free-er" for them to make more money, frequently without
the purported constraints that our society imposes--like anti-trust
laws. This have been wholly disregarded in recent years, as are most
other laws that seek to better the profit margin for these
non-citizens. A corporation is NOT a citizen. It does NOT have parity
with the citizenry. Nevertheless it owns the citizenry, since it owns
the government.
> They shouldn't be assumed to be the enemy. Now about Phillip
> Morris... I'll help you nuke the bastards.
They too are a corporation.
Note also in our great non-democracy that we are supposed to have a
jury system in place for legal matters. And yet we have
"representatives" in government that make it illegal to sue HMO's and
gun manufacturers because those would be "frivolous". I think a jury
can decide what's frivolous or not. And even if they do a poor job it
beats writing a law PROHIBITING people from suing your friends.
> > 2. Are you disturbed by conservative policies such as welfare
> > "reform" -- even when they are enacted by democrats?
>
> So you're saying NO reform is necessary? The current welfare system
> that has been in place for decades has proven to be a total failure.
Not it's been in place for about 5 years I think. Bill Clinton signed
the Republicans bill. It should be coming due any time now, then we'll
see how successful it really is. It will be a great savings in terms
of tax money--we can give them back to corporations and wealthy folk.
But it will be a big lose in human misery. Expect CROWDS of folks
under the bridges in the next few years.
> > 3. Do you believe full time employees in low-wage jobs should make
> > enough money to afford both rent AND food?
>
> This is a common variation on the "convervatives want to starve your
> children" routine.
Absolutely wrong. Conservatives just want to make money. Starvation
is YOUR problem.
> People should be paid a fair wage, but forcing
> companies to pay an abnormally high wage for menial and non-skilled
> jobs drives companies out of business, and then there are even MORE
> unemployed.
What the hell is a fair wage? Anything that doesn't cost an employer
more money, that's what. Every time we talk about an increase in the
minimum wage--EVERY time, it's a bad bad thing that will cause much
difficulty for employers. Forget the employees that can't live off the
wages they currently get.
As the years role by and housing and food costs go up the marker for
"poverty" goes down. People living thousands of dollars above the
official poverty line (that line we use to allow them to get
"benefits") still can't afford a crummy apartment for 4 people while to
are working two jobs each.
> Any small business owners out there? You know what I'm
> talking about.
Small business owners should have no more currency with writing law and
controlling our world than the population at large. I'm always
surprised that the mythic "little business man" who the Republcians
could care less about, seems to be far more important than any one he
employees.
--
The storm starts when the drops start dropping. When the drops stop dropping
the storm starts stopping.
John Monroe
> For what
> it's worth, I would have found this post equally interesting if it was
> [snip] Silvio Berlusconi [snip] that digs Brotzmann.
ROTFL! LMAO! The very idea of this is so funny I can hardly stand it!
John Monroe
Fabio Rojas
"Hey guys, did you hear that Jimmy Carter owns a Wynton Marsalis record?"
Post 2:
"Let's all hear it for our 34th best president. He may know jack about Iran,
but he knows an all American hero when he sees one!"
Post 3:
"The Ayatollah Khomeni listens to Cecil Taylor. Why do you think he used
to call American the Great Satan?"
Post 4:
"Thank god that boob Carter is out of office and stoped disgracing our nation.
He's brought nothing but shame to the sacred presidential office. Can't he
keep his lusting in his heart and keep it away from the record store?"
Post 5:
"Can't we keep politics out of this newsgroup? The unity provided by our
hate of Kenny G is fragile."
Post 6:
"Look I never said that Carter was 'slack jawed rabbit victim.' You misquote.
I said that he was a 'hemarrhoid afflicted marathon runner.' "
Post 7:
"I don't see what the big deal this thread has become. It's Ken Burn's
artistic choice if he wants to give Jimmy Carter five minutes to explain
the Giant Steps changes."
-fabio
MusicMax
@agate.berkeley.edu:
> "I don't see what the big deal this thread has become. It's Ken Burn's
> artistic choice if he wants to give Jimmy Carter five minutes to explain
> the Giant Steps changes."
