Conference rdvax::grateful

	... a show dealing with the 60s.  Channel 2 in Boston, which is
	our PBS channel, is going to show a 3-part documentary on the
	1960s.

	It starts tonight, at 9 pm (until 11), for three nights.  This
	should be good to watch and I'm counting on an appearance from
	the boys...

				JC

	A review of this program in today's Boston Globe was lamenting the
	things the program was leaving out, such as:

	Bob Dylan
	The Grateful Dead

	and some others...

	Josh

    Today at 4:30 on channel 4 there's a show on Deadheads. I forget the
    name of the show, but it's on every day, covering some aspect of our
    society. I caught a commercial for the show during the news last night
    and heard Jerry talking.
    
    Scott
    

    Today at 4:30 on channel 4 there's a show on Deadheads. I forget the
        name of the show
    
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
        The name of the show is "Instant Recall." It's hosted by John
        Palmer (?) who used to do the  news on the Today Show. Some of the 
        episodes I've  seen have been  excellent and others just total fluff. 
    
        Mike

    
    what's channel 4?  Is this a local station or a network or what?
    
    

I watched the "60s..." program last night on Channel 2, one of Boston's PBS
stations.  I thought it was excellent.  Basically, the first part showed many
things in the 50s that may have led to the 60s rebellion period.  The second
part focused heavily on the civil rights movement.  Some of those white folk
who were against integration, spoke out about it getting cheers from the white
crowd.  Man, I felt like punching the dude's face in VERY HARD... the mean
things they did are truely saddening...

Tonight, more to come.  I think tonight's 2 episode focuses on the hippies,
drugs, "free" sex, rock 'n' roll, and things of this nature.  Should be 
good.  

Starts at 9 pm.

    
    Channel 4 is out of Boston..
    
    Don

I think the Instant Recall show is a syndicated thing.




I watched most of the PBS thing last night..very interesting.  I enjoyed
the protest songs (forgot about most of them) and decided I was going to 
go out and see if any of this stuff is still available.



The thing that touched me the most was a scene during the second half, where
there was a funeral going on for a black person killed during a march...the
scene was a young black boy all dressed up, and crying his eyes out.  It really
choked me up watching it.  




Jim

re:          <<< Note 107.8 by BOSOX::HENDERSON "Give peace a chance" >>>

> The thing that touched me the most was a scene during the second half, where
> there was a funeral going on for a black person killed during a march...the
> scene was a young black boy all dressed up, and crying his eyes out.  It really
> choked me up watching it.  

Yeah, me too...  that was real hard to watch.   I think we've come a long 
way towards civil rights but we have a long way to go.  For example, we
have a holiday for Martin Luther King, but most of the country chooses not
to acknowledge it.

The activists interviewed sure looked _incensed_ when they recounted the
story of being told "you cannot pass out leaflets on this campus [which 
express your opinions]"!   You could see fire in their eyes.

Did Joan Baez look young or what ?

Ken

Phyllis, channel 4 is NBC here (as well as there too right?)

I'm really surprised to see that there is not more discussion in this notes
file about this program.  At any rate...


Yah Jim, the sadness in that little boy's face was pretty true.  But, scenes
showing black people or whites that came from the North for Freedom Summer
getting beaten UNPROVOKED was much more SAD.  There was one scene where an
older black man was walking away from a group of whites.  One white guy hit
him really hard from behind.  And then the scene where a circle of white kids
were beating the shit out of another white kid who was standing up for the
blacks...  sad, sad, stuff.  

I felt myself boiling when they showed the white man talking in the microphone
to a big group of supporting whites saying that the black man is not wanted
and we don't want to share with him, etc,etc.... I just wanted to sock that
guy so hard in the face that he'd never, ever say anything like that again...
man I was boiling...

On the good side, I chill ran through my body when they showed MLK speaking
near the White House at that *HUGE* rally ... his voice echoing through the
land and being heard by 100s of thousand people there must have been something
out of that's incredible... real inspirational for the young folk trying to
fight racism...

Excellent program.  They should have that program run for 2 weeks because
there is so much to cover.  I hope we get to see Malcom X tonight ... another
inspiration for many...

 JC - that's twice today you've said you wanted to sock someone in the
 face - it's interesting to me, but although I abhor the attitudes 
 the racists expressed, the most powerful concept expressed in the show 
 for me was the idea of social change thru non-violence...

 let there be peace on earth, and let it begin with me

    
    I found the scene with the young child the most upsetting also.  Not so
    much because he was crying, but because of the way he kept singing..
    we shall overcome.. while at his brother's funeral.
    
    Did anyone notice that that guy receiving the lecture on how to fit in
    with the popular kids, by seeing how they dress, act, etc... was Darren
    from Bewitched? :-)
    
    So far, it looks like a well done series.. I'll be home by 9:00 for
    part 3..
    
    

Yeah, there was a lot of other stuff, but I think I looked at that
little kid and thought that him crying and his (I assume mother) holding
him trying to comfort him summed up the horrors and injustice that were
going on at the time (and still going on of course)




Jim

I had forgotten that he was singing "We shall overcome"...thanks Phyllis..

Sitting here thinking about it saddens me.





Jim

I watched the movie about Morris Dees last night ... he's the founder of the
Southern Poverty Law Center, a group of lawyers who participate in litigations
against people who commit crimes of a racist nature.  He's won lawsuits
against the KKK and other white supremacy groups (in one case, almost putting
the Klan out of business financially) by linking their teachings and training
of their "recruits" with the actual crimes committed.  He's still very busy
... he recently took to court John and Tom Metzger, a father and son team who've
been recruiting skinheads from the Portland Oregon area ... Dees showed in court
that their training was responsible for the attack on an Ethiopian student
in Oregon some number of years ago.

I'll post the address of the SPLC tomorrow, in case people are interested in
making donations or joining ....

- Dave

re:          <<< Note 107.13 by TERAPN::PHYLLIS "Wake, now discover.." >>>

>    Did anyone notice that that guy receiving the lecture on how to fit in
>    with the popular kids, by seeing how they dress, act, etc... was Darren
>    from Bewitched? :-)

Yeah, Dick York!  I noticed that, too!

Speaking of those lecture programs, I'm glad I didn't grow up with that stuff
on TV.  Granted, I had other stuff on TV to tell me what to do/think/etc, but
that stuff on how to be popular, how to act in front of your parents, etc, was
pathetic!  It made it so easy to see why the counter-culture revolution
occurred!

adam

Sorry Debess, I guess that is my male aggression coming out.  Sometimes, if
pushed the edge, I will snap ... that would make me snap.

    Yeah, I noticed that was Dick York too!
    
    It's about time someone documented the 60's this way. Usually when
    someone documents a time, it's done from a "pop culture" point of view.
    What Joe Citizen saw on tv, the music they heard, etc. This puts it all
    into perspective by looking into the causes.
    
    I'm taping it all for reference.
    
    Scott
    

This is probably too late for most people, but "Easy Rider" is going to be on
Cinemax tonight (Tues.) at I think 11:30.

Too bad my VCR is getting warranty service now! :-(  This is the best time to
tape, since there's no commercials.  I hope they play it again soon.

BTW, Cream's Farewell Concert was on PBS last night.  Too bad I couldn't tape
that, either.

adam

Maybe this belongs in the "things you missed on TV" note, but Monday night
after the first 2 "Making sense of the 60's" episodes, CH 11 (NH) broadcast
Cream's final concert.  I taped it, but haven't watched it yet.






Jim

    
    Last night, before part 3 of the series, PBS in NY broadcast a show
    called Dominos.  Did anyone watch it?  It was a film montage of 60's
    events set to music.  Towards the end of the hour, they covered about
    10 minutes of a peace rally in Washington and the tune in the backround
    was..
    
    	Darkstar!
    
    It was very cool.. no narration.. just an hour of 60s sights and
    sounds.
    
    Phyllis
    

	Thanks JC for letting us all know about this series (the 60's)...
	I hardly ever watch TV and consequently don't check out what's
	on...I'm really enjoying it...

	Debess

I really don't watch much TV either.  However, I do peruse the TV guide each
week to check for things like this.  The cover of TV Week was dedicated to
this show.

At any rate...

Last night's 2 hours was very good too!!  Thank God they are showing this on
PBS because the "big" stations would have censored most of what they showed
(drug use, nude people, people having sex, etc).  I was disappointed to see
no mention of the boyz and the many other bands of the 60s.  I guess I would
like to see 6 hours dedicated to what we saw last night... perhaps because
that is what interests me the most...

Boy those damn cops were brutal!

Oh, one more thing.

Many of the people interviewed for this show are authors for books on the
60s.  Has anybody read any of those books?  If so, any recommendations for
something good to read?

I was a bit surprised the boys got left out.  Particularly when they
showed Harry Reasoner wandering around in the Haight...I've seen tapes
of an interview he did with the Dead during the program he did which I
believe was called "The Hippie Menace".


A couple of scenes in SF really made me homesick...one scene in particular
I could almost feel what it was like to be there :^(





Jim

    There is one thing that did bug me that I didn't know about before. 
    Last nights show showed some working-class guy putting down hippies
    because he worked for a living and the hippies looked for handouts.
    Well, although I don't feel I'm as extreme as that guy doing the
    complaining, it would bother me also if I was working and there were
    people around who were able to work but didn't want to and I was paying
    for their food stamps.  This is an old story and I was very young
    during that time so I don't really get the whole drift of the 60's
    movement, just what's documented and felt at dead shows.  I don't like
    working for someone else (who really does?), however, I do like to be
    self supportive and not rely on others for survival if I can.  At least
    some tryed to live off the land.
    
    Please don't take me wrong on this: I'm not putting down anything that
    hippies did back then, in fact, I feel most of the stuff that happened
    was for everones good.  Just express an opinion I found last night.
    
    They summed it all up pretty well at the end of the first part last
    night with the Stones' "You can't always get what you want, but if you
    try sometimes, you find you get what you need"  Ah yeah!!
    
    dave

	one of the authors was Jay Stevens - who co-wrote 
	"Drumming on the Edge of Magic" with Mickey.  He
	also wrote "Storming Heavens" which I have gotten
	recommendations for from many sources but I have
	been unable to locate it yet...

	re: no scenes with the Dead...what I noticed was
	the predominant usage of Phil Ochs footage - and
	NONE of Dylan :-(

	Debess

I guess I'm repeating myself, but ....

As long as the American people insist on voting into office politicians who
are more responsive to the military-industrial complex than the needs of the
people as a whole, we'll have GUNS instead of BUTTER.

That's part of what makes this whole war especially depressing ... just when
we were on the verge of finally getting our peace dividend, now that the Cold
War is over, we found a new way to continue funnelling our hard-earned money
to the Pentagon.  This at a time when 1/5 of the nation's children live in
families below the poverty level, hundreds of thousands of people can't afford
medical care, and the bridges collapse on the homeless living underneath them.

- Dave

Did anybody catch General Westmoreland (commander of the troops in Viet Nam)?
He was asked how the war effort was going and his reponse was remarkably
similar to those we are hearing today :^(  "Going very well, better than we
expected" or something to that effect.



Jim

    After correcting for inflation, the hourly and weekly wages of what
    the US Labor Department calls non-supervisory workers (about two thirds
    of the work force not in management) have been declining since 1973.  
    
    At the end of 1990 weekly wages are 17 percent below where they were in 
    1973, had been declining 1 percent per year in the previous four years 
    and were back to levels not seen since 1958.  
    
    A two-decade, 17 percent decline in real wages for most of the American 
    work force is not a recession, it is a depression.
    
    We haven't seen much "butter" for a long, long time.  This war will bleed us
    dry before it's through.

    
    
    
    	I really enjoyed watching the PBS special.  It taught me many things 
    	I never knew about the 60's.  Seeing I was born in 1968 that is 
    	a lot.  I always thought the 60's was a magical time, come to 
    	find out it wasn't as wonderful as I thought.  I also thought I 
    	would have loved growing up in the 60's but now I just don't 
    	think so.  I don't think it would have been any easier figuring 
    	out who you were.  Maybe even more difficult because of all the 
    	other SH** that was going on.  Would we be where we are today if 
    	it wasn't for the 60's.  I wonder what life would be like?   
                  

           Anyone see the gossip show on Deadheads?

    I think it really depended on where you were during the 60's.  I was
    born in 1955, so I experienced the 60's as a young teenager growing up
    in the San Francisco Bay Area.  To me, it *was* a magical time in which
    anything was possible.  Everyone was experimenting with new lifestyles,
    music, art, and, yes, drugs.  Most of my teachers were pretty charged up 
    about all of the changes and future possibilities, which made some of my 
    classes very interesting.  It was a very optimistic period.
    
    I didn't catch much of the PBS show, but what I did catch seemed very
    negative.  The only negative thing I experienced first-hand during that
    period were the Watts riots that were going on when I was visiting my
    Grandparents in LA.  I remember standing on a rooftop to see the smoke
    and flames from the riots that were taking place only a few blocks away. 
    At the time, the riots seemed more like a curiosity than the historical
    event they have become.
    
    I also recall the news of a NYE Dead concert (Winterland?) where a big 
    drum of koolaide was spiked with LSD.  I guess one or two people were 
    not clued into what they were drinking and freaked out, or did
    something to catch the attention of the media.  The news made the whole 
    show sound like some kind of disaster. (Who knows, maybe the Dead were
    really bad that night.)  The word from those who were there, however, was 
    that everyone had a grate time.
    
    It just isn't possible to capture the essence of an era objectively in 
    a textbook or a documentary.

    I agree with the last entry...I too was born in 55, grew up in a
    military family during the 60's, (and early 70's) and DUG IT! (ie:the
    timeframe) I remember having feelings about "missing it" though,
    (ie: the early 60's)
    
    BTW, I always thought being a military brat was an advantage during
    the time...I knew a little more about Viet Nam (my dad was there
    twice) i saw more of the county and world, thus i was exposed to
    "different" ideas more than those that grew up in say, Ga. or 
    Maine. 
    
    sorry if i digress.........
                                      rfb

    re .34
    
    I taped the Dead segment of Instant Recall yesterday, and it wasn't a
    bad piece. They had short interviews with Jerry, David Gans, Ken Kesey,
    and Ken Babbs. Babbs and Kesey looked incredibly *old*. I'd say they're
    both in their mid-50s by this time.
    
    The gist of the piece was pretty positive. They essentially said that
    the trip would go on as long as people could hold it together. There
    were no references to tour problems or anything really negative.
    
    Most of the film clips were from the '74 Dead movie, which was too bad.
    They did have one shot of Garcia from the mid-60s just wailing on
    guitar that was worth the entire piece!
    
    For a gossip-type show it was well done.
    
    Mike

I thought the 60's show was really interesting.  I don't think it made
sense of the 60's but it did represent the 60's, the issues, the
people, and events.

john

My 2 cent plain...


	Just like the many other Anthropologic escapades we've been seeing pop
up on PBS in the last few years, this series concentrated _way_ to much on the
socio-psychology of the topic at hand: Joe Sixties confronting the unrealistic
values of his youth and blaming that for his inability to deal face-to-face
with his current responsibility to be answerable to his own life choices.
Pulleeeezze!!!  O.k., granted, the sixties made life harder, not easier, for
Men, Women, Blacks, Jews, etc., etc. by empowering within the freedom to choose
their destinies, etc., but don't try to tell me that this new empowerment is
the ultimate reason the revolution failed, why the republicans seized power in
the 70's and 80's, why divorce rates are up, and why the United States is
losing its place as the Worlds most industrial and industrious nation.

	This serious completely failed to take into account any ecomonic trends
on a wider time scale as it relates to the Western rise of industrial
capitalism (which I beleive was a greater factor in the dis-enchantent which
led to the sixties upheaval) than any racial, political, social, or
drug-induced force.  Check it out. The real cause of the Sixties phenomenon
was the mass realization that the Free market sucks; look where we were back
then; rampant class divisions were caused by a free market; rampant pollution
was caused by an unregulated free market, rampant racism, which had its very
roots in the free market trade, were coming to an explosive head which was
probably foreseen since the day after the Bill of Rights was drafted.

	The revolution almost happened, but what stopped it was that nobody was
willing to die for it.  When shots started flying, people said: "Hell, I'd
rather live in a flawed system than not live," so they elected Nixon.

We had a choice back then, and we have that same choice today.  Let the free
market take its course, or radically alter it with bloddy revolution. Nobody
wants to die for a cause, yet can we really fool ourselves into believing that
the likes of Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush can and will prevent this
country from going down big-time and taking the rest of the planet with it (all
for the sake of a few short-term bucks)???  This series tried to answer that
question with a "yes". I don't buy it.

Rambling Mon

re < Note 107.40 by SPICE::PECKAR "More or less in line" >

>We had a choice back then, and we have that same choice today.  Let the free
>market take its course, or radically alter it with bloddy revolution. Nobody
>wants to die for a cause, yet can we really fool ourselves into believing that
>the likes of Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush can and will prevent this
>country from going down big-time and taking the rest of the planet with it (all
>for the sake of a few short-term bucks)???  This series tried to answer that
>question with a "yes". I don't buy it.

I've heard speculation about a class revolution led by the homeless.  They
seem powerless at the moment; but who thought a bunch of long-haired teenagers
and students would have had any power in the '60's?  And the homeless are a
lot more desperate.

- Dave

    After dying to overthrow the free market system, what do you suggest we
    replace it with?
    
    

>    After dying to overthrow the free market system, what do you suggest we
>    replace it with?
    
Capitalism does have its place; as a controllable method on which to base a
economy; not as a political weapon to be dropped like a bomb on the people
with the caveat: "emptor".  However, once capitalism is controlled, it is no
longer a "free" market.

Hows about a real representative democracy, to start with, with no "special 
interests"; multi-party, maybe, but with fair election rules.

There are a lot of systems better (and more equitable); both in theory and in 
practice.   Power must be wrested from the rich, and the rich must be wrested
from power. History sez so; and that can't happen in a free market system.

    Re: .40 & .43 - Fog!  Well put!.
    
    Just as social Darwinism in the 30's and 40's was finally seen for the
    racism that it was, the economic Darwinism of the 60's, 70's and 80's
    is yet another attempt to stratify society along ethno-racial lines.
    It's no coincidence that most of the victims of the 'free' market are
    the same old victims of the past.  Use of the word 'free' is truly
    ironic, but also insidious since I think people tend to assume it
    provides the kind of unalienable rights that we all know and love.
    
    Just ask the likes of Mike Milken, or David Paul;  T. Boone Pikens, and
    H. Ross Perot.  What do these vultures care for the poor, the homeless,
    or the economic tank traps that the 'free' market builds to defend the
    well-heeled from the unfed minorities?  Zip.
    
    
    tim

	For those of you in the Boston area who missed all or
	part of the "Making Sense of the Sixties" series last
	week it will be aired again, beginning tonight at 8:00
	on Channel 44.

	Lisa

    re .40
    
    	Woo Mr Fog! haven't seen you exploed on the scene like that in,..
    three versioons of Grateful! Well done
    
    re .43?
    
    	" what to replace free market with"
    
    	Well... The price of a product can still be determined according to
    a "free" market. However, right now, the resources to make a product
    are "free". What I mean is, If I'm Joe entreprenneur (sp?), and I buy a
    piece fo land  I can basically rape that land to my heart's content,
    using all the natural resources there, and creating as much waste as I
    like. As long as I can make a profit, I can continue buyging land and
    resources, wasting them, and moving on. 
    
    	In my view, that is what needs to change. The "waste" which
    includes the excess energy spent, the pollution, and the unnecessary
    wasting of natural resources (strip mining etc) has got to be stopped.
    You can do it and still have a free market,.. you just have to tax the
    heck out those companies who are too wasteful. We can noty afford to
    allow the capitalists to make their profits with no accounting for what
    they are doing to the future of the planet. If you wnat to be nice and
    environmnetally conscious while you build something, fine. You can
    build it, you can sell it, and you can make your profit according to
    the limits of the free market. If you want to burn out the earth along
    the way,.. sorry, thats going to cost you ,.. DEARLY!!!! So dearly,
    that you will make the smart business decision and become
    environmentally conscious becaue its more profittable than paying the
    "waste" tax that slash put on them.
    
    	Of course, this may sound like "regualtion" or taking away the
    "free market". I don't view it that way. It is the end of "laissez
    faire" as far as wasting the environment is concerned,.. but thats a
    change that must take place. I think we could, with that amount of
    "regualtion" still allow a "capitalist" "free market" to driver the
    prices and wages...
    
    	Just my opinion,.. but I'd be interested to hear what y'all think
    
    							/
    

    
    O.K. / here's what I think...
    
    Alright tax'em...  good idea,  
    
    one thing....
    
    
    
    		how?

    
    	For every non recyclable product, made from "new" resources, 1000% tax
    	For every non recyclable product, made from recycled resources, 50% tax
    	For every recylcable product made from "new" resource, 50% tax
    	For every recyclable product made from recyclde resources, no tax
    
    	Then the energy tax,.. which I'm not sure how I would implement,..
    	but it would be something like for each kilowatt used to produce
    	a recyclable product,... 20% tax
    	Kilwoatts used to produce non recyclable product, 100% tax
    	kilowatts used to prodeuce recyclable product, no tax
    	kilowatts "wasted" unnecssarily, to produce a non recyclable
    	product,.. 20000000000% tax
    
    	kilowatts wasted uinnecessarily to produce a recyclabel product,
    		10000000000% tax
    
    	So, .roughly,.. something like that. Of course, the numbers might
    be a bit high (200000000000%),.. butthe idea is to get them to
    stop wasting resources, and stop wasting energy.
    
    	Notice, that any recycled resources used, and not "wasted"
    entails no extra tax to the manbufacturer. So the guys who start
    priducing along those lines will have less tax, lest cost of
    production, and will thrive in the "free" market against their
    "wasteful" competitors.
    
    							/
    

    
    Clearly a good idea (one that I agree with too ;^)
    
    O.K., then how do you separate kilowatt's used to light the facility
    from kilowatt's used on the mfgt line? etc...  
    
    Also, All this tax would do (if implemented this way) would get
    companies to do some legal running around to define their product's as
    recyclable, when in fact they may never be recycled...
    
    I like the fact that you've pinned down areas of taxation, but once
    again, I'm not sure that the taxation would help you meet the goals
    you've set, because of the infamous slimy corporate law depts. that
    would indefinitely find loopholes and workarounds...  Does that make
    sense?
    
    Treemon_sorry_for_the_reality_check_but_just_IMO

    I think the useful lifetime of the item must be factored in.
    Something that is disposable, but recycleable, and made of recycled
    materials, may still be more of a waste of energy than something
    that is made of new materials but is reuseable.

    re Treemon
    
    	Hey,.. get off my case! :-) :-)
    
    	The terms:
    		recyclable
    		new
    		recycled
    		waste
    	
    	would all need to be sufficiently and legally defined to "close"
    the loopholes. They may even be the wrong terms to use,.. 
    
    re Andy
    
    	I'm willing to ammend this idea to include longevity of usefulness
    of the product.
    