Carter's term as president occurred after 1965, therefore Ken Burns does not
know that he ever held the office.
MusicMax
> Not so. It would be "free" enterprise if the corporate power in
> question did not control the reigns of government
Does Jack Walsh have the power to put you in jail?
Does Bill Gates withhold anything from your paycheck?
Are you forced to hand over to Wal-Mart more of your earnings than you pay
for food, clothing and shelter COMBINED?
Government does all these things.
> writing rules to make things "free-er" for them to make more money
A corporation makes money only when it provides a needed or desired product
or service at a competitive price. The ONLY exceptions to this rule are
imposed by GOVERNMENT: monopolies (ie. utilities), and government contracts,
which are awarded on the basis of political patronage rather than merit.
Government, on the other hand, provides few needed and no desired products
and services - if it did it would have no need to collect taxes under threat
of imprisonment and confiscation of property, would it? Hmmmm?
> frequently without
> the purported constraints that our society imposes--like anti-trust
> laws.
The only monopoly in the world that is not a creation of government is the
DeBeers diamond monopoly. Government creates monopolies (example: awarding
a cable franchise to a single provider such as Time-Warner), and it uses
regulations to impede the entry of competition into the marketplace (who is
better equipped to upfit their restaurants to meet ADA and OSHA standards,
Burger King or Mom & Pop's Greasy Spoon?).
> This have been wholly disregarded in recent years
What?! With the namesake of this thread, Lord God King Klinton, as
president? *gasp*
> A corporation is NOT a citizen. It does NOT have parity
> with the citizenry. Nevertheless it owns the citizenry, since it owns
> the government.
Ummmm...actually citizens own the corporations. Assuming that you have (a)
a job; and (b) a 401(k), YOU are likely part-owner of the corporations
against whom you are railing.
> Note also in our great non-democracy that we are supposed to have a
> jury system in place for legal matters.
No, we have a jury system in place to make lawyers rich.
> And yet we have
> "representatives" in government that make it illegal to sue HMO's
If you don't like your HMO, switch plans or pay fee-for-service like you do
for, say, FOOD AND RENT. Is this such a radical idea?
> and gun manufacturers
Any action that hinders LEGAL gun ownership aids ILLEGAL gun owners (ie.
criminals).
> I think a jury can decide what's frivolous or not.
What's frivolous is going to the emergency room for a hangnail. The third-
party-payer system fosters a dangerous sense of entitlement: the belief that
"insurance will pay for it" without realizing that someone (ie. YOU) have to
pay for the insurance first.
In addition, care providers (doctors etc.) are so scared of being sued that
they order dozens of expensive and unnecessary tests (which the HMOs then
refuse to reimburse them for), and their malpractice insurance premiums now
consume a double-digit percentage of their billable invoices!
> And even if they do a poor job it
> beats writing a law PROHIBITING people from suing your friends.
So you prefer guys like that creep Senator Edwards from Carolina (a personal
injury and malpractice lawyer) who whined against a $1.5 million cap per
case on lawyers' windfalls?
> Not it's been in place for about 5 years I think. Bill Clinton signed
> the Republicans bill. It should be coming due any time now, then we'll
> see how successful it really is. It will be a great savings in terms
> of tax money--we can give them back to corporations and wealthy folk.
> But it will be a big lose in human misery. Expect CROWDS of folks
> under the bridges in the next few years.
I think five years is more than enough time for someone to find a job.
Anybody "under a bridge" after that amount of time DESERVES to be there.
> Absolutely wrong. Conservatives just want to make money.
And you don't? Or do you realize you CAN'T and therefore anybody who's more
successful than you doesn't deserve to either?
> What the hell is a fair wage?
Nobody can answer that question, so it's best left to the market, isn't it?
> Anything that doesn't cost an employer more money, that's what.
Then I guess no employee has ever gotten a raise at any time in history.
> Every time we talk about an increase in the
> minimum wage--EVERY time, it's a bad bad thing that will cause much
> difficulty for employers.
Government policies - specifically Clinton's, including the minimum wage
hikes - are certainly contributing factors in the present economic slowdown.