    	How would you like to factor it in?
    
    Wouldn't it be great if we could submit a petition along these lines?
    
    						/political_animal
    
    	PS Keep it coming treemon, Andy,. and anybody else,..
    	   I'm enjoying it. No need to apologize for "reality
    	  checking" me Tree...
    

Taxing certain products is not the answer in my mind.  Responsible policies to
begin with, like encouraging alternatives to politically motivated dependancies
on such things as oil, lumber, chemicals, beef products, etc., is a start.

Taxes on everything encourages bloated bureaucracies; policies such as those
that encourage the inventiveness and entreprenurialism that made this country
an industial great can easily be refined into policies that heal the wounds
made to this planet and to this species by those very policies responsible for
leading us into this pit.  Rather than make the Buck the motivating factor, all
we need be doing is to make the Human Condition and the World in which we live
the motivation for living.  It wouldn't be too hard.

Lil'_spark_of_idealismP

re .52               Things not to miss on the TV                  52 of 52

> Responsible policies to
>begin with, like encouraging alternatives to politically motivated dependancies
>on such things as oil, lumber, chemicals, beef products, etc., is a start.

	I'm not sure I understand this sentence,.. but what I think you
	are trying to say is that we need policies that will encourage
	business to not be dependent on oil....

	Right?

	If yes,.. what policies do you suggest?

	If not,.. what the heck do you mean? :-)

>Taxes on everything encourages bloated bureaucracies; policies such as those
>that encourage the inventiveness and entreprenurialism that made this country
>an industial great can easily be refined into policies that heal the wounds
>made to this planet and to this species by those very policies responsible for
>leading us into this pit.  Rather than make the Buck the motivating factor, all
>we need be doing is to make the Human Condition and the World in which we live
>the motivation for living.  It wouldn't be too hard.

	Agreed,.. bureaucracy would abound,.. and that sux,.. but

	I wonder what policies you can create that won't have that problem.

	As far as not making the buck the motivator,.. I am working
	from the premise that the buck is the ony thing that will motivate 
	big business in any direction on any issue.

	What else do they care about?

>Lil'_spark_of_idealismP

	Keep the fire goin' mon!!!!!!!

								/

  I believe fog is right that we must move towards a more honest
to mankind and motherearth society.  I believe away to do it is
to become _much_ more of a country to our own self.  To take a
solid step towards isolationism.  I would like to see strong
tariffs and meaningful legislation towards energy research and
tax benefits and government grants for conservation.  My hope
would be for us to focus on the poverty/education issues while
making some solid priority changes.  Probably have to allow the
corporations to make some money out of it and have to have a
public awareness consistent enough to vote out politicians that
didn't share the image.  I'd also legalize pot and direct the
monies and energy elsewhere.

 john

Money is the driving factor in this country my friends.  Everything eventually
ties to the big ole dollar sign.

So, I say tax the F out of businesses that abuse the system.  Take those taxes 
and pay off the huge debts this country has...or, perhaps put it to research
or education programs...  money makes people listen...

***

you may now know, but I wrote a pretty big reply to the "Stop the War??" topic
about money and how it affects this country.  after re-reading it and thinking
about it for a little bit, I deleted the sucker.  I thought it was too strong.

the basic jist was to down-play the importance of money..........

    
    
    Liked Fog's idealism....  I like being an idealist when possible
    (doesn't sound like an idealistic viewpoint does it? :^)
    
    I agree with Fog's approach...  Though the humanitarian approach is one
    that must be built into people's value systems, we can educate
    children, but we can't change adult's formed value-systems (easily)...
    
    So, I think Fog's direction is a long term approach, and the short term
    one would be...   TAX the HEck out of them adulterists.
    
    To cut down on the bureaucracy, why not set up a gubmt agency like the
    FBI, where agents go "spying" on corporations, then write reports of
    their findings and assess tax penalties  (and or bonuses) based upon
    the environmental policies and practices of the company....
    
    Treeing to be creative 

    not a flame, just a question (or two :^)  re: isolationism...
    
    is it important to you to build a level of consciousness in the world
    today regarding a "citizen of Earth" mentality???   it seem to be 
    a strong current in all our environmental discussions and to some
    extent in our "how do we stop war?" talks...
    
    if youy do feel that we need to promote a "citizen of Earth" mentality,
    how does the "take a solid step towards isoaltionism" fit with that?
    
    to me it seem that by isolating ourselves from other people problems,
    lives, situations etc and making them fend for themselves in so many
    areas, that we are abandoning the "citizen of Earth" mindset so many
    of us espouse these days...
    
    i don't feel a whole lot of obligation or responsibility to countries
    and/or geographic boundaries as i do to people...
    
    				da ve
    
    

  da ve,

    I guess you hear a negative attitude here.  I believe that we need to 
start at home first.  In my "wouldn't it be nice" dream I envision that we have
to create a consciousness in America first and then try to "show the way" so
to speak.  I think it wil be hard enough here, but think it is doable if the
movement starts. I do not think it can be done worldwide at this time.  If
it could be done internationally I am all for it, but achieving these goals in
America looks rough enough for me, and i do not believe we can stop war from
happening again at this time.  Perhaps we can bring about change in the American
attitude though, but i believe it has to look profitable to some as well as
the correct move for our country and the world.

  john 

    How though, John?  How could we make that happen?
    
    Mary

  Oh Mary, I have smiled at some of your entries in the past and wished I
had your certainty and strength of convictions.  I don't know the answers,
I even wonder if my world of harmony is possible in this world of human 
wants.

  I would think we have to have a dedicated core group willing to give the
energy and commitment necessary to "get the ball rolling".  If the following
is true;

>   international figures the opposition
>   numbers are astounding: over one-and-half million people in over 20
>   countries, including 250,000 in the United States have
>   protested against the war during the week.  An additional million
>   people in 11 countries have demonstrated in support of Iraq.

there is a start.  The above is hardly astounding, considering the numbers
that will protest once the ground war (killing) starts, but it represents 
efforts in 20 countries that could be coordinated.  If a group would take the
responsibility to contact protest leadership and each effort and set up a
network it is the very beginning.  The attitude in Germany and Britian are
better than in America, and perhaps a base in Russia.  If a small movement
within the U.S. could manifest to a large publically supported demand, that
was well conducted perhaps there could be enough public pressure worldwide to 
make a samll meaningful step towards the world we believe in.  

  I would like to see a coalition of liberal forces within the U.S. looking as
mainstream as necessary, politically astute calling for steps in the direction
we believe in.  My hope would be to start with issues that can gain strong 
public and corporate support and put pressure for legislation.  I would imagine
tax breaks and punishments to help businesses support this coalition while 
remaining rightwing in some respects, this would be a compromise at the 
beginning to get powerful support.  I would hope to get a mandate to prioritize
the war on poverty, education, and racism  ......

  Without going on to areas I believe myself to me somewhat ignorant in my
point is:

  That social change is very slow, it has begun and now seems like a very good
time to speed it up a little with an organized effort to move this country
and then the world one carefully mapped step after another towards a better
reality.  We are always told face reality, fine, let us take the tools of 
"their" reality and use them to move the awareness and desires of the people
into our reality.  


john   

    
    I think the establishment should take it upon itself to accomplish
    this.  Its the only way for it to survive the coming times, you know?
    
    Mary

 >I think the establishment should take it upon itself to accomplish
 >   this.  Its the only way for it to survive the coming times, you know?
    
 >   Mary

   I totally agree, but they will not until the suffering appear to reach
them and their own in ways that they cannot blame on a convient subculture.
I believe this has to be a somewhat universal grassroots movement.  I too
believe it is the only path to survival and do not want to leave it all for
my children, but do not feel impowered.  I realize I am and it awaits my
conviction and effort, but am not always willing to make the sacrifices 
necessary to to truely pick up the standard.  Sad to say and I apologize,
but if I or any of us would it is true, One person can make a difference, but 
at what costs, I don't know.  I should find out.

  john

Note 107.63               
    

>I totally agree, but they will not until the suffering appear to reach
>them and their own in ways that they cannot blame on a convient subculture.
    
    Well, blame doesn't solve anything, you know?  Blame doesn't resolve
    anything..  or as the boys say... sooner or later it comes down to
    "no one left, to place or take the blame".
    
    Now the establishment enjoys running things.. they have chosen that
    role for themselves and have invested a great deal of time and
    resources in the accumulation of power.
    
    Doesn't it just make sense for them to use the position and resources
    to develop a mantainable system?  ... or am I off base here, John...
    
    I mean... we all have special skills and abilities, you know? 
    Gardeners grow things and carpenters build things... it just seems to
    make sense that the bureaucrats should be able to handle this.
    
    Am I off kilter here or something?
    
    Mary

>   Am I off kilter here or something?
    
>    Mary

  Sure you are, but bless you for that.  I guess the next question would be
why they aren't doing as you propose and identify their motivations.  I'm
with you, they can lead, it doesn't even have to be a perfect society, but
for the survival and for a better world lets redirect the motivations and 
rewards.  But then i think I am off center too.

  john

    
    So why don't they just change, John?  Why don't they 'see' the way
    and go there... take steps to move in that direction?  
    
    Why do they scramble trying to keep the house of cards
    from falling apart instead of just rebuilding it with wood?
    
    I've always had trouble understand I guess.  These days, it seems even
    harder to understand.
    
    Mary

Mary,

  seems like this is just between you and I, but my guess would be their 
perspective.  "They" probably don't believe in some sort of cosmic oneness,
seems the mystical venue of choice for them is one or another of the forms 
of Christianity and that is a very limiting choice and definitely eliminates
any cosmic oneness attitude.  I don't mean to knock Christ or his followers,
it's just an observation that only 1/4 the world is Christian and according
to them the others are lost.  Also, from the perpectives of people like
Bush, Quayle, Trump, Turner ... everything is dependent upon economics, not
the naivete of brotherly love, besides they buy off their conscience with
large and generous donations.  Lastly, from their lives, isolated as much as
possible from the poverty, if they keep the money coming in and the rabble at
arms length life is good.  Only the minorities and hippies cause any trouble 
and they are lazy worthless drug addicts that only love their children 
occassionally.  There seems to be little credence given to background such
as childhood situation, or the emotional effects of poverty, besides just 
enough Horatio Algers (sp) situations occur to show them that if a person 
really they can make it.
  I think one of the reasons you saw more nonfreaks in the Viet Nam protests
as time went on is because as time went on more of their children were effected.
I have always said being a white male the 50's look good to me.  I would have
all the advantages, isolate myself from the suffering of the minorities and
marry a June Cleaver type (I'd want a horny June) and life would be great.
  i find it refreshing to hear some of the older friends I have met from church.
They are politically conservative, but seem to have a realization from 
experience that something must change if we are to survive, but it is very 
hard for them to accept anything coming from the counter culture as in their
livetimes the counter culture represents a decay in morality.  It is amusing
to see them when they are faced with the high morality of the "hippies" and
the lack of morality of the "three piece suits".  It just doesn't compute.

  How would you bring about meaningful change in our society?  Is fog right, 
do we need a revolution?  Why do honest men become pawns once elected to office.
I think there is a Stepford wives type of thing going on, what we are really
seeing is the Stepford politicians they real ones are buried under the White-
house's indoor pool.

  john     

     >  So why don't they just change, John?  Why don't they 'see' the way
     >  and go there... take steps to move in that direction?
     
    As much as I hate to disturb the mood of this discussion with a note of
    optimism, I think things ARE moving in the right direction.  The shift
    may be slower than everyone would like, but, overall, I think the 
    political consciousness is beginning to grasp the (political) importance 
    of ecology, education, human differences, and peaceful coexistance with 
    other nations.  (I don't want to get into an argument about the war. 
    My belief is that Iraq is a major threat to world peace, and that's why
    we're working with most of the rest of the world to defuse their
    military capability.)
    
    There is so much momentum behind doing things "the old way" that shifts
    toward changing things for the better seem unbearably slow.  But, I do
    see these changes occurring.  
    
    The radical says "let just tear the system down, 'cause anything that 
    happens afterward has got to be better."  The liberal says "let's shift 
    the focus of the system in a more positive direction."  The conservative 
    says "I'm happy. Something must be wrong with you if you're not happy."  
    
    I think the liberals are winning.
    
    
    
    

RE. OXNARD::FURBUSH 

>As much as I hate to disturb the mood of this discussion with a note of
>optimism

;-) nice note


>I do see these changes occuring.  

>think the liberals are winning.

  I agree with you on both counts, just seems like an ideal time to 
organize a little better and direct a little more.  but then will we
become the enemy?

    Talk about synchronicity....  I'd just finished entering my last note,
    when I received the latest desperado.  In it was the following:
    
				    =*=				    

From:	SEARCH::BREEDING "ANDY BREEDING"
To:	CLOSET::T_PARMENTER
Subj:	Desperado contribution

From:	DECWRL::"JMBSYS%RITVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu" "Jenny Beaven-Leibow" 
Subj:	Wash your flag. 

My husband Michael & I went to Washington on Saturday (1/19) - it was an
exhilarating experience, full of hope & creativity. This was my favorite
bit:

 As the huge crowd assembled in Washington's Lafayette Park (across the
street from the White House) for the demonstration on January 19th, Mike
Havenar of Central Valley, NY was attracting his own crowd-within-a-crowd
with a tin tub half full of sudsy water, an old-fashioned washboard, and
a flag.
 "So many people burn the flag!" he said "Hell, that's suicidal. You
should wash it! It says the same thing! The flag is dirty! Ever since
criminals like him" here he pointed to the White House "started *wrapping*
themselves in it!" The crowd laughed and shouted encouragement as he
knelt and started to vigorously scrub the flag.
 "They can't pass a Constitutional Amendment to keep you from *washing*
the flag" he said as he squeezed out some suds. "Hmmm... I seem to have
gotten a few stains out... but there's a lot of blood on this flag.
Gonna take something a little stronger to get it all out. Acid, maybe..."
which drew another laugh from the crowd.
 Finally he rinsed it a last time and said "Now it's cleaner than that
one up there", pointing to the White House flag. Someone in the crowd
suggested he wash that one, too, and he answered "Yeah, I'd like to."
 "As a great American - Abbie Hoffman - once said, "Hey, it's my flag,
too!" and that drew some sustained applause. I felt like we had somehoe
reclaimed something that the "my country right or wrong" folks had
symbolically claimed for their own.
 He had someone from the crowd help him fold the flag, correctly and
respectfully, and a couple of people helped him carry the tub along to
the next spot in the crowd.
 A good message, I thought - don't burn America... clean up our act...

/jenny
	
				    =*=
    

    John and Mary
    
    	It is impossible for you, the idealists, to understand the psyche
    of them, the realists.
    
    	Likewise, it is impossible for them, the realists, to see what is
    so plainly obvious to you, the idealists.
    
    	But we all gotta eat
    
    	And in this system, you need money to buy food so you can eat, lest
    you be reduced to begging and or stealing
    
    	To get money, you gotta work for the man. The man is greedy slimy
    dirty and mean. 
    
    		He'll give you a nickel
    		He'll give you a dime
    		and then he'll ask you
    		"Are you having a good time?"
    
    	For the most part, hunger is a more powerful force than idealism.
    Even most "idealists" would have trouble discussing their philosophy
    of life if deprived of food for say,.. a couple of days. This will
    lead people to do whatever the man says, so they can eat, and the
    ideals and good principles have to wait,..
    
    		and wait,..
    
    				and wait,...
    
    	Until the man is dead,.. and the meak inherit the earth. But in the
    meantime,.. 
    
    
    	money talks
    
    							/
    

	Here's something that is about what this note-topic is about:

	Edie Brickel is on David Letterman tonight.

	Hey, isn't she Jerry's daughter?  :-)

    
    :-) :-)
    
    

Note 107.67               
OURGNG::RYAN 
    
>  How would you bring about meaningful change in our society?  

    Well john, to my eyes, our society is disintegrating so fast that 
    change is bringing itself.  Its just happening and it's happening now.  
    
    Those who have isolated themselves from the problems of society
    have also isolated themselves from the truth.  Of course
    they can ignore it, or deny it, or cover it up, but the disintegration
    continues ... and so fast that most us of can neither recognize nor 
    comprehend it.  
    They have destroyed their own house of gold, john.
    
    People like us... we can live anywhere and we can live any way.  We'll
    just keep on truckin.. as we always have.  They are the ones (the free
    riders) who will suffer the most; they have the most to lose because 
    they have the most to begin with and they live so far from the edge
    that survival takes on a whole new meaning for them.  
    I wonder sometimes if they can survive at all without their system.
      
    	"I know you rider, gonna miss me when I'm gone"

Note 107.69               
OURGNG::RYAN 
    
    We've been the enemy for so long that I sometimes feel we've lost any
    potential we may have had to help.  Who would listen to us?  
    
    I'm strictly in observer mode now.
    
Note 107.71               
STAR::SALKEWICZ 
    
    / ... it won't be long before the meak inherit the earth I think... not
    long at all.      
    
    Money is nothing but paper, you know?  It represents confidence in the
    system.  As people lose confidence in the system, the paper loses it's
    value.  The system is self-destructing.  It seems to be happening
    everywhere.... all over the world.  People have already lost
    confidence.  The systems are so bogged down with their own karma that
    they don't work anymore..  What happens when (any kind of) paper money no
    longer has recognizable value to anyone?  When there is no money to 
    maintain a public structure?
    
    The industries that have true value (like computers :-) will make it,
    I'm sure..  It will just be a very, very different way of life for
    most of us.
    
    Sure, the very wealthy will be able to buy private armies to protect
    them.... at first anyway... but with paper having no value they had
    better have plenty of gold on hand, and most of their wealth is tied
    into the system (in the way of stocks, bonds, securities).... it's all
    in *paper*.  Under those kinds of conditions... the haunts of the very
    wealthy become magnets for the hunters ... they become prey.
    
    Those who wanna eat will have to learn how to grow things again... how
    to milk things and hunt things... if there's enough healthy Earth left
    to us.  Or trade skills or goods with each other... like at a show.
    
    	"the Earth will see you all through these times"
    
    Mary
    
    p.s. But we'll come out of it a heck of a lot better off than we went
    in.  We'll have the Earth back again.
    
    Anyway ...thats the way of the vision.. 
    
    	"Althea told me about scrutiny
    	 and that might need protection"

I have changed to title of this topic to more accurately reflect it's contents.

    re .75
    
    	Amen sister!
    
    	I'd like to frame that reply,.. it really made me feel good.
    
    							/
    

  TV from the sublime to the ridiculous:

  tonight, 10 PM, 1 hour, Ch 2 in Boston (public TV station), repeat of 
  "Bird", an excellent bio of Charlie Parker.

  Tomorrow, 8 PM, 2 hours, Ch. 50 in N.H. (Manchester?), 

  "The Conquerer" (1956)  A Mongol leader (John Wayne) captures a Tartar
  princess (Susan Hayward).

  This movie represents the epitomy of against-type casting!  Big John
  swaggers his way through this sword-and-horseshoe Mongol Western costume 
  drama playing...John Wayne.  One of those "so bad its good" movies.  
  Actual jaw-dropping, mind-numbing sample of dialogue:

  Big John to evil Tartar guy:  "I say, the Tartar woman is mine!"

  He keeps calling the Tartar princess "the Tartar woman" in that distinctive
  John Wayne diction of his ;-).  All the while dressed up in silly (on him)
  12th Century style Mongol attire and HELMUTS!!!  Kinda like a mutated Viking
  helmut!

  Connoisseurs of Bad Movies will not want to miss this one!  (are you
  listening, ISLNDS::CLARK?)  Note: this movie is best enjoyed with
  at least 1/2 a six-pack or so.... ;-)

		Josh

re < Note 107.78 by BARFLY::BELKIN "the slow one now will later be fast" >

>  Connoisseurs of Bad Movies will not want to miss this one!  (are you
>  listening, ISLNDS::CLARK?)  Note: this movie is best enjoyed with
>  at least 1/2 a six-pack or so.... ;-)

Hmm, maybe I'll tape this one ... it can join my collection along with my
most recent acquisition, "Robot Monster."  ;^)

Bad movies in terms of plot or acting?  If it's acting, check out "Hard Core"

I rented this one a while back and it was lame !!!

I hate going into those movie places; too many movies!  I never know what is
good since I don't watch TV or read movie reviews...

re < Note 107.80 by BIODTL::FERGUSON "Is it just a waste of time?" >

>Bad movies in terms of plot or acting?  If it's acting, check out "Hard Core"

Bad in terms of...everything I guess!  Bad taste, bad script, bad (over)acting,
bad costumes... you know....

"Hard Core" with George C. Scott and I think also his wife, Trish Van DeVeer?
As a guy looking for his daughter-turned-hooker in some sleazy city like L.A.??

>I rented this one a while back and it was lame !!!
yup that would be a waste of money! 

>I never know what is good since I don't watch TV or read movie reviews...
you don't really miss much, I guess.  Most TV and movies are junk these days.

		Josh

Yah Josh, you have the right movie in mind.  I just kind of read the back of
the movie and if it sounds good, I rent it.

I like movies from the late 60s to mid 70s...

Oh, one more thing;  it was a 2-for-1 night at the movie rental place, so not
all was lost.

I think I got "The Postman always rings Twice" with Jack Nicholson.  Not a
bad movie...

    Anyone know the name of the really bad cult film in which these young
    kids put LSD in the drinking water and fourteen year olds get the right
    to vote?  Their slogan was something like "fourteen and fight!"  They
    rise to power, but the film ends on a scary note: seven year olds are
    mobilizing to seize control!
    
    Jamie

    Sounds like "Wild in the Streets".  I never saw the movie, but I read
    the book about 20 years ago.
    
    ... Bob
    

    
    Seven year olds might do a better job. :-)  At least we'd all have the
    right to free chocolate.
    
    Mary

    
    and speaking of chocolate ... did you see where Hersey Candy Co devised
    a way to make chocolate bars that don't melt???  Guess who their
    biggest customer is?  <Hint> Said customer has a need for 400,000 bars
    o' chocolate daily. <<Hint again>> We're not in Kansas anymore Toto.
    
    Carol

re:  <<< Note 107.87 by CIVIC::ROBERTS "sing us a song" >>>

>    and speaking of chocolate ... did you see where Hersey Candy Co devised
>    a way to make chocolate bars that don't melt???  Guess who their
>    biggest customer is?  <Hint> Said customer has a need for 400,000 bars
>    o' chocolate daily. <<Hint again>> We're not in Kansas anymore Toto.
    
Errr...let me guess:  Colonel Schwopskopf (??) trying to satisfy his
chocolaholic urge??

peace,
t!ng

    
    Nope... we're not in Kansas anymore.  Maybe it's time for everybody to
    find that out.
    
    Next stop.... Oz.

We're not in Kansas anymore ... I think we're in New Jersey.   :^/

- Dave

    Why not just send them M&M's?
    

    
    Huh .. I've HEARD about your bro's place.  We may never come back ...
    
    c

RE:             <<< Note 107.93 by CIVIC::ROBERTS "sing us a song" >>>
   



>                -< jim's bro sounds eggggzactly like JIm >-


      But not as cute :^)


    
    >Huh .. I've HEARD about your bro's place.  We may never come back ...
    



    That's the whole idea!   There's fun for everyone!





Jim

re < Note 107.93 by CIVIC::ROBERTS "sing us a song" >
>                   -< jim's bro sounds eggggzactly like JIm >-
>
>    
>    Huh .. I've HEARD about your bro's place.  We may never come back ...
    
I managed to survive there ;^) for three freaky days during the MSG shows
last year.  Everyone here should visit this place at least once.  Maybe all at
the same time.  Make sure you see the living room.  Weird colored lights shine,
fantastic spirits flit in and out, paintings and photographs beckon from beyond
the known boundaries of our universe.  Say hi to Tom.

- Dave

    
    Is there anyway to miss seeing the living room?  Connections made there
    can last a lifetime :-) 
    
    c  

	Tom is the cute friend (who was at slip into summer last year)
	of your cute brother right Jim?  :-)

	Are people who spread rumors about setlists in the middle
	of the night welcome at your brothers house as well Jim?
	(this question is being asked for Phyllis and dave, the
	little tricksters that they are!)  :-) :-)

Lisa

RE:     <<< Note 107.97 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "child of countless dreams" >>>


>	Tom is the cute friend (who was at slip into summer last year)
>	of your cute brother right Jim?  :-)


        Nope...You're thinking of Danny (the blond haired guy?).  I think
       Shawn Bridges may remember (hmm may not) Danny :^)
       Tom is my not as cute as me brother's roommate ;^)


>	Are people who spread rumors about setlists in the middle
>	of the night welcome at your brothers house as well Jim?
>	(this question is being asked for Phyllis and dave, the
>	little tricksters that they are!)  :-) :-)



        You bet!! he'd love to see all of youse! You'd be more than
        welcome.  Then he could show you the calendar where he wrote 
        "St Stephen" and then he could show you the path he wore out
         in the floor while he was pacing back and forth at 5AM saying   
        "they played St Stephen, they played St Stephen"...and then
        he can show you the receiver on the phone where he grabbed the
        thing so tight when he found out you guys were spoofing us...
        Then he could show you where he sitting when I tried to call
        a certain person in this conference to return the favor and 
        got a Goddam answering machine!!!

        Yeah, he'd love to see all of you ;^)



Jim

re:      <<< Note 107.98 by BOSOX::HENDERSON "Right under the X in Texas" >>>


>        Nope...You're thinking of Danny (the blond haired guy?).  I think
>       Shawn Bridges may remember (hmm may not) Danny :^)
>       Tom is my not as cute as me brother's roommate ;^)

 
If memory serves me correctly isn't Danny the who gave me a ticket for
the Magical mystery tour. 



Shawn

That's the guy!







Jim

But I am not thinking of a blond, I am thinking of a guy with brown hair
(and glasses?)  you know Jim ... I saw him at the Garden, I think it was
the night of "St. Stephen".  :-) 

May I correct a spelling error from my last note ... I meant da ve, not dave.

:-)

Lisa

RE:     <<< Note 107.101 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "child of countless dreams" >>>



>But I am not thinking of a blond, I am thinking of a guy with brown hair
>(and glasses?)  you know Jim ... I saw him at the Garden, I think it was
>the night of "St. Stephen".  :-) 


St Stephen this sweetheart ;^)




Jim

    da ve?!?!?!?!?   what did *i* do?????????????????????????????
    
    gee, i guess i'm going to have to start thinking about what kind of
    people i choose to associate with in my free time!  :^) :^) :^)
    
    				da ve

re:  <<< Note 107.101 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "child of countless dreams" >>>

>May I correct a spelling error from my last note ... I meant da ve, not dave.

I think that's a spacing error 8-)

peace,
t!ng

	:-)

Well, I talked to my brother this morning on another topic, but he
wanted all of the set list from hell pranksters to know that he and 
all the other people he called and woke up with the list would be glad
to see them during the Nassau run  :^)





Jim

Re: <<< Note 107.106 by BOSOX::HENDERSON "Right under the X in Texas" >>>

>Well, I talked to my brother this morning on another topic, but he
>wanted all of the set list from hell pranksters to know that he and 
>all the other people he called and woke up with the list would be glad
>to see them during the Nassau run  :^)

	That's nice.  I am sure Phyllis and da ve would love to meet them!
	Too bad Jerri moved .....

:-)

    
    I don't know what you're talking about.  I had nothing to do with any
    of this.
    
    

    i am with Phyllis...
    
    i was with Phyllis...
    
    i intend to be with Phyllis in the future...
    
    			:^) :^) :^)
    
    			da ve_the_innocent_one_who_(at_least_on_this_issue)_
                        is_as_pure_as_the_driven_snow

    I think Lisa needs to see Jims brother
    
    I'm not sure why,.. but if for no other reason I think Phyllis
    and da ve should go along with Lisa,.. as moral support
    
    						/
    

	Sorry slash ... you're not innocent on this one.
	We would not have done what we did if you hadn't
	kept on buying us all shots with that $20 you
	*thought* appeared out of nowhere (into your pocket!)

:-)
    

    how does one such as myself provide *moral* support????
    
    				da ve

    
    HAH!  :-)
    
    

    :-)
    

 Did anyone see The Legend of Lizze Borden on TNT monday night. Very well
done. Elizabeth Montgomery played Lizzy and Katherine Helmond played Emma
Lizzy's sister. 

Shawn

re < Note 107.115 by BOSOX::BRIDGES "if the sun refuse to shine..." >
                        -< Lizzy Borden toke an axe... >-
                                        ^^^^
                               nudge nudge wink wink say no more

- Dave 

It must of been Fruedian slip on the keys I guess. ;-) 

Shawn

    	For all you Greg Allman fans don't miss SUPERBOY this Weekend,
     Greg will be the guest Villain !

	Monday, 18 Mar 91, 9 PM on Channel 2 in the Boston Area (check
	PBS listings in other areas)

	Firing Line Topic: "Resolved: Drug Prohibition Has Failed"

	Some of the folks discussing this will be Rep. Charles Rangel
	(U.S. Representative from Harlem - in my opinion, he is rabidly
	and fantically anti-drug), Jerry Falwell, William F. Buckley
	(who is very much in favor of legalization), and I forget the
	rest.  Could be a very interesting discussion - or it could be
	a bunch of useless flaming...

    so, did anyone watch this show last night???  can anyone comment on how
    the discussion went???  points??  counter points??? 
    
    				da ve

    and did anyone see Grandma marijuana on national news last nite?
    I didn't...but some friends were talking about it this morning.
     %^)rfb

I watched it for a while last night.  I wasn't impressed with the people
on either side of the debate....though the people who were prohibitionists
seemed a bit ignorant on some aspects of their arguments, in particular
the lawyer woman (don't recall her name, but she was the only woman in this
debate).  The childish personal attacks were both amusing and annoying at
the same time.  Jerry Falwell was there.....he's a self righteous pompous
ass if I've ever seen one....sheesh..... he made a few "jokes" about the north
during his time at the podium, I though they showed how much of an imbecile he
is.  Another person made a few jokes aimed at Falwell's weight, which I found
just as childish.

Basically, I think that the politically minded people involved here were
more concerned with winning their personal arguments than actually covering
the issues.  I wasn't impressed with many people involved....on either side.

Geez, I can't stomach politicians......

Its a very difficult issue, one that I don't believe there is any clear
cut solution to......I don't believe that there is any solution to this
"issue".......as said before, the drug problem is a symptom of a problem,
not a problem in itself.

Dave on neither side and with no answer

Re: marajuana grandma

see the World We Live in Topic....

I wrote something about it..................................... 

This was not as good a discussion as I had hoped.  Both sides made some very
good points, but the pro-legalization side failed to bring up, or failed to
adequately discuss, many important points that would have helped their
argument.

My favorite debator on the pro side was the ACLU guy (I generally like ACLU
people anyway).  Falwell hardly talked at all.

The biggest counter-argument to the anti-legalization people I could think of
was to put word "alcohol" in place of "crack" whenever they were spouting off
about the evils and the damaged done by "drugs".  The way they talk about the
damage done by heroin and coke while ignoring the harm done by alcohol and
tobacco is hypocrisy in my opinion.

Rangel made a good point that the pro-legalization people want to effectively
"give up" on the "war on drugs" since it has not worked.  He believes we should
not give up, but fight harder.  My opinion is that the damage done to
individuals, and the society as a whole, would be less than it is now if drugs
were legal and controlled.  Certainly there will be people who will ruin their
lives because of drug abuse.  We are humans and as such certain people will use
certain drugs for certain reasons.  There's nothing in God's kingdom that is
going to change that.  The best we can hope for is to minimize the damage. 
When you consider all the types of damage done by both drug usage and the side
effects of drug prohibition, removing the prohibition will remove a large
amount of societal damage, while possibly add a little back in the short term
due to new drug users.  The fact also remains that whoever wants to do coke or
pot now can do it.  Illegality is not much of a deterrent nowadays.  To say
that removing prohibition will significantly increase the number of drug users
is absurd, in my opinion.  There are statistics (US alcohol prohibition, the
Netherlands) to refute such nonsense.

I'm gonna stop here because this isn't the "drugs" note.  I could write books
on the subject, but, unfortunately, I have work to do. :-)

adam

I don't find the argument that if alcohol and tobacco are legal and
they are tremendously harmful, then we should make all harmful
substances legal as well.

I suppose you can argue about pot being harmful but it does seem to be
harmful to some people anyways...  I'm sure you all have seen a few.

There must be a better way than making all drugs (including alcolhol
and tobacco) widely available when they do pose clear risks.



john

re:             <<< Note 107.125 by VIA::HEFFERNAN "Juggling Fool" >>>

 I agree John, but I don't think the major issue is whether or not it's
harmful. There are many problems that occur when things are prohibited, 
many socio-economical problems arise. BY driving things underground, so
to speak, the demand remains constant but supply decreases. And as with
any precious commdity you pay a high price. If a person can't pay a high 
price and he/she is addicted obtaining the money becomes top priority.

 Many teenage prostitutes male and female preform services for just for 
a fix of whatever monkey is on their back. Of course the problems as not
as cut and dry as that and go much deeper. But to determine legality upon
risk factor just isn't IMO realistic. Such as sunbathing and tanning salons
lead to skin cancer. Should these activities be illegal?

 IMO an individual should have the choice to indulge in whatever substance
he/she chooses until he jeapordizes another individual. ie; driving while
intoxicated. The law should not have the stand "This is for your own good."
like the seat belt law way back when. No one but myself is endangered if I 
chose to not wear a seatbelt. My decision not the G'vmts. Freedom of choice.

But I do agree many substances are harmful.
Did any of this make sense?

Shawn

    To John Heffernan, with whom I heav debated this subject more than once
    	in the past
    
    	Just a couple of points to consider (again)
    
    	1) You can't legislate morality.
    
    		If you think its wrong for someone to take drugs, thats
    	fine. You are entitled to your opinion. If you think you can stop
    	people from taking drugs by making them illegal, you're wrong. The
    	vicious cycle already described in here by others of Wanting
    	the forbidden fruit, doing whatever (legal or illegal) to get it,
    	getting hooked on it, wanting more, needing money, committing
    	crimes to get more forbidden fruit just starts all over.
    
    	2) People *will* always do drugs no matter what the laws say
    
    	The need to get high and escape "reality" has been touted by some
    to be just as basic a need as eating, sleeping, sexing, etc. It 
    seems that since time immortal man has searched for some way to
    reach altered states. Perhaps your personal makeup is such that this
    	need is small. nonexistent, or repressed. Thats fine. But there
    	are other types out there who would like to belong to the same
    society you do. Do you not allow them their existence?
    
    	3) crime (drug realted or otherwise) is really tearing our society
    	   apart.
    
    		I don't really care whats legal or not for my own personal
    	reasons. I have free will and If I so desire, I may act illegally
    	to do "what I want". But as a citizen, I am distressed at what is
    	going on right now. The peolpe who really need help won't ask for
    	it because they know that it is incriminating to admit their drug
    	problem. In all the fervor to bust the dealers, society is in
    	effect ignoring the cry for help that does rarely come. So, thanks
    	to the system as it stands, people are just wasting away that could
    	be helped. Some are not asking for help out of fear of what will
    	become of them. The brave souls who do cry out are being plugged
    	for information as to their contacts for the cops to do the big
    	bust,.. and not receiving any real treatment for their problem.
    	Do you think the problem can ever go away under these circumstances?
    
    	The way I see it, we have no choice but to legalize. This will
    	allow us to get a handle on the drug problem, and would hopefully
    	curtail the amazing crime rate we are seeing. The gang/turf wars
    	are really business wars over the right to do drug businees. If
    there is a legal drug business in ever corner drug store, then the
    black marketeers will not be able to compete,... and will not have the
    money to carry on their  #$%^&* street wars.
    
    	If the fear of criminal prosecution is taken away, then many more
    	addicts would seek help. Thus decreasing the demand. Less people
    	would reach a state of addiction, because they wouldn't be hiding
    	and consorting with criminals. Their families would be aware of
    their (now legal) activites, and would be able to assume a proactive
    role in helping people avoid addiction before its too late. Today, 
    	everyone who hides their illegal drug use is also hiding from the
    	potential help they could be getting from friends/family.
    
    	Not that it should bear any on this decision, but it would be nice
    to take some of this tax money that could be generated from the legal
    drug business and help some people with it. Between the new revenue
    generated and that saved from fighting "the drug war", we could also
    make a dent in the deficit. Trouble is, all the under the table money
    	that the govt. is supposedly making off the black drug market will
    disappear. I guess they'd rather get cash off the books than revenue
    	on the books,.. after all,.. they don't have to account for how
    they spend the money they were never supposed to have. The otehr thing
    is that its no joke that the mob has a pretty good grip[ on some reps,
    and that these reps will never vote in favor of legalization for fear
    of their lives. After all, would you want to be the one to tell a drug
    king pin that you just voted him out of business?
    
    	ENOUGH I say
    
    	I know there are counter arguments, and there are good points and
    reasons why drugs should not be legalized. I've thought it all over,
    	and I'm tired of paying tax money to see the Bill of Rights
    desecrated in the name of the drug war which is absolutely not working
    and all the while good people are wasting away. I want t help these
    people as I think we should,. I want to takle away the black drug
    market, I want corrupted govt expsoed, and I want the @#$%^& street
    wars to stop. It is a #$%^& mess right now and if we don't take a
    little risk here and try a new approach,.. we're really going to know
    what civil war is. Only it won't be fought for slavery, or human
    rights, or any of the traditional reasons,.. it will be fought for
    #$%^&* drugs.
    
    							/
    
    
    
    
    

RE:  .-1

Well, that a good argument.  The only weak point is the assumption
that if one destroys oneself, it does not impact anyone else.  In the
case of alcoholism, for example, the costs are tremendous to
employeers, families, all of our health care costs, the children and
spouses.  So an individual does not live in a vacuum.  The cost of
alcoholism and tobacco abuse alone are staggering.


The other weak point in my view is one of availability.  Will wider
availabilty lead to more problems?  Also, if the goverment is handing
out the stuff, it seems kinda weird to me for the goverment to making
money off people's addictions.  If it's corparations, ditto.  In fact,
I have to wonder if that's where some of the right wing folks are coming
from.  New markets.  I don't know.

Of course, a real interesting question is why people feel they need
drugs anyway.

john

re: john h

>Of course, a real interesting question is why people feel they need
>drugs anyway.

To escape reality.  To feel good.  Everyone has their own way of taking a
break for a while.  Yours might be meditating or going on a hike through
the woods, others might be smoking a joint and relaxing to some music.
What works for you John, may not work for others.  And quite frankly, I'm
glad it is this way.  Otherwise we would live in a monotone society...

  except for a tragic fling with coke I never felt I "needed drugs",
but I do support certain legalization.  If I read you correctly, John Heffernan,
you are seriously questioning the logic that legalization will help solve
the problems.  My 2 cents are that the police action will solve nothing and 
that legalization will save money that can directed at education and care,
will reduce broken up families, stop much (most) of the crime on the streets,
and although I didn't think of it before, I believe / is right in that it
may reduce some of the corrupt gov. officials.  I see the logic in your 
arguments, but differ in the sense that my view is:

 the "War on Drugs" has solved nothing and created many ills, let's try
another way.  Your attitude of "why do people need drugs" is no different
to _me_ than, why do people need religion, why do people need to discriminate,
why do people need to judge other's needs, or why do people need sweets????

 I badly hurt my life and family with drugs, but because of my poor judgement,
not because drugs were available.  I believe legalization of pot, would have
helped in my case, but that is another long story  ;-)

  peace

  john

RE:             <<< Note 107.128 by VIA::HEFFERNAN "Juggling Fool" >>>

 All very good points. I do realize that we do not exsist in a vacuum.
But not all people who use alcohol, tobacco, MJ, or whatever, abuse
them. For instance I bought a six pack last sunday and still have five
left. Because I'm a responsible drinker ( I won't drink if there isn't 
a sober person to watch my son, or drive my car.) should I be prohibited
by law because others are not responsible? 

 There are good points to be made by both sides of the issue but thru out 
history societies that show tolerance fair better than those that don't.

Shawn

    RE: "bought a six pack Sunday and still have 5 left..."
                                  
    BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!
    
    %^) rfb

Well I bought a 6-pack two weeks ago, gave two to friends and I still have 1 
left.

I'm a real heavy drinker:-)

Geoff

	ask Phyllis about the beer in her refrigerator!  :-)

    "You ain't drinkin enough to wash away old memories,
    There ain't enough whiskey in Texas,
    to stop you from beggin here "please, please, please"
    
    She passed on your passion, stepped on your pride...
    Now ya found out you ain't quite so tuff,
    And if ya still wanna hold her, you must not be drinkin enough...."
     
    don henley

    
    :-)  As I was reading those replies I was thinking, "Hey, Lisa, should
    I tell them about the beer in my fridge..!"  :-)
    
    After my Garden shows party in Sept. I had about 5-6 six packs of beer
    left.  I think I'm down to 2 now.. 
    
    

    
>    :-)  As I was reading those replies I was thinking, "Hey, Lisa, should
>    I tell them about the beer in my fridge..!"  :-)
 
	:-)  I heard you.  (I am psychic you know)   :-)

Lisa

Lisa,

  What am I thinking????

    
    REally, John!!!!  This is a public place ya know!
    
    :-)
    
    

re:                     <<< Note 107.132 by CLOSUS::BARNES >>>

   > RE: "bought a six pack Sunday and still have 5 left..."
                                  
   > BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!
    
    I know, I know. There was a time in my life when I would buy a case on
Saturday and it would be gone by Sunday ~12:01 am. But ever since my son came
along I just don't drink that often at home, or anytime for that matter. But 
when I do watch out.

Shawn

hey rfb ...

my friend Joe (you met him when I was out there) is amazed at your ability to
suck 'em down ... he says for a small dude, you can POUND !!  I can understand
why... that brew you make is very tasty!

i still have to get into makin' brew.  i've been so cotton-pickin' busy with
other social life things that i have not had time.....

soon!

RE:     <<< Note 107.129 by BIODTL::FERGUSON "Is it just a waste of time?" >>>

RE:                -< Built into man from the beginning >-

A number of people have mentioned that people have always used drugs;
therefore, (as I read it) one should not question their use and abuse.
I don't agree.  There have always been wars and conflict too but I
feel such things are worth looking into and questioning (as is
everything).


>>Of course, a real interesting question is why people feel they need
>>drugs anyway.

>To escape reality.  To feel good.  Everyone has their own way of taking a
>break for a while.  Yours might be meditating or going on a hike through
>the woods, others might be smoking a joint and relaxing to some music.

What does it mean to escape reality?  By the way, when I meditate or
go for a walk in the woods, I hope that I am not escaping reality.  If
so, I need to reevaluate my walks or my sitting.  In fact, it is quite
the opposite.  So, I don't really feel your comparision is
appropriate, at least for the reasons you stated above.

In my view, there are a few problems with using drugs for these
reasons.

1)  Frequently, the state of mind induced by drugs becomes for the
user their normal state.  So what starts to happen is the drug is
taken to feel normal.

      Feel good    normal    feel low 
      <----------------------------->

      Take drug/alcohol


becomes


      normal    feel low    feel really low
      <------------------------------------>
      Take drug   no drugs  


2)  Drugs do have well-known toxic effects.  If they are so great,
then why do you feel like sh*t the next day?

3)  Even if you escape for a while thru altering your brain chemistry,
whatever you are escaping from is still there, in fact, it may be
worse.  Why not deal with it directly when you have the oppurtunity?


The above is just some thoughts on the personal use of drugs and why
people (including myself in the now distant) past used them.  I think
it interesting hearing about why people feel they need to use drugs
although perhaps this is not the best forum to discuss it.

In my mind, questioning personal use is not tied directly to
legalization arguments.  My feelings on that are mostly tied to two
things one is the incredible damages drugs do and two is the values we
want to make explicit in our laws.

I do not favor suspending the bill or rights for drug related offenses
so I think it is disingenious to argue about them when rebutting my
remarks.  I also do support fair and realistic penalites tied to the
drugs danger and also whether its personal use or selling, etc.  And I
include tobacco and alchohol in my arguments.  I do not support the
hypocricital standards between alcohol and marijuana for example.

john

Re: john h.

>What does it mean to escape reality?  By the way, when I meditate or

I did not really qualify what I meant by escaping reality.  

	For me, I get caught in this cycle of getting up in the morning, eating 
breakfast, reading the paper, getting ready for work, going to work, eating
lunch, working out, going home, making dinner, etc,etc.  This cycle of events 
tends to repeat itself.  I find that ever since I graduated from college, 
my personal time has dwindled down to next to nothing and my routine is 
somewhat monotnous.  Time seems to pass by as fast as the wind.  Sometimes
a routine can cause undo stress on some people if they let it get to them, or 
if life's pressures are too great.  Hell, i'm just a single dude with what 
appears to some as next to nothing to worry about and I have plenty of 
stress (no loans, no wife, no kids to support, etc).  In short, my relaxing 
time seems to be very low.  When I relax, i don't enjoy thinking about work
or wondering if I'll be able to make it by this month.  So, often I will make 
time out to take a walk (or whatever) -- to break up the daily chain of crap 
that goes on, and on, and on..

	Perhaps people experience this phenomenon too.  And, every now and 
then, these people just want to put on the breaks and forget about the daily 
events -- releive the stress.  Do something different.  Relax for a change.  
This might  include doing drugs (alcohol, MJ, etc);  maybe that is why I 
chose the "escape reality phrase" because the daily chain of events *is* 
reality, where as, if I can just take a moment to totally space out and 
*forget* about reality, I'm escaping it.... after a short escape, I'm 
definitely ready to confront reality once again...

	It is similar to working your butt off for 12 months without a 
vacation.  After a nice long vacation, you're ready for work.  Reality is 
work, escaping reality is the vacation.