The only government to ever help the US economy was the German one: when it
decided to invade Poland it brought us out of the Great Depression.
> Forget the employees that can't live off the wages they currently get.
Every day I run into people making quite a bit above the minimum wage who -
honest to God - couldn't spell "cat" if you spotted them the "c" and the
"a". People who take the initiative and better themselves deserve to be
compensated handsomely. Those who don't, don't.
> As the years role by and housing and food costs go up the marker for
> "poverty" goes down.
And as I pointed out, the average American pays MORE IN TAXES than s/he does
for FOOD CLOTHING AND SHELTER COMBINED.
> I'm always
> surprised that the mythic "little business man" who the Republcians
> could care less about, seems to be far more important than any one he
> employees.
Well, let's see, you've slammed small businesses AND large businesses. Just
curious - how many people do you know who've gotten jobs from smelly
unshaven winos and unwed welfare moms - apparently the only two demographics
for whom you feel no contempt?
Top Catt
mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com says...
[Mumble grumble, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb, endless OT political-type
boring, ranting rhubarb--]
I'd suggest that you change your posting handle to MusicNil, since the
"music" content of what you're "adding" to this group is indeed nil...
T.C.
MusicMax
@news.speakeasy.net:
Hey dimwit I was responding to another poster. Why don't you direct your
venom in that direction?
Marcel-Franck Simon
: f...@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (Fabio Rojas) wrote in news:9kso2u$13u4$1
Wynton Marsalis was born in 1961, so Ken Burns should have had no awareness
of his existence, and given him no screen time.
--
Marcel-Franck Simon Hewlett Packard
"Papa Loko, ou se' van, wa pouse'-n ale' Florham Park, NJ
Nou se' papiyon, n'a pote' nouvel bay Agwe'" min...@fpk.hp.com
the rmb troll faq is at http://liquid2k.net/rmbtroll. spread the word!
Jesper Larsson Traeff
jul...@nxps.com (jules ryan) writes:
|> For what
|> it's worth, I would have found this post equally interesting if it was
|> George Bush, Jesse Helms, Ted Kennedy, Silvio Berlusconi, or Vaclav
|> Havel that digs Brotzmann.
|>
Jesper
MusicMax
> In article <Xns90F7DBD05A8B0m...@24.93.67.43>,
Your mom help you with that or did you come up with it all by yourself?
Top Catt
mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com says...
Eh? This brilliant "snappy comeback" of yours took only a week--the gears
turn v-e-r-y slowly in your near-empty cranium, it seems. I'm not waiting
around for your next bit of creaky repartee, you're going into my
killfile as of right now.
T.C.
Murphy McMahon
pressure as quite an accomplishment, actually. tell me you voted for dubya.
--
Murph
Murphy McMahon
> "JC Martin" <subs...@NOSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in news:6eEb7.1444
> $nb4.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
>
> > That's another rhetorical BTW. I care not the answer! Be gone!
*PLONK*
>
> I just LOVE the open-mindedness of the American leftist
he just LEFT the closed-mindedness of the American loveless... it's perfect
i didn't get that n'sync reference, either... do 'brownies' refer to your
fellow libertarians or what? i'm lost.
--
Murph
MusicMax
news:tnqtc66...@corp.supernews.com:
> me and some people i know might regard his success in giving you high
> blood pressure as quite an accomplishment, actually.
Considering your "edu" domain, that's not surprising, since you've
obviously never earned a paycheck. Your butchery of the English language
demonstrates what happens when government pays for school rather than the
individual receiving the alleged "education": a total disregard for
learning.
When I attended college at the University of North Carolina, our sports
teams would occasionally lose to the rival Wolfpack of NC State. Our
chant in response was "That's all right, that's OK, you're gonna work for
us someday." I would say that you, sir, lack the brain power to even
fill out the application I might hand you. Practice, now: "You want
fries with that?"
>tell me you voted for dubya.
Harry Browne, actually.
Murphy McMahon
know at Chapel Hill regards Duke as their 'rival', not NC State
--
Murph
MusicMax <mRuEsMiOcVmEa!x...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9100AFE3BCD34m...@24.93.67.43...