	I believe people can use drugs, which may be illegal, in a controlled 
way.  It is a matter of having an understanding of the effects and not losing 
site of reality.  I indulged quite a bit in college... actually, quite a lot 
would be more accurate.  But, when it came time for an examination, I knew 
that I had to do well -- tests made up my grades which led to the ultimate 
goal of graduation.  So, i'd dry up, study hard, and ace the damn test.  My
friends would laugh at me when I said no because I have to do well on a test.  
I graduated Cum Laude; my friends could hardly believe it...I had a handle on 
it, I understood the "system."  I never lost site of my goal (graduation).  
Now, maybe others have a harder time doing this (I had many friends who didn't 
make it) ... but, it can be controlled.  And, this is why I have a major
conflict with some laws in this country.  

	JC

    Re:  the incredible damages drugs do
    
    I believe that legalization would significantly reduce the damages done
    by drugs.  From an Economic standpoint (a strictly cost-benefit
    analysis) the costs of the drug laws by far outweigh the benefits.
    Staggering amounts of money are being used to prevent "victimless"
    crimes.
    
    "There are two policy issues in drug control:  Is it desireable that
    government officials attempt to suppress voluntary drug use by
    individuals, and can government effectively suppress it at a REASONABLE
    COST to the citizens?  The philosophical issue arises at a fundamental
    level.  Although criminal law primarily emerged to control crimes of
    force and violence, it expanded to prohibit behavior which does not
    directly involve coercion by one person against another.  It is hard to
    gather statistics on these crimes because it is not in the interest of
    either party to report it - perhaps a signal that it is none of the
    government's business.  From an ideological perspective, conservatives
    seem to favor strong drug laws and enforcement, yet people who embrace
    free enterprise cannot be philosophically consistent and favor criminal
    laws against drug use because the essence of free enterprise is
    individual liberty."   - Crime by Choice, Morgan O. Reynolds, Fisher I.
    
    Costs of the laws are incredible and not (IMO) reasonable.  Besides the
    monetary costs there is:  alienation of the user - as the laws stand
    anyone who has ever tried mj, cocaine or heroin is a criminal, many
    users are forced to turn to criminal activities such as burglary to
    support their drug habits.  The inelastic demand for most drugs
    indicates that trying to curb drug use by reducing supply and raising
    the price will be ineffective.  
    
    "The result is that efforts to cut supplies have trivial effect on the
    consumption (due to inelastic demand) but yield a large increase in
    expenditures - and thus a large increase in the property crimes used to
    finance those expenditures.  In an important sense, crime prevention
    becomes crime creation."  Daniel M. Benjamin, Roger Leroy Miller and
    Douglass North, The Economics of Public Issues.
    
    There are sever costs to the justice system.  Not only are the courts
    backlogged with drug offenders but, due to the lucrative nature of the
    business of selling drugs, corruption is rampant.  
    
    The illegal nature of drugs also hinders the treatment process. 
    Resources are directed at suppressing use, not treating those addicted. 
    
    There are two reasons why the war against drugs can't be won.  First,
    the opponent is vast in numbers and most Americans don't consider them
    enemies, and second, the illegal nature of drugs produces the opposite
    of the desired effects.  Crime, corruption, desease and other costs
    that the war on drugs aims to prevent are increased by criminalization.
    
    Legalization would increase domestic production and reduce incentives
    to smuggle.  NORML claims that mj is the second largest cash crop in
    America.  Obviously, the growers are not telling the IRS about their
    profits from the sale of their product.  The legalization of the drug
    would allow these people to come out into the open about where their
    income is from thus generating revenue in taxes for the government.
    The government could also generate revenue by levying a tax on the sale
    of the drug.  This revenue could be used to finance rehab centers or
    any number of socially beneficial programs - such as comprehensive
    education in schools on the dangers of drug use. 
    
    Legalization would also GREATLY reduce crime.  Even though the
    government would levy a tax the price would still be lower than before
    legalization.  This would create a reduction in property crimes
    committed to support habits.  There would also be a serious decline in
    the power of organized crime.  "More than half of all organized crime
    revenues are believed to derive from the illicit drug business; 
    estimates of the dollar value range between $10 and $50 billion per
    year.  Instead of the government collecting billions of dollars
    annually in tax revenues they expend billions in a virtual subsidy of
    organized crime."  Ethan Nadelman "Drugs:  The Case for Legalization",
    Washington Post, Oct. 8, 1989
    
    There would be a much more effective police force with a substantial
    reduction in corruption.  Prisons and courts would benefit - right now
    there are so many cases awaiting trial for drug charges that cases are
    sometimes delayed for long periods of time or are never brought to
    trial at all.
    
    The addict would no longer have the stigma of being a criminal attached
    to him.  Addiction could be dealt with at the medical levels as opposed
    to the criminal level.
    
    There is also a health issue.  Cocaine, heroin and mj sold at the
    street level often contain impurities that can be more harmful than the
    drug itself.  Many users also use unclean needles, which has been shown
    to contribute to the spread of AIDS.  If drugs were legal these
    problems could be eliminated.  Selling impure drugs would be a criminal
    offense and needles would be readily available.
    
    We have seen that the United States is now involved in a seemingly
    futile battle against drugs.  We are spending enormous amounts of money
    to support these prohibitive laws, yet the costs of these laws outweigh
    the benefits.
    
    "The path you [William Bennet, ex National Drug Policy Director]
    propose of more police, more jails, use of the military in foreign
    countries, harsh penalties for drug users, and a whole panapoly of
    repressive measures can only make a bad situation worse.  The drug war
    can not be won by these tactics without undermining the human liberty
    and individual freedom that you and I cherish."  Milton Friedman, "An
    open letter to Bill Bennett", The Wall St. Jrn., Sept. 7, 1989

    all comments are valid,... and I read them and try to keep the right
    perspective...so how can I say this >nicely< to people like J. Heffernan
    etc. whose thoughts and ideas I value, yet don't agree with.....
    
    STAY OUGHTA MY BUSINESS!

                                                libertarian rfb

    yes JC...I do have a tendancy to pound 'em down....course ya'll
    saw me at my best (worst)...during a deadshow!!!!!!
    
    I never lose sight of my goals either  (got another beer?)
    
    BTW haven't heard from BIG JOE, sent him a Xmas card, is he still
    in Denver?
              
    HIC_rfb

Hey now John;

You contrast meditation with drug-taking, saying that meditation brings you 
even more in tune with reality, while drug-taking is done to escape from
reality.  If one takes drugs in order to withdraw from the negative aspects
of this world, or put them at a distance ... how is this different from
meditation?  I'm not arguing so much as asking your opinion, as you obviously
know quite a bit about meditation.

- Dave

 ya know rfb, that is one of the things that alwaqys gets me.  We tend to
use the Constitution as an unbendable justification for the laws of the land,
while creating laws that the writers of the Constitution would have rejected
as too much government interference.

  The leaders of this society verbalize the argument that society has changed
and the founders could not have envisioned the present day problems, if that
is true, throw the document out.  I don't believe that to be true!!  I believe, 
like England of old the powers want to keep their power, corruption and wealth 
through control which they get by laws that infinge upon our basic freedoms, 
they get buy in from the masses through false fears.  We denounced this years
ago and we should now.

  john

rfb,

Joe said that he got your card and he wants to come to Colo Springs when he
gets a weekend off.  He is still in Denver... Joe is not a good corresponder...
when he was back east for a bit (earlier this month), me and his girl friend 
really leaned on him about the letter writing.  We made him feel really guilty..
Hmmm, I guess it did not work ... i still don't have a letter from him (that 
he owes me!!)

JC

< Note 107.148 by OURGNG::RYAN "Spent my life seeking all that's still unsung" >

I think there's always going to be the problem of how government can ensure
citizens' safety and well-being, without becoming too intrusive.  I think the
reality of modern society is that there will always be individuals/groups who
will harm others, intentionally or as a side-effect of the pursuit of their own
goals.  I would like to think that the gov't is going to address that ... 
ideally without interferring with citizens' personal lives.

- Dave

re:       <<< Note 107.147 by ISLNDS::CLARK "politicians throwing stones" >>>

I've been meditating the last few months as a way to deal with stress, so
let me offer an opinion.   Meditation is incredibly powerful and I never
understood it until I started doing it.  What I get out of meditation is
a slowing down of the outside world, or rather, my _reaction_ to it.  Instead 
of getting into a "fight or flight" mode of reaction when confronted with a 
stressful situation, I try to _not_ get into the fight or flight mode of
reaction, which only gets the adrenaline going, the nerves frayed, and so on.
Compound fight or flight modes of reactions with the many situations one 
encounters, and you get stress!   

By meditating I can become more aware of how I react to certain situations.
And I can realize that it is _my reaction_ that causes stress, not the situation
itself nor is it the way I am (and therefore cannot be changed).  By breathing
a certain way you can trigger a relaxation response (releasing opiate related 
endorphins in the brain), and you stop the opposite reaction (f or f).

This is awareness, or I think as John H. put it, being more in tune with
reality, or your perception of things as they are.  

Contrast this to drugs, for example, alcohol.  Using alcohol (or something
else I guess) to mellow yourself out may help while you're under the influence 
but really does nothing when you wake up in the morning and have to deal with
the same stuff you got stressed out about in the first place.   

I always equated meditation with "spacing out" until I started doing it.
They are not the same things.  Granted, after/while meditating I feel like
I'm in an altered state for a brief time, but I call that relaxed.  Those
endorphins are powerful.

> reality.  If one takes drugs in order to withdraw from the negative aspects
> of this world, or put them at a distance ... how is this different from
> meditation?  

Did I help answer this question ?   

Ken


P.S.  I learned about meditation in a DEC course at MRO called "Dealing with
Stress" or something similar.  Highly recommended.

    To John H
    
    	You are really getting picked on this time bug guy,.. but
    I'm going to try a little something here.
    
    	We started out talking about legalization,.. and then digressed
    towards the question of will with:
    
    	Why do people want to take drugs in the first place?
    
    	Now we can sit here and debate for years *why* people take drugs
    and in the mean time, you can kiss the bill of rights goodbye along
    with billions of dollars in tax money and hundreds (thousands?) of
    good people who OD/ waste away in their addiction. The question will
    still never be answered, and that is why it is such an interesting
    question. I do not care to have you psychoanalyze my reasons for the
    things I do,.. so I will not tell you what I think the reasons are.
    Whats more, why should I have to explain to you or anyone else my
    reasons for doing anything I do? This is supposed to be a free country
    and I shoud be free to pursue happiness however I want. So my answer
    to the question of Why do people take drugs is "because".
    
    	Given that, and given that people will always take drugs even
    if they know they shouldn't, you have the drug problem to solve.
    Right or wrong, its the facts of life. This is what we should stick to
    as far as a topic for conversation goes. If you are going to challenge
    everyone to defend their actions,,.. and criticize them for it, the
    discussion is going to degenerate (even further than it already has)
    into personal attacks. Whats the point? John you're right people should
    not take drugs. Why do they? I don't know,.. I haven't got the time to
    think about that because there is man with a gun over there ready to
    shoot anything that moves to protect his illegal drug business. He's
    the problem I want to deal with,.. not the psyche of modern man.
    
    	The people who really need to hear all these things you are saying
    John are not in this notesfile. They're sleeping in a doorway downtown
    plotting their next crime to get their next fix. You'll neve speak
    to them because they'll never listen to you until we as a society start
    to do something to help them with their problem. Lets legalize the Sh*t
    so they have to come into the drug store,,,, in broad daylight,.. and
    ask for it. Then they can be ID'd and possibly helped. Right now,
    they're just "out there" on the "other side" of this ridiculous war on
    drugs. We should all be on the same side after all if this is really a
    war on drugs,.. why are we attacking and sacrificing people?
    
    	So regardless of the moral value of taking drugs, lets just discuss
    whether legalization is a good idea.
    
    							/Bill
    
    
    
    You may be 100% correct John, that people should not take drugs. That
    doesn't change the fact that they will anyway. Why does the 90 year old
    man dying of lung cancer continue smoking? Stupidity? Death wish?
    pleasure? what have you.
    
    	It is also true that if everyoine didn't take drugs, then we
    wouldn't have a drug problem. However, attempting to convince everyon
    not to take drugs, or to try and assure it through legislation does
    not work. Histroy speaks.
    
    	

re < Note 107.151 by FURTHR::HANNAN "Beyond description..." >
                        -< maybe I can help explain... >-

Good info, Ken ... I understand your point.

I was trying meditation for a while, but was too easily distracted by my
senses, as well as having difficulty clearing my mind ... but I'm thinking
of trying again, with different methods than those I was using.

- Dave

RE:  .147 Dave Clark?

I think Ken H answered the question quite well so I won't bother to
basically repeat what he said.

    
    Why do we think that a single state of consciousness should be
    legitimatized by law as if it were the only "correct" one?
    
    What happens when the computer driven virtual realities start coming
    out.. altering consciousness electronically?

RE: <<< Note 107.155 by HKFINN::STANLEY "What a long strange trip it's been..." >>>

    
>    What happens when the computer driven virtual realities start coming
>    out.. altering consciousness electronically?

I for one have not been too impressed with this new computer
technology.  I fail to see what good it does.  It seems to me like
another game or hobby.  So few have mastered this "plain-old" reality.
Are these other realities people so keen on mastering anything more
than an escape from the vanilla one?  I don't know.  I suppose I
shouldn't comment until I try this virtual reality stuff but I can't
help thinking that the undefiled natural world has enough if one cares
to really investigate it.  Who needs
all these high-tech toys? 

re:             <<< Note 107.156 by VIA::HEFFERNAN "Juggling Fool" >>>

>Who needs all these high-tech toys? 

I do! I do!

		Dave

re:             <<< Note 107.156 by VIA::HEFFERNAN "Juggling Fool" >>>

  That is why I want to learn to get into non-drug induced meditation.  
I think spacing out is great and the high tech toys, I could use and 
appreciate them, but from the outside looking in, tapping into the naturally
available powers of the universe looks pretty sweet to me!!   Talk about a
trip, astro traveling has gotta be it!!!  and if you get become truely
psychic while you are at it that has gotta be cool.  Seems like the high
tech. stuff is just getting as close as we can to the real thing without
doing the real thing.  No problem, I'd like to get as close as I can, but 
might as well do the real thing.

  john

    It looks like the legalization movement is slowly gaining ground.
    First, last week we have Bill Buckley endorsing it. Never thought I'd
    see it, but like someone lese pointed out, he is a thinker and has
    really good reasons for his change of mind. Now this week, old William
    Rotch, editor of the Milford Cabinet (what? you can't get it at your
    local news merchant?) was rambling about how the NH government has been
    getting around an income/sales tax by increasing unavoidable fees, like
    the "franchise" tax, and a $500 tax for law practice. He says the state
    could make a bundle if thses drugs are legalized and the state got a
    monopoly on the like they do now with liquor.
    
    Scott
    

    
    IMNSHO - there is not "one" reality...
     
    everyone creates their own reality which is molded by our environment
    and by what we accept of another person's perceived reality.
    
    for some people taking drugs isn't an escape from reality -- 
    it's another form of molding in order to create our own uniquely 
    perceived reality.  but again this is in violent agreement to the
    analogy of the finishing touches on the painting.
    
    traking drugs is only escape when a person believes that there is only
    one true reality....
    
    Meditation can also be used in both these ways -- either as a mechanism
    to shape and mold one's reality, or to escape from everyone elses
    "reality" (which I guess it's obvious I don't believe in)
    
    fwiw - I support legalization of MJ, but that's it.  I believe we
    should not allow highly addictive drugs to become legal.  There's
    enough big business exploitation of alcohol and tobacco addictions.  I
    don't believe anything good could from allowing this same source of
    exploitation becoming widespread with drugs like cocaine and heroin.
    Yes we could redirect a lot of the money being spent to fight these
    drugs towards education and rehabilitation.  but I believe these
    dollars would be offset by business advertising, much like the currnet
    advertising of beer and butts. 
    
    Enuf fer now... 
    
    glenn
    
    
    
     

RE.  legalization maryjane

  Years ago I saw a list of already copyrighted names for brands of pot
in case it got legalized.  Fun reading

  john

    
    
    
| I know, I know.  Where the hell did that come from??  The above story was a
| little far fetched to be sure, but I hope it illustrates a point.  Just 
| because there is a "war on drugs", this does not give the powers that be the
| right to forego our rights as citizens in order to fulfill their objectives.
 
Oh Yeah?  I refer you to HR4079, currently before the U.S. House of Representatives
in which Rep. Newt Gingrich and Sen. Phil Gramm have proposed declaring a state of
emergency in this country vis-a-vis the drug war/crisis, etc.
 
        "The bill proposes suspending the Constitution for five years so that 
  millions of illegal drug users could be held by the state in concentration
  camps.  All internees would be forced to work and if anyone is caught
  with drugs in the camps, they would have one year added to their sentence 
  each time--with no right to appeal.
        "HR 4079 calls for declaration of a five year national state of emergency
  --in essence marial law.  It proposes reopening the Japanese Internment Camps
  used during WWII, using active and inactive military bases as prisons, and 
  instituting a new privately owned prison system as well.  To aid in accomplishing
  this, the 4th Amendment, the 8th Amendment, and habeas corpus are to be either
  superseded, redefined, or disallowed.  A provision has been built in to allow 
  the government to purchase goods manufactured by prison slave labor.  To ensure
  the duration of this labor force, all previous maximum sentences would be changed
  to minimum sentences.  New mandatory sentences would be applied, and probation,
  parole, and suspension of sentences revoked.
        "To provide an even greater pool to draw from, mandatory drug testing
  of just about everyone above junior high school level has been included in 
  the bill.  However, the resolution carefully avoids addressing the necessary
  funding.
        "Although press releases regarding the bill were went out to all the
  national and local news outlets by the Maryland Libertarian Party, there has
  been practically no mention of the bill in the media.  The state evidently is
  hoping to sweep this bill into law right under our noses while we are all
  preoccupied with other events taking place around the world.
        "Everyone needs to make phone calls and write letters.  Direct your
  correspondence to the media and your representatives as well as Gingrich
  and Gramm.  If they don't think you care about this bill becoming law--it will!
  Act now or cry behind the barbed wire later.  (reproduced from the July 1990
  Libertarian Party NEWS.) Editor's note:  The number of the bill, once again,
  is HR 4079 and this report is NOT exaggerating.  Look it up."   
                         -reprinted without permission from
                          Mondo 2000, Issue Number 3, Winter 1991
                          page 19, by Tomas Estrada-Palma & Larry Monaghan
  
    

RE:         <<< Note 107.161 by IMTDEV::INGALLS "Earth Day - Every Day" >>>
                        -< why ask why -- try Bud Dry  >-

    
     
>    everyone creates their own reality which is molded by our environment
>    and by what we accept of another person's perceived reality.
    
Interesting statement.  My own experience is that there is a "reality"
that is and also a "reality" we create in our own minds that differs from
person to person.  I think you are referring to the second one in your
statement.  It seems to take some work to get in touch with the
former.

john

RE:         <<< Note 107.161 by IMTDEV::INGALLS "Earth Day - Every Day" >>>
                        -< why ask why -- try Bud Dry  >-

    
    
>    Meditation can also be used in both these ways -- either as a mechanism
>    to shape and mold one's reality, or to escape from everyone elses
>    "reality" (which I guess it's obvious I don't believe in)

Glenn, where are you coming from when you say this?  From your own
experience, things you have read, opinions?  Perhaps you would care to
expound on what are trying to say.

Anyways, my understanding is different.   Most meditation that I know
about and I have been practicing one form for three or four years and
have read about many others *is not* about shaping or molding one
reality nor escaping everyone else.  It is about directly perceiving
what is without preconceived opinions, thoughts, feelings, judgements,
etc.  Do you see the difference?  It is doing this so compassion may
arise and so it will be clear what needs to done in any circumstance.

Most of the time we we don't really see what is.  We see our own
reaction to what is shaped by our own self-created and self-centered
ideas about what is.  Isn't this the case?  Have people investigated
this matter directly (if they care to)?  One of the biggest ideas is
that of a separate permanent self that exists in isolation from
everything else.

When thought and analysis occurs, doesn't there automatically arise
self and other, what is being observed and what is observing?  What is
there before this occurs?  That is an interesting question I think.

re:         <<< Note 107.161 by IMTDEV::INGALLS "Earth Day - Every Day" >>>

>    IMNSHO - there is not "one" reality...
     
>    everyone creates their own reality which is molded by our environment
>    and by what we accept of another person's perceived reality.

>    traking drugs is only escape when a person believes that there is only
>    one true reality....

I agree very much with this point of view.  I don't know if it's possible to
know the a one true reality as an individual.  All we can know is our own
personal perceptions of that reality.  I enjoy meditation as well as chemically
induced perceptual shifting and techno-virtual realities.  It really depends on
the circumstances.  I figure that one should get as many different points of
view of reality as possible.  

		Dave

Note 107.163             
AD::VAUK 
    
    
    If this bill passes, then America no longer exists.  
    
     
    mary

RE -1, HR whatever


Hard to believe that we have freely elected officials in the Congress of
the United States of America who have the testicular fortitude to even THINK
like that.







Jim

    
    
    
    Its not testicular fortitude.
    
       
         Its RECTAL CRANIAL INVERSION!!!
    
    
    stece
         

    
    
    Oh well.... it doesn't matter anyway.... it WON'T happen. :-)
    
    We will all work together, each in our own little way, to see to it
    that the fabric that binds our country together isn't torn by the
    unaware.  The Constitution and Bill of Rights will not be suspended.
    
    mary

I must admit that I have not been following this topic, or many
topics in Grateful lately.  Too busy with trying to help this
company MAKE MONEY.

But, I did happen to read John Heffernan's note in .156 about
"who needs it" with regard to virtual reality.

I sent John the following:

John,

Just a quick note, triggered by your "who needs it" not about virtual
reality in Grateful.

The popular media is very quick to latch on and publicize the, in my opinion,
most lame aspects of this new field.

Someone in my group is involved in virtual reality research, and we have
some very big customers who are quite eager to see virtual reality become
a reality for thier application domains.

One example...the pharmacutical industry.  We have been working with drug
manfucturers and virtual reality.  The drug designers (chemists) have some
very real and useful v.r. needs.  Drugs today are typically designed via
a styrofom model system...very much like leggo's or other children toys.
Chemists want to be able to view 3D chemical structures, and to manipulate
them by hand (take this molecule here, twist it, and move it over there).

Such a successful application may very well help to develop drugs which 
could revolutionize the medical industry...everything from asthma to 
allergies to cancer to...

We have several other customers, in other domains, for which v.r. could
offer revolutionary possibilities.

I guess my point is that it is not just toys, games, or hobbies.

tms

Journal:   Newsbytes  June 12 1990

SECRET SERVICE ADMITS TO MONITORING BULLETIN BOARDS NEW YORK, NEW YORK,
U.S.A., 1990 JUNE 5 (NB) -- In a letter to Rep.  Don Edwards (D - Calif,),
United States Secret Service Director John R. Simpson admitted that the
Secret Service, in investigating alleged criminal activities, has
surreptitiously monitored computer bulletin boards.

Simpson's letter, obtained by Newsbytes, was in response to an April 3rd
request by Edwards' House Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights
that the Secret Service answer specific questions concerning its methods of
investigating computer fraud.

In response to Question 2, "Has the Secret Service ever monitored any
computer bulletin boards or networks?" Simpson replied, "Yes, we have
occasionally monitored computer bulletin boards.  The monitoring occurred
after we received complaints concerning criminal activity on a particular
bulletin board.  The computer bulletin boards were monitored as part of an
official investigation and in accordance with the directives of the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (Title 18 USC 2510)."

"The procedures used to monitor computer bulletin boards during an official
investigation have involved either the use of an informant (under the direct
supervision of the investigating agent) or an agent operating in an
undercover capacity.  In either case the informant or agent had received
authorization from the computer bulletin board's owner/operator to access the
system."

We do not keep records of the bulletin boards which we have monitored but can
provide information concerning a particular board if we are given the name of
the board."

Rep.  Edwards was quoted in a page 1 New York Times story on Sunday, June 3rd
by John Markoff as saying, "Every time there is a perceived crisis,
law-enforcement agencies and legislators overreact and usually due process
and civil liberties suffer.  The Fourth Amendment provides strict limits on
rummaging through people's property."

The same article made reference to Secret Service agents that
"surreptitiously eavesdropped on computer bulletin board and telephone
conversations." Responding to this issue, Secret Service spokesperson Richard
Adams told Newsbytes "We do not have the manpower to sit around and monitor
bulletin boards.  When we do, it is in direct response to charges of criminal
activity that firms or individuals have brought to our attention.  It's much
the same as counterfeiting.  We don't begin an investigation until some one
complains of receiving counterfeit bills."

re < Note 107.165 by RAB::HEFFERNAN "Juggling Fool" >
                                    -< ??? >-
>Anyways, my understanding is different.   Most meditation that I know
>about and I have been practicing one form for three or four years and
>have read about many others *is not* about shaping or molding one
>reality nor escaping everyone else.  It is about directly perceiving
>what is without preconceived opinions, thoughts, feelings, judgements,

John, how do you know that you are perceiving reality as it "is" while
meditating, or as a result of meditating?

re:  <<< Note 107.173 by ISLNDS::CLARK >>>

>John, how do you know that you are perceiving reality as it "is" while
>meditating, or as a result of meditating?

Ok, I'm not John, I'll admit, but I'd like to take a shot at this question.
I do transcendental meditation, and the main purpose of this type of
meditation (and, as I understand, most types of meditation that I know of)
is to clean out the "garbage" in your mind that's cluttering up your
thoughts (most of the garbage being thoughts resulting from everyday
stress).  So, by clearing up your mind, meditation can relieve stress
and, in the process, probably give you a better view of the reality
you want to see (which, of course, is not necessarily anybody else's
reality, but which I feel is a part of an absolute reality).

As for reality, I think the reality each person sees is just a part of
the whole picture.  People use meditation to become "enlightened" (which
I always think is just a fancy word for cleaning out all the garbage in
your mind as opposed to just some, and thus widening the little peephole
through which we see the world).  I don't think any human is capable of
seeing the absolute reality (even the enlightened folks) because to be
able to do that would make us God (but that's another story 8-).

peace,
t!ng

re < Note 107.174 by SKYLRK::TING "Give Peace a Chance!!!" >

>and, in the process, probably give you a better view of the reality
>you want to see (which, of course, is not necessarily anybody else's
>reality, but which I feel is a part of an absolute reality).

I don't understand ... the reality you want to see = part of absolute reality?

Oh no, semantical debates on reality!  ;^)

On the side ... I see MJ as being what John Lennon called it ... a harmless
giggle.  Asking a person why he "needs" to smoke MJ in order to enjoy life
makes about as much sense to me as asking a person why he "needs" to ride
a roller coaster.  The harder drugs are a different issue.

Disclaimer: I don't smoke MJ, of course.

re:  <<< Note 107.176 by ISLNDS::CLARK "honor veterans - wage peace" >>>

>I don't understand ... the reality you want to see = part of absolute reality?

Yep.  I hate to keep repeating the story, but you know the story of the blind
men and the elephant that I've told a couple of times in old Grateful??  Well,
you have these 7 blind men who wants to "see" an elephant.  Each one went up
to the elephant and grabbed a part of it to "see" what an elephant "looked"
like.  The one that grabbed the leg thinks the elephant "looked" like a
tree.  The one that grabbed the ear thought the elephant "looked" like a 
fan, and so forth.  They got into a great argument because each insisted
that he was right about what the elephant "looked" like.  The sad part is
that the real elephant looked like everything they each thought, but each
only described a part of it.  So, the blind men are not only "blind" in
the eyes, but also "blind" in their minds when each refuse to open his mind
to another person's "reality", thinking his is the only true "reality".
You can liken the elephant in this story to "absolute" reality.  We each
only will see the part that we want to see and we will be "blind" to an
absolute reality as long as we don't open up our minds to anyone else's
"reality".

>Disclaimer: I don't smoke MJ, of course.

Of course 8-).

peace,
t!ng

re:  Note 107.175 by OURGNG::RYAN 

>                   -< gee, T!ng you're God aren't you  ;-) >-

YIKES!!  No, and I don't wanna be!!  I think I'd be afraid to see the
way God would see (God = Jehovah, Buddha, the Force, the positive Vibe,
etc.)  

peace,
t!ng

    
    re 107.178
    
    You do see the way God would see though Ting.
    
Note 107.175             
OURGNG::RYAN 
    
    I agree with you, John... we are God.
    
    It only makes sense... you know?  I mean... if you look objectively at
    the history of life here in this galaxy.... like watching So Far.
    
    We gradually evolved here and the only consciousness we found when we
    became aware of ourselves ... was us.
    
    We are like a bunch of child Gods coming of age in a big playground.
    We are becomming more and more powerful and more and more aware of our
    power.  And with no one to guide us, we must be very careful now to
    "watch each card we play and play it slow".
    
    I wouldn't presume to tell conventional Christians (or anything else
    for that matter) that their services are wrong either... but I know
    that they are wrong for me.
    
    Mary

    never ceases to amaze me that you put yourself through such torture,
    John Ryan...%^)

                                 rfb

    re: Mary, John Ryan
    
    Same way I see it.  God is "in" not "out".  If you get my drift.
    
    dave

RE:                      <<< Note 107.173 by ISLNDS::CLARK >>>
                                  -< curious >-
>John, how do you know that you are perceiving reality as it "is" while
>meditating, or as a result of meditating?

Good question Dave.  I don't know if I have a good answer.  I would
say the "goal" is to see things as they are and that this can be done
from the point of view of an empty or still mind.  So more what I am
getting at is to see things and perceive things without preconceived
ideas and conditioning.  How can this be done?  Well, it seems like
having an empty or still mind might help.  This answer sounds terrible
sorry!  I wish I could get you a direct hookup after I've been sitting
for two or three days.

By the way, I don't really consider myself an expert or anything.
I've been sitting for about three years.  My mind is still very
turbulent and conditioned and everything else.  It appears like it may
be a lifelong process.  The best thing is to try it if one is
interested in such matters.  I find it very hard though.  I find that
in the past my mind generally doesn't quite down for two or three days
not that that is the goal or anything.  To be with whatever arises,
thought, feeling, sensation, emotion, without being throw about by
"the though train".  That would be interesting.  Anyways, I find it
interesting to see what happens when the mind is quiet and still (not
that it happens to me much ;-)


peace,
john

Hey now John;

A certain amount of mind-turbulence is natural, though, isn't it?  The
meditation "exercises" that I'm aware of (and I admit I might be completely
off base, here), such as sitting with eyes closed for long periods of time,
staring at a candle in a dark room, seeing how long you can go without 
some processing of a thought, etc. ... seems to be unnatural for humans.
I wonder whether maybe this could distort one's perception of reality?

I do agree, though, that life can be stressful and disturbing.  But I
don't think one can say that all MJ users are trying to return to a
"normal" state of mind (self-medication?).  I think MJ is usually used
as a form of recreation.

- Dave

 On Current Affair Extra this weekend there was a piece on The Boyz.
It was basically about the same thing that article of a few weeks ago
was about, and a short interview with Bobby. At one point my wife turn 
to me and said you better head back.... no no no. She said, "Is it me,
or does everyone think he is wierd?" ;-) So I said "NO it's not you,
he is wierd." 8-)

Shawn

    I saw this too, thats why I went out and bought DEADicated, saw some
    live stuff Bobby playing with the artists from the CD.....looked good
    too ! any boots from this show ? or shows ? or whatever it was !
    
    Chris

re:   <<< Note 107.185 by MSHRMS::FIELDS "A Time 4peace I Swear Its Not 2L8" >>>
   
    >any boots from this show ? or shows ? or whatever it was !
    
     Tough question to answer ubless we know what the show date is. :-)

     Gerry

    I watched PBS' "Adventure" program last night, which was ostensibly
    about diving for black pearls in Polynesia.  Like most of the episodes,
    getting there was most of the fun.
    
    The adventurer stopped on one Pacific island where she observed a local
    ceremony deep in the jungle.  The natives wore large headdresses made
    up from the skulls of their ancestors, and danced to the rhythym of
    wood blocks.  The ceremony celebrated the lives of their ancestors; to
    paraphrase one of the participants: "We don't mourn our dead, we dance
    for them."  A dance for the dead.  Some traditions have faded out,
    though.  They no longer celebrate their victories by consuming the
    vanquished.
    
    "Adventure" is a great program.  Unfortunately, I slugged out and
    switched over to the Red Sox game afterwards.  Stick a fork in 'em . .
    . they're done.
    
    Jamie

	There is a show on tonight called "Berkeley In the 60s" on PBS 
	in Boston.   It is supposed to be pretty good.

	Has anyone seen this?

	Does anyone recommend it?

	It is on at 10 pm, channel 2, Boston MA.  Maybe other PBS stations
	across the country are airing it also...

    
    It sounds very familiar.  I think I saw it last year.  You can poke
    around in Grateful_old if you're really curious.  

    Police Squad Wed. night at 8pm on CBS (channel 7 in the boston area)
    
    get the VCRs cooking !
    
    Chris

Finally...something worth watching :^)






Jim

	Well, personally I am very excited that some station (don't
	know which) is showing Taxi at 7:00.  Hey Iggy .... yesterday
	was the episode where Reverand Jim became a cab driver.
	Remember him taking his drivers test and whispering to the
	gang for answers?

	  Iggy:	 "What does the yellow light stand for?"
	  Bobby: "slow down"
	  Iggy:  "Whaat ddoes the yel-low light staand for?"
	  Bobby: "slow down"
	  Iggy:  "Whhhhaaat doeoeoeoeoeos tttttttttttttttthe yellllllll-loooooow
		 liiiiiiiiiiight staaaaaaaaand foooooooooor?"

	  :-)  and so on and so on ....

	Lisa

    The Prisoner is easily my favorite TV show of all time.  Anyone who's
    into conspiracy theories (no one like that here :^)  :^)) should really
    love it.  Besides channel 11, the A&E network is going to run it.  The
    schedule I got says:
    
    Sept. 19	9 & 10 pm: special showing of 1st and last episodes, then
    Thursdays at 11 pm starting on Sept. 26.  I'd skip the last episode on
    the 19th, it makes no sense without watching the last-1 episode and
    even then it's a very open ended conclusion.
    
    My favorite episode is "The Schizoid Man" in which No. 6 is brainwashed
    into thinking he's No. 12 and then given the mission of pretending to
    be No. 6.
    
    That's all for now, I've given you too much information already.
    
    Jamie

    Does every episode have a different #2? The last one on channel 11
    (episode 4) had #2 convincing #6 to run for the #2 office. It was
    obviously a setup, because as soon as #6 said yes, there were throngs
    of people (and the bicycle with the umbrella of course) suddenly
    marching with "Vote for #6" signs. I won't spoil the ending, but the
    end of the show left us with a new #2, and the #2 at the beginning
    wasn't the same as the one in episode 3. Strange show.
    I hope it's on long enough so I can catch the first 2 episodes, I
    missed them last week.
    
    There's also a "missing episode" that never aired, it supposedly filled
    in more of the mysteries than the last episode did. I think it's out on
    tape.
    
    Scott
    

Yes, every episode has a new No. 2.  I think though that the there was an actor
who returned in the No. 2 role (Leo McKern ? in first and last episodes?)

There is a Prisoner conference at OPG::THE_PRISONER, full of things along
the lines of :


note M.N:	"We want Information."

note M.N+1:	"You won't get it"

note M.N+2:	"You are Number 6."

note M.N+3:	"I am not a number I am a free man!"

note M.N+4:	"HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA .......!!!!"

but theres also some very interesting stuff in there too.. (I haven't read it 
for a while.)

 - No. 119937

Re:            <<< Note 107.193 by FRAGLE::IDE "now it can be told" >>>

>    My favorite episode is "The Schizoid Man" in which No. 6 is brainwashed
>    into thinking he's No. 12 and then given the mission of pretending to
>    be No. 6.

	A good episode - aren't they all?  My favorite is "Hammer Into
	Anvil" where #6 uses #2's own paranoia to turn the tables 
	completely...

	The Video Signals in Acton has the complete set on laser disc for
	rent.  Thinking that if they didn't get much rental action they
	might be willing to sell the set cheap, I asked.  Apparently The
	Prisoner disks *are* popular for rental :-) and they weren't 
	willing to part with them...

	Be seeing you...

    re .194
    
    .195? is right, Leo McKern was the only actor to appear more than once
    as No. 2 (three times, if you count the very beginning of "Fall Out").
    
    I think the "missing episode" you're referring to is actually a
    different (pilot?) version of the first episode.  I've heard that it
    doesn't really explain who runs or where the Village is.
    
    Some of the episodes are fillers made after the original run to satisfy
    US syndication distributers.  You can usually tell which ones are
    fillers because they're set outside the village (e.g. "Living in
    Harmony" & "The Girl Who Was Death").  There's also some debate over
    which order the episodes should be shown in.
    
    
                          AND FOR YOU NEOPHYTES
    
    The premise is this: A secret agent (for which country we don't know,
    although it's assumed to be Britain) resigns, is drugged, and wakes up
    in the Village.  He's assigned a number (#6), as are all villagers, and
    constantly resists #2's efforts to find out why he resigned.  Rather
    than physical abuse, #6 is subjected to psychological torture.  Does
    free will triumph in the end?  Maybe.  Maybe there's no such thing.
    
    
    Jamie

    Re:  Number 2s who were 2 two times...
    
    There was at least one actor other than Leo McKern who was two twice.
    I've forgotten his name, but I believe he was in the episodes "A,B & C"
    and "The General", but then it's been awhile since I've watched them.
    He was a skinny guy who wore black glasses, and liked to drink milk.
    
    In the original showing order, those two episodes weren't shown back
    to back, but there's been discussion (some of which sounded reasonable
    to me) that those two episodes should be shown sequentially, but in the
    opposite order.
    
    I've always had a bit of trouble taking Leo McKern seriously (though he
    is quite a good actor).  The trouble is, the first movie I saw him in
    was HELP, and still have pictures of him painting people red, swinging
    his big sword, and yelling "Kaliiiiiii!"

    I heard last night on WCLX that Ace Weir and Bob Wasserman will be on
    the David Letterman show this Friday evening (Sept 27th).
    
    

    A&E is running syndicated episodes of Late Night weeknights at 7.  Dave
    #1 was Monday -- the show opened with Larry "Bud" Melman's warning and
    Bill Murray was the first guest.  Bill was very strange and funny. 
    Dave made it all the way to last night's spisode #2 before mentioning
    that he'd "removed his pants."
    
    BTW, these early episodes from the fifties are in B&W.  I just wish
    someone would rerun the old "Dave and His Late Night Pals" radio
    serials.
    
    Jamie 

re:            <<< Note 107.200 by FRAGLE::IDE "now it can be told" >>>

   >    BTW, these early episodes from the fifties are in B&W.  I just wish
   > someone would rerun the old "Dave and His Late Night Pals" radio
   > serials.
    
    Wait a minute, I'm confused. I thought Late Night started in the early 
80's. 

Shawn

    
    
    Did anyone catch Late Night this past Friday? Bob n' Rob were on,
    weren't they? I tried to stay awake....zzzzzzzz
    
    Steve-O

	I did...(I got an amazingly little amount of sleep last week)...
	they played "The Winners", I believe it's called...the one
	with the line "he travels the fastest who travels alone"...
	Rob used his weird standup that doesn't have any "body".
	At points, he "banged" on it with a bow...good stuff...

	Last night, Branford Marsalis was supposed to be on the Tonight
	Show...I didn't see that though...

	Debess

 re: >          <<< Note 107.201 by CSLALL::BRIDGES "Fruit *IS* a food" >>>
    
    >Wait a minute, I'm confused. I thought Late Night started in the early 
>80's. 
    
    You're right, the first show was 2-1-82.  You've been watching for that
    long and didn't get the joke??  :^)
    
    I tapes Johnny with Branford last night but haven't watched it yet.  I
    read somewhere that BB King and teh Allman Bros. were going to be on
    Tonight next week.
    
    Jamie

re:            <<< Note 107.204 by FRAGLE::IDE "now it can be told" >>>

>    You're right, the first show was 2-1-82.  You've been watching for that
>    long and didn't get the joke??  :^)
    
 
 I have'nt been watching on a regular basis in about 3 years, then from '84
to mid '86 I didn't see it at all. Still that's no excuse, because I consider
myself somewhat of a LN/w DL fan. I really should start programing my VCR
to tape it each night.  The one long (not really long) running gags I remember
was when Dave got upset because the lawyers said he couldn't say "Bite me!"
anymore. He continue to say for weeks after that. (IMO the lawyers probably
never said squat.)

Shawn

    Anyone remember (or do you want to forget) the Starland Vocal Band show
    that aired during the summer of (I think) 1976? It was an on-the-road
    kind of show, although the "live" music was always overdubbed, and a
    rather young David Letterman toured with them and did ome on-the-road
    humor in each show.
    
    
    BTW, the Prisoner that A&E has been airing is not in order. I taped
    the 2nd week hoping to get "The Chimes of Big Ben" and I got the 8th
    episode instead. The week before when they were claiming to run the
    first and last episodes they ran the first and 4th episodes.
    
    Scott
    

    JC, your television bashing ways are about to change.  Tune in tonight
    for a spectacular holiday festival on TNT, featuring the Christmas
    classic:
    
    
    "A Smoky Mountain Christmas" starring Dolly Parton and Lee Majors!!! 
    
    The film which dares to ask the six million dollar question: "were
    Steve Austin's bionics or Dolly Parton's breast jobs more expensive"?
    
    Jamie  

    
    You know what else is on TNT tonight...
    
    The Grinch!!!
    
    :-)
    
    

re            <<< Note 107.207 by STUDIO::IDE "now it can be told" >>>
                                 -< boob tube >-

>    JC, your television bashing ways are about to change.  Tune in tonight
>    for a spectacular holiday festival on TNT, featuring the Christmas
>    classic:
    
If TNT is a cable channel, then no-can-do!  I don't have cable because I
don't watch the TV...

Geez, I don't remember the last time I watched commercial TV...

    damn!!!!   the grinch is tonight?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
    
    that's my all time fav christmas show...  now i'll just have to deal
    with the emotional trauma of missing it again since we're playing
    tonight at PT Beanies...  anyone want to come down and help comfort
    me in this great time of personal distress???  :^)
    
    					da ve

From hot-tuna.net:

WWOR, channel 9 in New York, will have Hot Tuna on tonight Tuesday, 12/10 at
9 p.m.  The show is "N.Y. at Night".

WWOR is included on many cable systems.  

/Ken

    
    So that's what it was..
    
    I saw Hot Tuna last night and at one point one of them said something
    about being on tv and everyone cheered and we couldn't figure out if we
    were on tv or what was going on.  Thanks for clearing that up. :-)
    
    

    What high level government conspiracy keeps the Christmas special with
    the Heat Miser ("The Year Without A Santa Claus"?) off the air?
    
    I watched "Santa Claus Is Coming To Town" last week and taken in
    context (I think it was made in 1970), this show must have been
    scandalous at the time.  At one point they call Kris Kringle a
    "rebel" and "non-conformist" and put him in jail.  Then he puts a seed
    on the tongue of each reindeer and they fly!  Did it create a big stir
    when it came out?
    
    Jamie

    
    > What high level government conspiracy keeps the Christmas special with
    > the Heat Miser ("The Year Without A Santa Claus"?) off the air?
    
    Hey good question!  That's my favorite one and it hasn't been on in
    years.  
    
    At least I caught the Grinch this year! :-)
    
    

    My wife's been giggling about that Heat Miser one.  I've never seen it. 
    Don't know where she saw it.  It was playing in a store window at a
    video store in the Emerald Mall in Attleboro.
    
    dave

    >> What high level government conspiracy keeps the Christmas special with
    >> the Heat Miser ("The Year Without A Santa Claus"?) off the air?
    
    >Hey good question!  That's my favorite one and it hasn't been on in
    >years.  
    
I hear it is because the "politicly correct" people think Heat Miser is Satan. 
No joke!  It's my favorite too!

But I did get the Grinch, Frosty, Santa Claus is Coming to Town, Rudolph, and 
of course It's a Wonderful Life (colorized version) all on tape this year! 8^)

Scott

    Just say no to colorization.

    Digression Don

    How about a monochromized Gone With The Wind?
    
    They even pulled the video tapes of the Heat Miser show.  Too many
    uppity parents I guess. Probably the same ones who got the Grinch
    kicked off network tv.  Fortunately my friend Meri taped the Heat Miser
    show a few years ago.
    
    Just say no to fake color, fake stereo, fake beers, fake garlic, ...
    
    Scott
    

I know, I know, colorizing may not be for the purists, but when it comes to 
It's a Wonderful Life, I've seen both and I prefer the color version.  But 
since it is shown about 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (is that a 
kazlilion??) both ways between Turkey Day and Xmas, everyone should be 
happy 8^)

Anyway, I'm outta here so have a good one y'all!!!!!!!!

Scott

re .-1

>since it is shown about 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (is that a 
>kazlilion??) both ways between Turkey Day and Xmas, everyone should be 

Uh, Scott, I really hate to pick nits, but that's a BAzillion.  A KAzillion
is about 3 orders of magnitude higher.

Digression Don_who_is_a_mathemetallurgist_by_avocation

 TNT will be re-running the "Trials of Life" series starting Jan 2.  I didn't
see all of the programs in the series during the first run, but IMO, this is
some of the best nature related material I've ever seen on TV.






Jim

re    <<< Note 107.216 by MR4DEC::WENTZELL "TheCourseOfLoveMustFollowBlind" >>>
                       -< Christmas Special Junkie  ;^) >-

>I hear it is because the "politicly correct" people think Heat Miser is Satan. 

Oh oh, the PCers and the Moral Majority have joined forces?  Scary!  ;^)

I don't get why people have a problem with colorization ... can't ya just
turn off the color on your set?  Sometimes I do that while watching
"Smokey and the Bandit" to give the movie a good ol' classic feel.  ;^)

- Dave

    
    well, i watched the Heat Miser special ON CHRISTMAS DAY...  it has 
    evidently not been pulled from the christmas special list after all...
    
    as for the Grinch...  my understanding is that the show, like most all
    otehrs, is bought and paid for by that station in each market that
    chooses to spend enough money to buy the rights to air it...  if that's
    not a network station then it's because the network, or it's affiliated
    stations, didn't want to spend the dough...  i don't think that
    translates into "whoever got it kicked off network tv"...
    
    					da ve

  Did anybody else happen to see the Superman episode on Nick last night?  I
  thought I was gonna die laughing..this one involved a couple bad guys, our
  hero and his cohorts and a couple cans of memory destroying spray that made
  one forget anything that happened in the last 15 minutes...:^)  This was
  television at its best :^) :^)





 Jim

    No, but I noticed that the barrels of some secret goop on "Star Trek:
    The Next Generation" were nothing more than the standard blue plastic
    pickle barrels that everyone in the SCA uses for armour.
    
    Scott
    

    ref. memory loss spray.....so thats what happen to me NYE....I was 
    worried for a minute.
    
    
    rich

    Hell,.. I was worried for 15 minutes...
    :-)
    
    						/
    

RE: The Grinch

My wife tells me that Ted Turner bought the rights to The Grinch;  it still
airs, but only on TNT...

	-td

Yesturday I was thinking about the TV ...  I could not remember the last
time i sat to watch the tube ... must be more than 2 months!  i feel like
i've been missing something, but, really, maybe I haven't ...

re JC

Well, you missed a great Donna Reed on Nickelodeon last night.

           <<< Note 107.230 by VMPIRE::CLARK "sleep in the stars" >>>
                                    -< ;^) >-

>re JC
>
>Well, you missed a great Donna Reed on Nickelodeon last night.


darn!! 

Pornographic Soundtrack Broadcast on `Gilligan's Island'

	   TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) _ A soundtrack from a hard-core pornographic
movie popped up on an episode of "Gilligan's Island" broadcast in
Toledo.
	   The episode, broadcast Tuesday by Fox TV affiliate WUPW, began
with a conversation between Mr. and Mrs. Thurston Howell III. But
instead of their voices, viewers heard the words and sounds from a
porn flick.
	   "She was very explicit, very detailed of what this man was
doing to her," said Kim Brasher, whose two children, ages 3 and 6,
were watching the show and alerted their mother.
	   "It was gross. It was awful. I couldn't believe it," she said.
"I immediately picked up the phone and called my sister. She got
it on hers, too."
	   WUPW marketing director, Denis Katell, said the station received
several complaints. "I really don't know how many," he said.
	   The episode was taped at the station from a master tape provided
by Atlanta-based Turner Program Services, and was not reviewed
beforehand, Katell said.
	   "It's very difficult for any station to have a large enough
staff to scrutinize every frame of video," Katell said, noting
that programming runs 24 hours a day.
	   On average, 15,000 to 20,000 people are tuned into WUPW when
"Gilligan's Island" comes on at 5:30 p.m. The episode was on the
air for about a minute before the master control operator
discovered the problem and put on a different episode, Katell said.
	   Mrs. Brasher said the episode lasted about three minutes, and
included "bad music," obscenities and the sound of a woman
moaning and talking.
	   Katell said no bad language was involved.
	   "But, yes, indeed there was heavy female breathing and there
was some spoken dialogue, but no four letter words," he said.
	   Turner Program Services uses contractors in Los Angeles to
produce their master tapes, said sales director John Walden. "I've
never heard of anything like this happening before," he said.

    
    > "It was gross. It was awful. I couldn't believe it," she said.
    > "I immediately picked up the phone and called my sister. She got
    > it on hers, too."
    
    This is what cracks me up.  If it was that gross and awful, why call
    your sister?  Why not call the station?  
    
    

Same reason why shows like Geraldo, Donahue and Oprah are popular, I guess. ;^}
"Aren't we all shocked ..."

    ...did the Capt. and Gilligan have anything going.."Come here little
    buddy".....always had me wondering...
    
    rich

    call the sister to pull her unattended kids away from the TV...

	Did anyone see Dave (Letterman) last night?  Jamie......

	I saw a commercial, apparently he had a "Dave festival"
	where all his guests were named Dave?  Were any of you
	Daves on?  (dc, not you, because you play Phyllis on TV).

	   Wasn't sure where to put this, but the news made my week!!!

	        New Usenet conf:	alt.fan.itchy-n-scratchy


:-)

Also alt.fan.ren-and-stimpy !!! 

Happy happy happy!  Joy joy joy!

    
    
    What ARE Ren and Stimpy????
    
    
    ...I know one (Ren?) is a rabbit, but what is the other?
    
         ...a DOG? GOPHER? 
    
    
    Check out the rabbit's voice...sounds JUST LIKE  Larry Fine!!  :-)
    
    
    Steve-O 

    re .-1
    
    I think Ren is a mouse and Stimpy is a cat.  I've just started getting
    into the show -- good stuff!
    
    Jamie

There's a segment in the ad for Ren & Stimpy where Ren (?) is on a couch and
screams "stop haunting me!" at a pillow ... I asked the alt.ren-and-stimpy
newsgroup what episode that came from, and was told "Nurse Stimpy" ... I
saw that episode Sat. night, and alas, no joy.

Anyway, for those interested ...

	Sat. 8 PM, MTV - TWO, count 'em, *TWO* episodes, back-to-back!
	Sun. 10 AM, Nickelodeon

- Dave

p.s.  Ren's last name is Hoek.
p.p.s. Stimpy's first name is Kenneth.

	Just caught my first episode of Ren & Stimpy on MTV saturday
    	and thought it was the best tv show I saw in a long time.
    	I tried to catch it on sunday morning but only saw the last
    	fifteen minutes (rough one sat. night)... Anyway the show is
    	a riot and I think it will probably become a lot more 
    	popular now that MTV has started playing it. 8-)
    
    					Later,
    					    Jim
     

Watch for Ren 'N' Stimpy merchandise at a strip mall near you!

    No, one is a cat and the other is a chihuahua.
    
    I'd like to see an hour of Bugs Bunny cartoons with that little martian
    with the sneakers and the broom on his head, looking for his eludium
    q37 explosive space modulator.
    
    Scott
    

re          <<< Note 107.245 by TLE::ABBOT "J. R. "Bob" Dobbs in 92" >>>

>    I'd like to see an hour of Bugs Bunny cartoons with that little martian
>    with the sneakers and the broom on his head, looking for his eludium
>    q37 explosive space modulator.
    
"Ohhhh, you Earthlings make me so angry!"

Excellent cartoon ... another two of my favorites are (1) when Porky Pig
gets sentenced to the Wearin' O' the Green Shoes by a leprechaun (sp?) in a
dream, and (2) when Elmer Fudd (I think) and Sylvester spend a night in a
haunted house.

Reality is vastly over-rated.

Personally, I've always liked the Bugs Bunny cartoon with the Opera Singer, I
think there's more than one of these.  Bugs keeps distracting the Tenor from
Opera to funkier fare.  There's also one where the Tenor is singing Figaro, and
conducted by a hilarious charicature of Leopold Stokowski, and Bugs has slipped
him some "liquid alum" in his atomizer/throat spray.  Cracks me up.

Funny stuff.  Especially when I remember that most of this stuff is older than
me. (Not that I'm all that old or anything)...

tim

I like the one with the evil scientist and the giant red-headed monster.
("Let me just give you a permanenanenanent").  That's the one where bugs
floats to the castle atop of his bed during a rainstorm and floats back home
high on ether then wakes up and thinks it was all a dream until the monster
he shrunk floats by.  It so happens I saw this one Saturday for the first time
in years.  I guess it pays to keep up on looneytunes!  ;^)

	Not being blessed with cable (and the $284 per year bill), I will miss 
the chance to see Ren & Stimpy.  Oh well.

RE: the martian:  heh heh, I use his voice a LOT when talking to Charlie:

		"Genius, pure, unadulterated Genius I say"

He's probabably gonna flip when he finally sees and hear's this character "in 
the flesh (tone)"...

:-)

Fog_who_thinks_the_martian_sounds_suspiciously_like_PeeWee.

      Loony Tunes are on everynight for 2 full hours on TNT!!!

    It goes by the name Bugs bunny and friends.


Shawn

yea I know - but it's a Saturday morning kinda thing.....

So tape it and watch it Sat. morning!  Heck, tape EVERYTHING and watch it Sat.
morning!

> I like the one with the evil scientist and the giant red-headed monster.
> ("Let me just give you a permanenanenanent").  That's the one where bugs
> floats to the castle atop of his bed during a rainstorm and floats back home
> high on ether then wakes up and thinks it was all a dream until the monster
> he shrunk floats by.  It so happens I saw this one Saturday for the first time
> in years.  I guess it pays to keep up on looneytunes!  ;^)

Yeah, I heard that one was on Saturday.  I'm bummin' that I missed it.  I also
haven't seen it in years.  I guess P-for-a-DFA was down on the ether part?

But, I have at least seen one of the others with Gossimer recently.  It's the
one with Duck Dogers in the 24th-and-half Century.  Porky Pick shaves Gossimer.
Nothing but hair and sneakers!  I can associate with that!

Niiiiiiggggggghhhhhhttty-Niiiiiigggghhht! 

:-)

Dave

    so, who saw 'dinosaurs' last night? what a grate show! They found a
    'happy plant' that got them all baked; they ate all the munchies in
    the house, etc. The dad forgot to go to work for a week, then when 
    he went back to grovel to his boss the boss had Purple Haze cranked
    on a stereo in his office. At the end the son delivered the obligatory
    'anti-drug' talk, concluding that "If you don't take drugs, you won't
    have to sit through sitcoms with these stupid anti-drug themes". Very
    well-done :-)
    
    - Dave

I love 'Dinosaurs'.

I just wish they chose to pick on a more serious form of drug.  Like Cocaine or
Alcohol.  Herbal drugs take too harsh a beating in the media lately, if you ask
me.

    I agree with Tim...I didn't see the episode, my kids were crackin up,
    though!!!  They came running to tell me about the "this is yer brain on
    happy plant" part %^). My kids are 12 and 14, past the point of being
    affected by the brainwash techniques, so they saw past that and saw the
    humor. 
           rfb

    ...Mickey Hart.  He took a few rhythm instruments into KQED's
    studio (PBS broadcast channel 9 in northern California) for
    a bit of show-and-tell interview.  I wonder if he knew, or even
    cared, what introduction or leading question would be presented.
    I think he was prepared to say the same thing, no matter what.
    
    He made a subtle, yet powerful point about the difference between 
    having an open mind and having no mind at all.  "What we have
    here is a rhythm instrument made with the tops of two human 
    crania..."  With a twist of the wrist, he played.  "This particular
    rhythm instrument", he said, "Was made with skullparts, not out of
    any morbid desire or wacky spiritual mandate, but for the sake
    of a good sound."  RSuch is life; at some point it really doesn't 
    matter for you any more; you might as well be made into a drum.     
    Until then, rhythm beats its way even into minds so closed, 
    they seem brain dead.  As long as there is life, there is still 
    hope.
    

re:            <<< Note 107.257 by WLDWST::BLAKKAN "We will survive" >>>

>     Mickey:
>     He made a subtle, yet powerful point about the difference between 
>     having an open mind and having no mind at all.  

	Sounds like Mickey's been listening to Dan Quayle ;-)

	ken

    > As long as there is life, there is hope
    
    Hmmmmmm
    
    						/
    

    hmmmm is right! 
    how 'bout this one to counter
    
    "as long as there is life after death, there is hope, and if there
    isn't, ya better make a better life!"
    
could be prophetic if in the right state of mind %^)

    pieces of this drum once served as vice president of the...

Eight more days 'til Yak Shaving Day!

- Dave Hoek

    Anyone see So Far on PBS/Ch. 11 last night?
    
    This was one of those fortunate coincidences that you run into once in
    a grate while, like the night three years ago when I happened to notice
    that David Bromberg was in town that same night, playing in a small
    bar; 45 minutes before the show, I happened to see it in the TV
    listings...
    
    I've never seen So Far before - yes, I've lead a sheltered Deadhead
    life.  I also just got a new stereo VCR, and channel 11 is one of the
    few cable stations on which I actually receive a real stereo signal.
    And no commercials!
    
    Neat.
    
    These days, it doesn't take much to get me excited...
    
    tim
    

    Even better (or less frequently seen, at least by me) was the 5 videos
    they showed at the end.  I've seen the videos of ToG and Foolish Heart,
    but did you know they also did them for Hell In a Bucket (Bobby goes
    Hollywood!), Throwing Stones and Just a Little Light?
    
    Something to check out next Tuesday on some other channel (I think
    A&E): Van Morrison doing a musical tour of Ireland.
    
    Scott
    

	I have So Far on video.  Very nice, but short at just under 60 minutes
or so.  It is digitally mastered and sounds very nice through a stereo.  I've
played it through my parents stereo vcr hooked into my stereo... good stuff
on that...

    re .266
    
    	Jamie,.. I just gotta say you sure know how to keep us guessing...
    
    							/:-)
    

Despite all the hoopla which is being just a tad overdone, I've decided
to watch Johhny Carson this week for at least as long as I can keep my eyes 
open.  Last night just before he came on, the channel 4 news had a short 
segement on Branford Marsalis, new musical director of the Tonight Show.  
Nice piece on him (they played the new theme song he wrote, it's pretty good), 
and he ended it with a cool quote:  "We won't play music because it is 
popular, we will play it because it is good.  As a result you hear a lot of 
music that isn't popular, but it all will be good."

And Johnny's had a good opening to his monolog.  The crowd was gave him a 
looooooong ovation when he came out, and he had a hard time getting them to let 
him speak.  When he finally did he said, "I feel like Ross Perot.  Everybody 
loves me and I haven't said a damn thing!"  8^)

They started the show with some clips of old skits by Johnny and let me tell 
you, before there was any thoughts bouncing around in Dave Letterman's head, 
there was Johnny.  He has mellowed some in recent years, but in his prime he 
really did some good stuff.  Last night he also had on three of the guests 
from the first Tonight Show that Johnny hosted back in 1962 - Mel Brooks, 
Tony Bennett (he sang I Left My Heart in San Fransisco, which he sang in 
public for the first time on that first Tonight Show with Johnny), and one 
more that I can't remember because I was asleep by that time.  Anyway, if you 
ever liked Johnny, it'll be worth tuning in the week I think...

Scott

    yes this week is TV history in the making....all the hype is being made
    by everyone but Carson....I'm going to a party Friday night just for
    this man...I remember hot summer nights watching the Tonight Show as a
    kid, and tring to be quite sos not to wake Mom & Dad....I'll miss
    Johnny but Jay , being a local boy does good, should do alright .
    
    Chris

Wow, 2 dead references on the Fox network in one night!

I was watching "Studs" last night (OK, shoot me).  At the end of the show, they
ask each of the 3 ladies to pick one of the two guys they'd like to go on the
"ultimate date" with.  The 'ultimate date' is created by the guy.  Anyway, guy
#1 is asked what his ultimate date would be, and he said he'd rent a Winebago
and tour the country, seeing, among other things, the Grateful Dead.  This got
the host to sing the opening line to "Truckin'".  They also put the camera on
lady #1 and she was also singing.  It turned out she picked him, and before
telling who she picked, said "how can I pass up a Winebago and the Dead".

Hopefully their 'ultimate date' will go well.  They looked like a typical pair
of deadheads, early 20's.  They certainly didn't look like most of the weirdos
they usually have on this show.  Unfortunately, I don't remember what they look
like so I wouldn't know if I bumped into them at a show!

adam

Deadheads on 'Studs'????

C'mon Adam!  You sure you weren't hallucinating!  

That's certainly a change from the normal dance-club/meat-market types you
usually find there....

Dave (who only watches it when I'm forced to at one of my friends house who
really gets into it)

>Deadheads on 'Studs'????
>
>C'mon Adam!  You sure you weren't hallucinating!  
>
>That's certainly a change from the normal dance-club/meat-market types you
>usually find there....

My housemates force me to watch it.  Yeah, that's it.

Most of the women on that show are pretty unappealing to me, but lately
there've been some more down-to-earth types on there.  Just goes to show, once
again, we are everywhere!

adam

Adam, are you trying to tell us that you've checked out the female clientele
on Studs and now that they meet your standards you are planning to go on
the show yourself?

:-)

    I didn't make this up: the producers of "Studs" have a new syndicated
    offering in the works this fall, a similar show called "Bedroom
    Buddies."  Repent now.
    
    Jamie

    
    give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    AUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 THUD...what will they think of next..on second thought I don't want to know.



 Jum on day 3 of a no more TV kick.

> Jum on day 3 of a no more TV kick.

Hey, you can't do this .. Blues Brothers is going to be on soon.  Anyone know
when??  Chris?? 

   <<< Note 33.425 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "discover the wonders of nature" >>>
> Jum on day 3 of a no more TV kick.

Yeah Jim,  you can't do it!  

Think of all the Austin City Limits, Ch2 specials, Ch11 things, CNN, 
and other stuff you'll miss!

You could wind up being like a good friend we both now and love who said:
"are we the only people who didn't see the Rodney King video"

:)
bob

      Da Blues Bruders   are on Thursday night at 8pm on WSBK-TV 38
    (The Blues Brothers)
    
    
    Chris

	I knew you'd know that.  Thanks.  Can't ever miss that movie!!

> You could wind up being like a good friend we both now and love who said:
> "are we the only people who didn't see the Rodney King video"

Yea, Patti and I still haven't seen that!  But it's nice to know that ya
still love us, Bob!

Let's see...my last TV experience was watching the finals for the NCAA
basketball tourny this spring.  Before that...I caught 10 minutes of the
nightly news the day of the Pam Smart guilty verdict (summer '91?).  Before
that...I caught about a half-hour of news the night the Gulf war broke out
(when was that, January '91?).

tms_who_says_NO_to_TV

RE:   <<< Note 33.425 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "discover the wonders of nature" >>>

>> Jum on day 3 of a no more TV kick.

>Hey, you can't do this .. Blues Brothers is going to be on soon.  Anyone know
>when??  Chris?? 


 Hey, I'm loving it so far..I've found time to do a bunch of other stuff, 
concentrate on playing my guitar, etc.  I do miss Nick at Night, but that's 
about it..sure don't need to watch the Red Sox either :-/

RE:                      <<< Note 33.427 by LANDO::HAPGOOD >>>


>Yeah Jim,  you can't do it!  

>Think of all the Austin City Limits, Ch2 specials, Ch11 things, CNN, 
>and other stuff you'll miss!

 Well, I may scan the guide and see what's up on PBS or nature related stuff,
 Right now I figgered I'd leave it off for a few days and then see what happens


>You could wind up being like a good friend we both now and love who said:
>"are we the only people who didn't see the Rodney King video"


 Or..what channel is Saturday Night Live on?  :-)

    the new Oldsmobiles are in !................
    
    well Jum keep not watching the Sox, they won last night in extra
    innings...funny you mentions NickatNite, i watch F-Troop and it was
    like the 2nd one when Cheif Wild Eagle told how the tribe got their
    name ! and a neet Superman,Get Smart, Dick Van Dyke, and Dragnet in
    between innins of the Sox game :')
    
    Chris

re:   <<< Note 33.421 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "discover the wonders of nature" >>>

>Adam, are you trying to tell us that you've checked out the female clientele
>on Studs and now that they meet your standards you are planning to go on
>the show yourself?

Yeah, when the sun turns purple!

If they had Deadhead_Studs I'd consider it :-)

adam

ps. Bedroom Buddies - Dan Quayle would have a field day with this one!  Kind of
odd that something like this would spring up in this day and age (AIDS, etc.). 
Jamie, I'm assuming you're serious (I know that's a tough assumption :-)).

re   <<< Note 33.434 by EZRIDR::SIEGEL "The revolution wil not be televised" >>>
          -< Gotta hand it to Fox - they are a change from the norm >-

>ps. Bedroom Buddies - Dan Quayle would have a field day with this one!  Kind of
>odd that something like this would spring up in this day and age (AIDS, etc.). 

Yeah, it's so out of character for the TV producers to value high ratings
above the public interest ....

;^)

    >> Yeah, it's so out of character for the TV producers to value high ratings
    >> above the public interest ....
    
    Yabbut ... it the public weren't so interested, the ratings wouldn't be
    so high.
    
    ... Bobbb
    

re: Just say NO ..... to TV 

Congrats to you Jum for turning the bloody idiot box off (sorry folks, i don't
much care for it and yes, deb does hate it when i call it that!).... and TMS,
i didn't know you were a just say no to TV person!!!   i have not watched
it since early Nov '91... or, mayube it was late Oct'91... i want to try to
make 1 yr... now that i have not watched it in so long, i never miss it.  my
stereo is in a diff. room then the tv ... after work & dinner, i put on some
tunes and kickback... reading or something... or work on my photo albums...
it is amazing how much free time you get when you don't watch!!  all those
things you never thought you had time for suddenly look possible.

keep da faith jum!!! .......

re .436

>    Yabbut ... it the public weren't so interested, the ratings wouldn't be
>    so high.
>    
>    ... Bobbb

Couldn't agree with you more Bobbb ... but there's a difference between what
the public's interested in, and what the public interest is.  ;^)  Heck,
the last two presidents are evidence of that.

Re: Studs: I suggest they change the name to Slugs.  Bedroom
	Buddies?  BUDDIES?  Jeez.

I've been so damn busy I forgot the TV was there unless I
rent a movie.  The day the L.A. earthquake hit, somebody
stopped by that night and told me about it, which was the
only reason I turned the thing on.  It's not a social
statement, per se, I'm just swamped!

Jum, nice work on your abstinence.  Who knows, you might
do something constructive, like develop a larger vocabulary,
stop using cliche's like "NOT", and "Get a life", and be
able to concentrate on things for longer than a 30 second
spot or a 10 second sound bite.  And you'll probably never
have to see or hear GHWB again, much less Big Dan.

I think a guest spot for Dan Quayle on Studs would be great,
though.  I'd turn the toob on for that.

tim

    I'm with you, Jim... I stopped reading the papers too (except for an
    occasional indulgence) :-)

I did turn it on for a fe minutes this morning to watch the shuttle land..
then right back off.  I could feel those brain cells go to the off posotion
even in that short span of time.



Newspapers are next :-/

    I support any (or should that be NE) one who doesn't watch TV. I
    personally don't own one, but I had to stop saying I didn't have a tube
    at home when I brought home a VT200. 
    
    	People reel in shock when you say, "I don't own a TV". 
    
    Geoff
    	But I would have like to watch some of the AC races.

maybe we could get Jum, TMS, JC, Geoff on Donahue with the topic,
"People who don't watch TV"

a simple twist of fate perhaps

I actually don't have the TV on too much these days. I'd rather play and read
with my son and if the tube's on it's a distraction.


jeff

I'm getting less and less interested in TV, but that's not so much the TV or 
idea of TV itself, rather the crap that is on it nowadays.  But I love to 
watch movies on VCR (cheaper than actually going to the movies, plus I can 
drink beer while I watch at home ;^)) and ch 38 has good movies on a lot that 
I'll tape and watch later.  The Discovery Channel usually has something 
interesting on.  But I would have to say the most use my TV gets is for 
watching sports, especially hockey.

But I never make plans around the TV.  If something is on that I think I'd 
like but I don't feel like watching at the time it is on, I tape it and watch 
it whan I want to (and I like being able to skip commercials).

Scott_not_home_enough_to_watch_much_tv_anyway

TMS - you made it pretty clear here that you _don't_ like the TV, which is
the way I am.  

I have a question: what do you do if you're at someone's house and someone
suggests watching TV?  do you speak up?  what if you walk into a room where
the TV is on?  do you leave?  i've had some of the confrontations, and i
feel very uncomfortable.... just want to know how you (or any TVhatter(tm)
deals with these) .

thanx

re      <<< Note 33.445 by MR4DEC::WENTZELL "Don't say I didn't warn you" >>>
                      -< I watch, but not all that much >-

>watch movies on VCR (cheaper than actually going to the movies, plus I can 
>drink beer while I watch at home ;^)) and ch 38 has good movies on a lot that 
 ^^^^^^^^^^

believe him, he's tellin' the truth!!!  beer is good food!!!!

i too watch movies, which i do not consider tv-watching, even though i use
the TV for this purpose.  movies do not have commercials... and i make the
choice to watch the movie...

	I'm another non-TV person.  

>I have a question: what do you do if you're at someone's house and someone
>suggests watching TV?  do you speak up?  what if you walk into a room where
>the TV is on?  do you leave?  i've had some of the confrontations, and i
>feel very uncomfortable.... just want to know how you (or any TVhatter(tm)
>deals with these) .

	This may be odd, but my friends don't watch TV, either, at least with
company around so this situation doesn't arise.  The few times I've been at
places where there were people watching TV, there was a group of people in
another room that had no interest in the TV, so again, it wasn't an issue.
While my experience may be atypical, based on it, I tend not to think of TV as
a common vice.

Mark

So if you all don't watch the news on the tube OR read the papers then how can
you keep up with what's going on?  Not care? Consider it all to be unimportant?
Consider yourselves to be totally powerless to affect your surroundings?  News
via word of mouth (which can be very accurate we all know...).  Magazines? 

Then try and have a discussion on how things could be better or worse but you 
may not know what's going on.  [also,  if you know what to read and where to 
read it you have the opportunity to read all slants and angles...so I said 
this just to avoid the usual rehashed argument about network news programs].

I watch TV when I feel like it.  *Everything* has it's good points. Even the 
Tube.   Scott's right; how could I possibly watch the Bruins play without a 
TV :)

feeling like an outcast,
bob who knows he should remained silent and just read the ex-tv watching 
noters notes about the evils of the box and be reminded of growing up in NC 
where JD Salinger was a beast with 666 imprinted on his forehead.

Re: <<< Note 33.447 by ZENDIA::FERGUSON "Villains always blink their eyes" >>>

> i too watch movies, which i do not consider tv-watching, even though i use
> the TV for this purpose.

	And you thought George Bush talked like a weasel...  :-)

    
    re: what to do when visiting tv watchers...
    
    If you feel that strongly about it then why not suggest
    an alternate means of entertainment... without insulting
    the persons intelligence because they enjoy it.  
    
    Please remember the phrase 'different strokes for different folks'!
    
    We may not all agree on lots and lots of issues but each of
    our opinions are valuable.  And because we are so different is
    what makes life a little more interesting.  I for one would not
    want to live in a world full of me's.  (scary scary thought!  :-)
    
    I respect the fact that there are non-tv watchers out there
    but I expect the same respect in return.  
    I am not an idiot because I watch tv.  I also 'choose' what
    I watch, and if that choice happens to be the most ridiculous
    thing on, then so be it.  
    
    MJ

    when I'm mentally fried from work or family responsibilities, or 
    physically fried from spliitin/cuttin wood, heavytimes in the high
    country, etc... like Chancer Gardener said in "Being There"..
    "I like to watch."
    
    to counter......
    there are many times where I feel guility for watching when there's
    chores to be done...
    
    rfb (who postponed bottling all this week because of some stupid TV
    show or movie, now THAT"S cuttin into quality time!)

    re MJ...
    
    i am with you...  i watch the tube too...  but i also realize it is not
    the only form of entertainment in the world...  games are much more
    fun with company than tv (though i'm a sucker for a good movie
    anytime)...  a cool supply of games for the home can be a great
    substitute for the tube when company is over...  in fact, the little
    girl who lives downstairs from us will often come up to play cuz
    "you guys aren't grown ups...  you're just big kids..."  when we watch
    her for her Mom she always wants to come up to our apt instead of us
    going down to hers "cuz you guys have better toys"...  :^)  
    
    there's lots of cool stuff on the tube...  to me, cutting off a
    perfectly valid means of communication, entertainment, and information
    is a bit much...  overkill...
    
    things just haven't been the same since ALF went off the air...  :^(
    				;^)
    
    hey, on another note, for those of you who like to drink beer while
    watching movies, you might try the Elm St Draft House in Millbury!!!
    a movie theatre that serves beer, pizza, hot pretzels, hotdogs and
    burgers, sometimes they even have waitresses so you don't have to get
    up to get your own...  i like sitting in a theater and having a
    waitress bring me pitchers and pizza!  
    
    						da ve

	To clarify my earlier comments, I have no objection with those that want
to watch TV.  I respect your choice, and didn't mean to imply otherwise.  I just
don't get into it, mostly.

Re: Bob's question on were to get news,

	I do read newspapers.  I also listen to the radio, both NPR, and various
world news services on short wave.

Mark

    >hey, on another note, for those of you who like to drink beer while
    >watching movies, you might try the Elm St Draft House in Millbury!!!
    >a movie theatre that serves beer, pizza, hot pretzels, hotdogs and
    >burgers, sometimes they even have waitresses so you don't have to get
    >up to get your own...  i like sitting in a theater and having a
    >waitress bring me pitchers and pizza!  
    

Yes, this place is WAYYY cool.  But, I don't have to drive home from my 
apt. 8^)  Nevertheless, when I want to go to the movies, the Elm is the best 
deal going...

Scott_not_really_a_beer_drinker_but_plays_one_in_real_life

	I do not watch T.V. on a regular basis, the only thing 
	I watched this month was a colorful PBS Amazon show.
	Movies are also nice to rent and watch cause I am able 
	to select what I want to watch.  I get enough microvave
	activity daily from my monitor, I don't need anymore.
	I caught a flash of Opra a couple months ago and really
	didn't like the fact this a show with such graphic overtones
	could be permitted to air at 5:00PM.  Goes to show how
	incredibly much television has changed since I remembered
	it 10 years ago.  Not to mention some of the crap they 
	have on FOX.  

	As far as current events go, I usually ignore it! But when 
	the country is battening down for war, or disaster has struck, 
	NPR is a relaxing news source.  I like the way radio gives me 
	the ability to picture things without the pictures :-)

    
>I have a question: what do you do if you're at someone's house and someone
>suggests watching TV?  do you speak up?  what if you walk into a room where
>the TV is on?  do you leave?  i've had some of the confrontations, and i
>feel very uncomfortable.... just want to know how you (or any TVhatter(tm)
>deals with these) .

    I feel no need to be a fanatic about it.  I'm not a tv hater.. I'm just
    not much of a tv watcher anymore.
    
LANDO::HAPGOOD                                       
    
    >So if you all don't watch the news on the tube OR read the papers 
    >then how can you keep up with what's going on?  
    >Not care? Consider it all to be unimportant?
    >Consider yourselves to be totally powerless to affect your surroundings?  
    >News via word of mouth (which can be very accurate we all know...).  
    >Magazines? 

    Much of what we see isn't news anymore (in my humble opinion).
    
>Then try and have a discussion on how things could be better or worse but you 
>may not know what's going on.  
    
    This assumes that you will really know what is going on judging by what you
    are told by the media... not necessarily a valid assumption.
    

JC, what would you do if someone told you that the Dead were being
broadcast live from the moon on channel 4 at 8:00 tonight?

;^)

here here bobo, bob, mj, da ve...  (sorry to those I have forgotten)

as was pointed out there are some good things on TV and there are some bad
things on TV.  Lest we forget it is an incredible means of communication that
ties many homes into an outer world they may not otherwise see?   Am I
misinterpreting something or do I get the impression that people feel they have
to defend, or justify thier TV viewing habits?  Since when does choosing not to
watch TV (as opposed to choosing to watch it) make someone a *better person*? 
Some watch it, for whatever reason - and some don't, for whatever reason.  Just
like everything else, these are choices individuals make. It is by no means
basis for a value judgement on that individual in one way or another IMHO. 


Lisa

    nah...  no justification...  just (like they say on the editorials
    on TV :^) providing equal time for opposing viewpoints...  :^)
    
    					da ve

 RE Bob H...

  I get my news from Notes!  Actually I do listen to the radio (mostly AM
talkl shows and NPR.)


 I think what I am trying to do is kinda whath MJ was talking about.  I think
I got to a point where I was watching too much and things that I wanted to do
(like pick a VP candidate) got ignored.  I wasn't making the progress on playi-
ing guitar or other things cuz I kept watching the tube.)  After a couple of
weeks or so I may get to where I can discipline myself and only watch those 
things that I really want to watch..Nature related stuff, etc..



I'm not about to put down anybody that wawtches the thing..there are good
things about TV...or at least was til they took ALF off :-(



Jum

    I watch TV ... I guess that puts me in the "idiot" class.  I like to
    watch the News, Star Trek (especially TNG), M*A*S*H reruns, sports,
    lotso movies, and other things.  Lots of stuff on TV I don't choose to
    watch.  I have plenty of other interests besides TV which lend a sense
    of balance to my life ... personally I think it's a pretty healthy
    balance.
    
    If someone comes over to my house and doesn't want to watch TV, I give
    them options:
    
    	- go in another room
    	- don't pay attention
    	- leave
    
    ... it's that simple.  My lifestyle, my choices.  If anybody don't like
    it, too bad.  I don't like people inferring that I (or anybody else) is
    an idiot because my choices are different than theirs.
    
    ... Bobbb
    

What are trying to tell me, here?

"Tune in, Turn on, Drop out" doesn't mean "Watch TV and don't go to school"????

Another childhood myth debunked.   :-)   :-)   :-)

Some TV is _made_ for socializing; in an of itself it comprises a nexus for 
interaction, heck, if it didn't then we wouldn't have notesfiles dedicated to 
the Brady Bunch.


Zippp, Poinnnnggg!

The greatest creation of humankind, Ren & Stimpy, is only visible (in
animated form) on TV.  I rest my case.

- dc

Did somebody say Ren and Stimpy??  8^)

-------------------------------------------
From: Steven_H._Waltman.Henr801C@xerox.com
Subject: Ren & Stimpy Return
Reply-To: Waltman.Henr801C@xerox.com
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 12:35:29 GMT


Not really any Dead content, but there are numerous R&S fans out there anyway,
so I doubt anyone will care.

Happy! Happy! Tour! Tour!

Ren and Stimpy will be back with 13 new episodes starting Saturday, August
15th, at 9:00 PM ET on Nickelodeon. There was an article about it in one of the
local Rochester papers recently. Unfortunately, I forgot to bring it in with me
today, but if enough people are interested, I'll post it in a day or so.

I do recall that Powdered Toast Man gets his own episode and Ren will have a
cousin from Norway (or some place like that) named Sven Hoek, who is even
stupider than Stimpy!

Get those VCR's warmed up...


- Steve

 Uh oh...well you've got them on tape, right?  :-)




 

I think the most important thing (as Mary said) is to understand that the
media, and TV in general, is not total reality.  There's nothing wrong with
mindless diversion, as long as you know it's mindless.  There's some really
entertaining stuff on TV if you look for it.  PBS, A&E, and Discovery are 3
good examples.

adam

    more mindless diversion! more mindless diversion!!!!
    
    (could pertain to a deadshow, to some people)
                                                 rfb

 Well, maybe I'll turn the thing back on on August 15th then :-)

re:: Mary and Adam

Concerning news - Sure the networks and lots of papers aren't reality but if 
you can't find reality in print then you just don't know where to look. 
Lots of people write the truth - finding it and filtering the bull is the
hard part....(I made a point to mention something akin to this when I mumbled
something about network news or whatever I said).

seeya
bob

> i like sitting in a theater and having a
>    waitress bring me pitchers and pizza!  

Sounds like pretty close to heaven, to me!

> Rocky Horror at the Elm would be fun!

Oh sure.  See it *NOW*!   :-)


Dave

    Oh yeah ... for those with cable ... if ya wanna find out what bumbling
    fools our elected officials rilly are, there's also a channel dedicated
    to covering Congressional debates on just about any topic you care to
    be bored with ... but you WILL learn more about your government by
    staying awake watching these proceedings than you EVER learned in
    Civics class.
    
    ... Bobbb
    

So as not to further desecrate the "Dead in the Media" topic .... :^)

I'm especially looking forward to the Powdered Toast Man episode, myself.

-dc

Article 2195 of alt.tv.ren-n-stimpy:
Path: nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!news.crl.dec.com!deccrl!bloom-beacon!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!convex!convex!dprice
From: dprice@convex.com (David Price)
Subject: Re: Great News
Date: 8 Jul 92 00:05:48 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <4eKNLfW00Uh7Q1QXIU@andrew.cmu.edu> Saul Markowitz <sm6t+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Oh Joy!!! There is a wonderful USA Today article (July 7) about the new
>R&S episodes that will debut in August. Can't wait to see them!!!

Here's some assorted details from the article "'Ren and Stimpy' stay off
the wall" by Matt Roush:

13 new half hour episodes start airing Aug 15th as "part of an
ambitious lineup of original prime-time fare for Saturday nights,
dubbed 'Snick'".

John K is a 36 year old transplant from Ottawa.

Ren has a cousin named "Svenhoek" (I assume that's really "Sven Hoek")
who is even stupider that Stimpy.  He loves playing the "Don't Whizz
on the Electric Fence" board game with Stimpy.  Ren doesn't heed the
game's advice and ends up in hell.

Powdered Toast Man saves the pope (Zappa) and the president who is
caught in his own zipper.

One episode has them reading fan mail in Hollywood, Yugoslavia.

Ren's advanced tooth decay spins out the fable of the Tooth Beaver who
feeds on nerve endings, "the tastiest part of the body".

John K is "stunned" that so many adults watch R&S.

The block of shows on Saturday night go from 8-10 pm ET/PT.  The shows
are: "Clarissa Explains It All", "Roundhouse", "Ren and Stimpy"
(yeah!), and "Are You Afraid of the Dark?".  I know nothing about
these other shows.

9PM ET, 8PM CT, Aug 15th, be there, aloha.
--
_	_	_	_	_	_	_	_	_	_
 David Price			| " ... on a 36 year mission to the Crab
 Convex Computer Corp.		|   Nebula.  We've made this trip dozens
 dprice@convex.com		|   of times."

Happy happy happy!


Joy Joy joy!


		

    OK, I'm a TV watcher but I'm worse, I'm a TV watcher with remote in
    hand ready to blow-away crap and move onto more crap so I can blow it
    away too ! but TV has its crap and not so crapy and hey this is cool
    stuff to offer, you just need to wad through it ! on a personal level I
    like Star trek TNG (great surround sound) CNN when all hell breaks lose
    like a war or earthquake or something that seems somewhat important for
    me to watch....MTV when they show live shows (Live Aid, Unplugged,week
    in Rock) PBS, A&E, Sports (alot cheaper then go to a pro game !!!).....
    movies (well I hate when they get too cut up, but
    sometimes its fun to pick out the parts thet got cut) ALF (BTW its back
    on 38 in the mornings at 9am and afternoons at 5pm)....Im also into
    Public Access TV which I make my own TV shows :') now what better way
    to get programming on that you can control ! TV can make you a zombie
    or it can teach you about the world we live on....but you control the
    remote, if ya don't like what ya see then change the channel or just
    simply shut it off.....
    
    
    	BTW if anyone wants to they can come over to my place to Watch the
    BLUES BROTHERS tonight !!!
    
    Chris

     speaking of eMpTV,a report was recently released (caught in on the
    news) that said that when eMpTV was shown to mental patients with
    behavioral problems, the number of violent episodes they experienced
    increased dramatically...  as soon as eMpTV was removed from thier
    video diet, behaviors returned to "normal"...
    
    believe it if you need it...
    
    						da ve

    but Mikey you don't have cable :-(

>    but Mikey you don't have cable :-(

Yes, but I have helical scanning-capable friends in coaxed places.


:-)

    I don't need that last one...
    but I believe it!!!!
    
    rfb (who believes MTV deserves and requires selective watching...
    my kids are violent!)

    oh I forgot the most no mind channel....COMEDY CENTRAL !!!! SHORT
    ATTENTION SPAN THEATRE !!!!

re -.1

Yeah, but home of Mystery Science Theater 3000 ... great stuff.

- dc who doesn't get the COmedy Channel unfortunately

ok, so I was watching Dennis Miller last night and he has this actress on as a 
guest (don't know her name, but she was in St. Elmo's Fire).  She mentions how 
she doesn't have a TV!  Of course Dennis rode her about it a little.  I thought 
it was way too funny after all the discussions in here!!

Scott

LANDO::HAPGOOD                                       
    
>Concerning news - Sure the networks and lots of papers aren't reality but if 
>you can't find reality in print then you just don't know where to look. 
    
    Sure you do... just look around you :-)... that's reality.  You
    know that debate going on in the USENET about whether Idaho really
    exists or is it just a conspiracy to delude potato eaters all over the 
    country?  Ever been to Idaho, Bob?  :-)
    
    Seriously though... I love Startrek TNG but we can't get it anymore and
    I went through serious Startrek withdrawal... hope it comes back..
    other than, Northern Exposure and the Simpsons are the only shows we
    watch regularly.
    
    mary    

Bob's living in his own private Idaho.  ;^)

Hey, TV's just a tool.  It's just a transmission medium ... what you see
on the TV is what's going on in the minds of the people you meet when
you're walking down the street ("they're the people that you meet each
daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay").  Without getting into the whole "does TV
cause X or is it a reflection of X" debate ....  ;^)

- dc who thinks it's both!

re: Note 107.313             TV note / How to change society              313 of 335
    DEDSHO::CLARK "Ever breathe oxygen, son?"             4 lines   9-JUL-1992 14:06

>JC, what would you do if someone told you that the Dead were being
>broadcast live from the moon on channel 4 at 8:00 tonight?

Lets just say I'll re-evaluate my personal TV policy when this happens :-) :-)

re: Note 107.317             TV note / How to change society              317 of 335
    CUPTAY::BAILEY "Season of the Winch"                 20 lines   9-JUL-1992 14:50

>    I watch TV ... I guess that puts me in the "idiot" class.  I like to

Bob, I sort of feel like this comment was directed to me.  The TV has been
referred to as the "idiot box" for as long as I can remember; I sure as hell
can't claim to be the one who invented that nomenclature.  I just call it that
because it fits my perception of the TV well, and, someone, way down the
line, put that term into my head (probably my parents, who did keep us from
watching garbage all day long when I was growing up).  Saying that you are
in the "idiot" class because you watch TV is something you made up, not
me mon.  lighten up a bit.

Say you think Ford Mustangs are shitbox cars, for whatever reason.  Since
I own a Ford Mustang, will that put me in the "shit" class?  plenty of
people have called things I do/own by less then respectful terms, yet, I
just treat it as their way of calling it...sort of like their own opinion,
if you will.

The majority of my friends (like, 99.9%) watch some amount TV, yet I still
hang out w/ them, etc.  If they were "idiots" in the true meaning of the
word, I really don't think I'd hang out w/ them... just like i'm sure you
avoid people who just don't click w/ you.

>    of balance to my life ... personally I think it's a pretty healthy
>    balance.
 
That is the key: finding a balance.  I don't tell my friends what to do with
their lives and I don't expect them to tell me what to do.  This works very
well.  If one wants gets there kicks by watching TV all the time, that is
cool by me.  As long as they are not hurting anyone, they can do whatever
they want.
   
>    If someone comes over to my house and doesn't want to watch TV, I give
>    them options:
>    
>    	- go in another room
>    	- don't pay attention
>    	- leave
>    
>    ... it's that simple.  My lifestyle, my choices.  If anybody don't like
>    it, too bad.  I don't like people inferring that I (or anybody else) is
>    an idiot because my choices are different than theirs.

Bob, you don't strike me as a person that would treat a guest this way; perhaps
I don't know you well enough.  I started out by asking a simple question to
those who dislike the TV.  You're taking all this a bit to hard mon. 

Peace,
JC

    
    ***  Opinion Alert  ***  Opinion Alert  ***  Opinion Alert  ***
    
    I choose not to get sucked into the TV is good/bad/it is what it is
    discussion,  rather I'll take the TV with guests discussion for $200
    Alex...
    
    Unless I invited (or was invited) to a social gathering that was
    specifically oriented around the TV (ex: Superbowl party, rented
    movies, "Come on over and we'll swill and vegetate in front of the
    tube")  OR if while I was over there was an event of great significance
    taking place (ex: L.A. Riots, Start of the Gulf War), I must say, I'd
    be disappointed if the TV was turned on...
    
    Hey, ain't it just SO much better to do WHATEVER else instead of watch
    the TV?  Chill out to some nice background music and perhaps have a
    meaningful discussion...  Or even get a game out (like Cosmic Wimpout)
    and go to it.
    
    	***  End of Opinion  ***
    
    Funny, for someone who owns a 35" Mitsubishi TV, I don't watch it all
    THAT often...
    
    Summer time I basically DON'T watch it, but when it's cold out, there
    are fewer alternatives (trying to make more)...  
    
    It's not that I think it's BAD to watch TV, more the feeling of going
    to sleep at night after watching hours of TV versus going to sleep
    after going for a walk, mowing the lawn, hanging out w/ friends, going
    for a paddle, or anything else for that matter.
    
    Tree 

    RE: TV is just a tool
    from Nick DAnger Third EYE! "OH Nikki, Yer such a tool!" spoken by
    Betty lou Wiskowsky but everyone called her Nancy. (er something like
    that)
    
    My favorite way to watch TV is with the sound off and the TUNES
    CRANKED! Esp when there's an entertainer or singer on and the lip
    movement matchs "Shake it, Shake it Sugaree..."
    
    Ever see the movie where some evil being infiltrates houses on a block
    through electical appliances?, esp TV's?
                                            rfb(let's all play nice)

I have no intentions of getting in, starting or propogating an argument, nor
can I speak for Bobb (lucky for him! :-) but I can say what I saw in hopes of
diffusing arguements.  I did not see a personal discussion going on.  I saw a
discussion around television from many angles.  One person chose to use a
common phrase while another chose to point out the innuendos implied by the
phrase. Innuendo's which it *feels* like the discussion was based upon to begin
with. I think Bobb's points were valid to the discussion without being
personally directed to you JC. 

It's 116 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, it's dark out, and we're 
wearing sunglasses.  Hit it.

    I always thought it was a half a tank of gas.
    
    Heidi

Isn't 110 miles?

Isn't either a full tank of gas and a 1/2 pack of cigarettes, or a 1/2 tank of
gas and full pack of cigs...

I dunno...it's been a while....

Dave

    Watching or not watching TV is not a moral issue with me, nor
    is it a question of intelligence.  IF I feel like watching TV
    I do.  I love Hallmark Hall of fame and documentaries and nature
    programs.  Sometimes I'm in the mood for Mork reruns or Rocky 
    and Bullwinckle if they are ever on again.  
    
    I'm a real movie freak.  I own a lot and rent a lot.
    
    Summers I rerely watch TV, too many other choices.  Lately I've
    been spending all my free time in my new "library".  Our sons
    are grown and gone and we turned one bedroom into a library.
    Finally have enough room for all my books.  THere will not
    be a TV in that room.  The stereo and electric piano are in
    there and my guitar that I"m teaching myself to play.
    
    I'm really grateful to have all these choices of ways to spend
    my spare time, including TV 8*).
    
    Peace,
    Rose
    

re:  Mary and Dave Clark

I am living in my own private Idaho!  But damned if I know exactly what
an Idaho is!  

57 channels and nothin's on!  Like Chris said a few ago that's why we
have remotes!  

A funny "comic" from the editorial page shows a stack of books and 
a man with a remote control unit in his hand complaining that he can't
turn the damned things on!  title is "crack the summer reading list" 
or something like that.

And yesterday's Zippy showed Zip staring into the front of a washing
machine (the industrial size with the window for a sudsy view to watch
the clothes swirl by)......making his commentary on the state'o'tv today.  

What do I watch?  Football and hockey.  The last regular show I watched
was Twin Peaks.  I also watch the Ch. 56 news at 10.  Misc shows on PBS,
CNN, DISC and the other CNN.  Also watch some CSPAN which leaves me partially
lobotomized.  Rae doesn't like CSPAN but she watches Murphy Brown.

:)
bob

I think I see the problem here: TV == popular culture, Deadheads represent a 
revolt against popular culture, therefore deadheads hate TV. Problem is: not 
all deadheads are constantly in revolt against popular culture, therefore all 
deadheads are in revolt against each other.   


:-)

Fog, that's revolting.  ;^)

Personally, I'd like to keep up with what's going on in the world, and
I think I do a fairly good job, but I just find TV too damn *depressing*,
sometimes.  I also get a little frustrated at the TV news programs when
they present information that I find a little one-sided, for example, during
the Gulf War, but that's another debate and it's all IMO beep beep beep
that's all folks.

Then there's PBS ... has Helms gotten that axed yet?

- DC

    We're on a mission... from God!  (Rawhhiiiiddddeee!)
    
    Once my father-in-law asked me if I collected anything.  I told him no.
    Afterwards though, with the question runnng through my head, I realized
    that was the wrong answer, I collect information. In various media's.
    Tapes (mostly dead), books, comic books, newspapers, video's, floppy
    disks, photographs, records (none of these lately), CD's.  All towards
    personal enjoyment and the quest for info.
      
    TV is another source of input, sometimes mindless, sometimes
    informative.  Sometimes I'll miss what's going on because I'm catching
    up with my backlog of newspapers.  I almost always watch the news, and 
    read the newspaper, and listen to NPR.  I admire those who don't watch
    it though I'd miss somethings.  The only MUST watch for me these days
    though is Star Trek, TNG (will Data get his head handed to him?  And 
    did you catch who the bellboy might be?? ;-)  Northern Exposure is
    fun, as are Cheer's and Mystery and ...  Lately though, we watch a
    lot of videos, 101 Dalmation's, Little Mermaid, Winnie the Pooh,
    (can you tell I have a small kid?  I love the fact that Fantasia is
    one of Hannah's favorites, and that I usually read her to sleep 
    every night ;-)  Sometimes I watch too much, and I'm sure I'll watch
    quite a bit ofthe Olympics.  But in rerun season, I get to increase
    my book throughput.  
    
    Having the TV on when company is over?  Not as a rule, but then it 
    depends on the company.  We had some friends over with their kids
    this weekend, and it got turned on towards the end so the kid's 
    could watch Charlotte's Web (or Wilbur as Hannah calls it ;-)
    ie  so they could sit quietly for a little while.
    
    The TV is just another form of input, with it's advantages and 
    disadvantages.  I'm going to try not to bring the kids up as
    total couch potato's (toes :)  They have their own idea's though
    so we'll have to see how it works out.
    
    Mostly though, I wish we had 28 hour days.  Maybe then I could 
    get in the things I want AND get enough sleep.  Sigh.... And
    find time to take the telescope out (another input source :)
    Sometimes I drive my wife a bit crazy as I'll have the stereo 
    on (when in taping mode ;-), the TV on and I'll be reading
    something!
    
    Of course, once the TNG spinoff (Deep Space Nine) starts up next
    January, that will be 2 MUST watch (tape actually) shows each 
    week.  I think I can survive.
    
    What a ramble, eh?
    
                                          Later,
                                          PeterT_who_will_decide_later
    _tonight_if_he_ends_up_reading_or_watching_a_Mystery_he_taped_months_
    ago_or_check_out_the_stars_or_none_of_the_above_as_Hannah_wouldn't_go
    _to_bed_early_enough;)

     I don't own a tv and can't justify the expense. I have much more 
important, to me, things to waste my money on. I can see it's merits in 
certain situations. If I ever acquired one it would need a tape machine 
connected. 
     In a situation where I'm company and a tube is on, my reaction would 
probably depend on the quality of the program. I used to visit someone, who's
life and household revolved around watching television and drinking beer. 
I'd visit, I'd socialize and I'd find myself in the mindless trance that 
this machine can produce. As soon as I'd find myself in or approaching that
trance, I'd leave the room. If every one was in that room I'd frequently 
find myself leaving the house. Please realize this is a specific case, no 
generalizations, I am not accusing anyone in this file as being mindless. 
Conversely, I find this file and the people in it far from that state and 
prefer all of you to this particular very lifeless crowd I knew in High 
School. It's been well over a year since I've visited that household and 
their attachment to the television is only one of the reasons I simply 
cannot be associated with them any longer. 
     People I respect, more frequently will at least have some programming on
that is less mindless. (You have to realize the extreme of the case mentioned
above.) I've even visited people in the past and found the movie they're
watching to be quite entertaining. This is how I saw "Witness" and "Fields 
of Dreams". The shear crap that Barry would opt for over anything of quality
has a lot to do with my personal bias against the tube. 
     As for what I do today, I virtually never visit people (not because of
television, just because there's no one left close enough to visit). I 
visit Adam and always suggest we turn on music. It doesn't always work, but 
I can avoid the tube often enough it doesn't bother me as much as it used to. 
I've not been an invited guest anywhere else in years. After a very poorly 
timed surprise visit to an acquaintance last year, I cannot feel comfortable
doing that any longer and subsequently don't. 
     I am a strange person and I want to be outdoors. Things I suggest have
a history of being rejected by everyone I suggest it to. I no longer make
suggestions. I've met and spent time with many wrong people. Though waving
good bye to the wrong crowd and doing my own thing was possible, connecting 
with and being invited to join the better crowd has not been as successful.
So today, the scenario does not exist.

     I read the paper, ride my bike and go sailing. Any one of these feels
significantly more healthy to me. I've never seen the Simpsons, I've never 
seen the Rodney King video, but I've seen owls in the woods of Northboro and
whales off Skellwagon Bank. 

     Would watching television make me more popular?
Geoff

    I think it's 1/2 a tank of gas AND 1/2 a pack of cigarettes.:-)
    
    Heidi

    hey Geoff...
    stop by and vist..on a whim, unannounced...next time yer in Colo. 
    We'll drink some beers, listen to some tunes, (with the TV on and NO
    sound) and go see some high-country wildlife. I'd like to meet someone
    as wierd as you think you are, cause I have some of the same feelings
    about myself yet most people say "You're not as wierd as you think you
    are or would like to be."
    
    rfb

    	back in 5 minutes

re:          <<< Note 107.348 by MILKWY::SAMPSON "Driven by the wind" >>>

> visit Adam and always suggest we turn on music. It doesn't always work, but 

You saying I watch too much TV?  You're probably right. :-)  I don't know about
you, but I *like* Herman's Head and I try to turn all my friends onto it.  It's
a big hit with my housemates, too.

Lately, the only time I listen to music at home is if I'm in a housemate's room
and it's on, or I'm playing my guitar to my stereo.

adam

    its a full tank of gas (they just left a gas station and Elwood took $95
    from Twiggy for what he told her cost $94 in gas, so I would say they 
    filled the tank !) its 1/2 a pack of Cigarettes, its 109 miles to Chicago, 
    it and we're wearing dark sunglasses, it HIT IT ! the model of Flame
    thrower is a M-77 (i think).....
    
    Chris

or not that you've seen it LAST NIGHT either!!!

(not that that should mean I remembered exactically what it was.... ;^/ )

Geoff,

I share a similar experience which is probably why I'm sour to the TV.  In
college, many of my friends would gather around the TV, watch soap opras
during nice sunny afternoons, and smoke cigs (not all of them smoked cigs).
That continued into my Sr. year ... I used to always ask these folks if they'd
like to throw a frisbee around, play some cards, etc... nope.. glued to the
TV.  This just did not go well w/ me because i tend to be a very social
person by default: i like to tell and hear stories, play games, and share
conversion w/ others.  Among these friends, I saw the TV as the device that
provoked unsocial behavoir, hence, I began to dislike it (the TV).  I too
do not personally own a TV (Deb has an old TV (circa '81) that she acquired
when her grandmother passed away a few years back)... i'll probably never
buy one either, at least for the time being.

you are welcome to come by my pad geoff...  i'm always up for having a few
folks over to share conversation, play games, and have a coupla brews while
listening to tunez.

jc

    >  This just did not go well w/ me because i tend to be a very social
    > person by default: i like to tell and hear stories, play games, and
    > share conversion w/ others.  Among these friends, I saw the TV as the
    
    Hmmm, just what did you guys convert into?  ;-)
    
    Soap opera's in college?  No wonder you're off TV!  The only thing I
    can remember watching in college was several of us gathered in a
    tiny dorm room to watch Monty Python.  Oh yeah, we'd also play the
    "Guess the Star Trek" game.  This is where either a) the sound is 
    turned off and you have to guess which episode (of the old Trek) it was
    by the action, or b) the tube was covered and you had to guess by the
    dialogue (or other sounds ;-)
         
    Substances may have been consumed, but I can't quite remember ;-)
    
                                                      PeterT
    

    I had friends from Norman Oklahoma, (bible-belt) that for fun watched
    the religious dummies on the local stations. The fav was some guy who
    would, during prayer, yell out "lay your hands on the TV Set", where
    thy would all rush forward and "lay their hands"....funny stuff. 
                                                                     rfb

    
    Speaking of pablum for the masses ... Doonesbury was EXCELLENT on that
    note in yesterday's comics.
    
    c

>You could wind up being like a good friend we both now and love who said:
>"are we the only people who didn't see the Rodney King video"

Hey bob,

Tell your friend that Randy and I didn't either and we don't care 8-).

peace,
t!ng

          <<< Note 107.359 by SKYLRK::TING "Give Peace a Chance!!!" >>>
>You could wind up being like a good friend we both now and love who said:
>"are we the only people who didn't see the Rodney King video"

>Tell your friend that Randy and I didn't either and we don't care 8-).

Hey T!ng,

Mr. I_don't_need_no_steenking_TV Spine will read this note and he will
be told!

swamped,  just popping in for a minute...
whew!
bob

Yes, t!ng, Bob was a talkin' about me.  So now the known count of those
who have not seen the Rodney King video is up to five...me, Patti (my SO),
Geoff Sampson (hang in there, Geoff...you're not crazy...you sound like an
OK guy to me!), t!ing, and Randy.  Cool...for a while I thought me and 
Patti were the only one's!  Ya can't imagine the strange looks we get...

I'd place even odds that JC hasn't seen it yet either...eh, JC?

tms

    I haven't seen the whole thing(king video)....made me sick right from the
    beginning. 
               rfb 

I think this pro- and con-TV discussion comes on every few months like
clockwork 8-).  The original incident that completely turned me off to
TV was having had a housemate who would do *nothing else* except sit in
his room with the TV on.  One time, we had company over for dinner and we
offered him some of the stir-fry.  He took it into his room and closed his
door so he can eat in front of the TV.  Needless to say, everyone else in
the house eventually came to a consensus to ask him firmly to move out or
get kicked out.  I used to own a nice 25" cabinet TV and watched it the way
rfb did (with the volume down and the stereo cranked up 8-), but after
having that housemate and having it sitting around for 2 years gathering
dust, I sold it.  I don't miss it.  Even without the TV, I hardly find
enough time to do everything I want to do (oh, if I only have 8 days a
week!! 8-).  We've had housemates that owned TV (which we asked that
they keep in their rooms), so we do catch the occasional Dead-related
thing on TV when it happens.  I even watched the women's figure-skating
competition during the Winter Olympics (I think that was the last time
I watched TV in fact) and I'd probably take time to catch the gymnastics
competitions this summer.  Luckily, our housemates since that one dodo had
never been TV "addicts".  I have nothing against the folks who choose
to spend all or part of their life in front of the tube.  It's just not
a life I'd choose for myself and I would never want to live with a TV
addict.  I'd probably even invest in a TV again and a VCR in the future,
but mostly to watch our growing VHS collection 8-).  

As for news, I listen to a news radio station every morning and read a
news magazine.  We also get the Sunday paper, so I can keep up with current
affairs.  With my 1/2 hour commute every morning and afternoon, I can
catch all the news I want *and* still listen to a bit of tunes 8-).

I've never been in a situation where I'm faced with people glued to the tube
at a party (unless of course if it's a super-bowl party 8-).  I guess none
of my friends are really TV addiscts or else I must be a more interesting
person to them than the TV ;-).  I remembered that when I used to live in
my own apartment, I used the TV to help me get rid of an unwanted male
guest.  There's nothing more anti-social than flopping on a sofa in front
of the tube with the TV on *loud* to prevent conversation and say absolutly
nothing.  It worked.  He left after about an hour of that ;-).  I turned
the TV off as soon as he left, turned up the music, and curled up with
a good book 8-).

peace,
t!ng

      Now, to take a little time out from our on-going discussion, I would
    like to relate something that I saw on TV this morning (I don't own
    one, but I certainly watch it...).   It may be of interest here 'cause
    it involves a few topics I've been reading about in this note.
    
      On CSpan this AM, they had a call-in show on which they were
    discussing the Convention that is about to begin in NYC.  The guest
    was Al Franken who is covering the convention for one of the comedy
    channels.  Usually the callers ask real serious, thought-provoking
    type questions, but today was alittle different.  Most of the questions
    were about Al...("what about Davis" his ex-parter, "how can I get the
    Comedy channel", that type of thing).  Eventually this guy calls in
    and says "I saw ya open fer the Dead in Radio City Music Hall in 198?,
    you were great, man.  Do ya remember that?"
     So Al says something about Jerry and the moderator asks him to explain
    who Jerry Garcia is for the benefit of most of the audience.  Turns
    out that Al was wearing a Garcia tie, also...
    I just kept picturing some older conservative republican type (nothing
    against them :-) sitting there cursing their TV and pledging their
    undieing alliegence to ole George because they're talking about 
    the Grateful Dead at the Dem. convention.....!!
      ****Disclaimer:  Don't mind me, I watch alot of TV, probably too
    much (although, I don't really miss it if there isn't one around)
    My favorite shows are sit-coms, so I can watch almost anything and
    find something funny about it....now back to our regularly schedualed
    debate (I mean "discussion")  
                                      :-) DaveB.
    

Last night at around 9:30 I tuned in to Cspan and watched some of the
Democrats give speeches.  They had the women from all over the country
who were trying to "unseat" the Republican strangleholds.  Boxer 
and Feinstein from CA, Odell from Kansas,  Someone I forgot from Iowa
and Yeakel from PA and on and on and on....

Ron Brown gave a good one - He called Bush "the President who has fallen
and can't get up".  Also said repeatedly - "read out lips; no 2nd term."

Bill Bradley got the crowd involved with his "and what did Bush do?
Wiggle, Waffle and Waver".....

I think you all are right - this stuff is rotting my brain :)

bob

ps.  T!ng,  re:  that date who wouldn't leave....what would you have done
if he plopped down mumbling something about "my favorite show"...:):):)

>ps.  T!ng,  re:  that date who wouldn't leave....what would you have done
>if he plopped down mumbling something about "my favorite show"...:):):)

He wasn't a date.  He basically came over and invited himself in - very
rude.  I think I was watching some PBS program 8-).  I knew it didn't
interest him 8-).  Good thing I don't have to worry about unwanted male
guests again ;-) (xref: the guest who wouldn't leave 8-)

peace,
t!ng

    well WSBK-TV 38 must be on a ROLL because tonight its SPACEBALLS !!!
    
    pure mindless movie entertainment !!! I love it !
    
    Chris

    May the Schwartz be with you
    

 I temporarily abandoned my no TV plan to watch Jesse Jackson's speech at the
convention last night..aside from the comparison he made between Quayle and
King Herrod (which think was reaching a bit) I really enjoyed the speech. I
hope if Clinton is elected he finds Jesse an impact type job in his 
administration.  I can't help but think that he would be an asset.


Keep hope alive!




Jum


PS...turned on the tube just as Jimmy Carter's speech was ending.  Wish I
had caught that.

    I think he will, Jum..

Yeah,  Rev. Jesse's speech was very good.

Nice contrasting between whites helping blacks and blacks helping whites
and everyone needing to help each other....

bob

    a little emotional towards the end there, I thought....emotion and
    politics lead to nationalism, bias, and finally violence, IMO.
                                                                  rfb

I heard several of the speeches. Got so frustrated with the "5 second rule"
of Television news coverage that I tuned it all in on NPR instead (5 second 
rule: don't ever show a shot of any one thing for more than five seconds, even 
of a speech-maker in the middle of a speech.)

My take: Great and inspiring words from the old-line democratic camp. How
unfortunate, however, that the current party line has moved so far towards the
right that very little (if any) of the progressive demands and by the speach
makers ever made it into the party platform. 

Example: Carter talked of the urgent need to rid the world of War, and 
emphasized the fact that no attempts at negotiation were made to avoid the Iraq 
war last year, yet the official party line is that the democrats supportted our 
actions in Iraq.

Its misleading, therefore, to think that because the party leadership is
comprised of individuals with extreme and progrerssive opinions, and the
Convention put these folks on the pedastal, that the party itself represents
any move away from the centrist, non-entity represented by Clinton and the 
current, much less toned-down (progressive-wise) party platform. It's a PR 
gig, dammit, and a pretty sucessful one at that, IMO...

    it was kind of neat when i flipped between two C-SPAN channels the
    other day...  on one was the live coverage of the convention...  on the
    other was video from the 1980 convention and Ted Kennedy was
    speaking...  i must admit that i was a bit bummed to discover that 
    over the last 12 years a lot of the same issues were STILL being
    re-hashed...
    
    					da ve

hey RFB!

I'll take the emotion over the emotionless (George) any day....

:)
bob

Bingo

    good point!!
                rfb

re                <<< Note 107.361 by DEDHED::Spine "Tom Spine" >>>

>I'd place even odds that JC hasn't seen it yet either...eh, JC?

No, I did not see it!  I only saw still-life pictures of it in the newspaper.
Geez, I can't even remember when that happened now!

re: Carter

I was reading the Dem. Conv. coverage in the paper and they had an article about
Carter.  Apparently, he is the most popular x-President by a decent margin...

    yeah Jimmy is a cool guy I rilly like the stuff he does for the Habitat
    (sp?) housing stuff....but it was Billy ! his BIG bro whoa !!! man
    could the dude party ! :') he even got a beer named after himself !
    
    Chris

    crummy beer, BTW, Billy died of liver conditions, I think....
    (hic)rfb

    >crummy beer, BTW, Billy died of liver conditions, I think....
    >(hic)rfb

But the can is a collectors item!!  8^)

Scott_who_has_two_of_em

 I think Billy died of pancreatic cancer, which seems to plague the Carter
family.




Jum

Pancreatic Cancer - same thing that killed Michael Landon?

tim

 I think so...I think that's the cancer that killed Jimmy Carter's sister (maybe
2 of them?) and I'm pretty sure that's what got Billy, though he did have liver
problems too.





Jum

    yabut,.. wasn't that beer named after him because he made it himself?
    
    Or was it that he drank it all himself?
    
    								/
    

 I think Billy Beer was a creation of some marketing genius to capitalize on
the position of his brother and his well known talents for consumption of that
delightful fermented beverage.





Jum

    
    So, do any of you anti-tv folks feel like selling me your set? :-)
    Really.
    
    Phyllis_who_is_in_need_of_many_things_for_her_NEW_home_and_can't_
    afford_to_buy_all_of_them_new.
    
    

Well, I have a confession to make.  I actually watched some TV yesterday.
Caught part of the Red sox game (what a waste), and watched Monty Python and
the Holy Grail last night...




Jum who will leave it off tonight and no he doesn't want to get rid of the 
thing just yet.

> and watched Monty Python and the Holy Grail last night...

(to be said with an out-RAGE-ous French accent...)

If you watch TV again, I will taunt you a 2nd time...

:-) :-) :-)

Sir Dave

    Yeah, I was up late (like tonight) watching the Grail again.
    
    Never gets old.  Poor Sir Galahad.
    
    tim
    

    Phyllis,
    
    	I've got a 19" in my storage but the tube doesn't work...you can
    have it and check into getting it fixed...but for some weird reason you
    could most likely get a new one for the same price :'/
    
    Chris

Oh yeah, Congrats Phyllis, on landing a new apartment!  You are fortunate. I 
know so many who commute >1 hr each way into manhattan every day who would 
probably punch you if you told them you walk to Penn Square from home...
 
:-)

    
    Thanks!  It's been taking me about 40-45 minutes for 5 years so I
    figure I deserve a nice 15 minute commute.  And the best part is that
    it's only 15 minutes, but in a completely different (nice) part of the
    city - nothing like the MSG area.
    
    But now I have to pack. :-/
    
    

    
    Hey Phyllis!!!! New digs, huh?  Did they ever fix that
    door_which_had_an_accident on the night of the party for
    all the upper east side and beyond?    
    
    c

    
    Yeah they fixed it.. and charged us $300 to do it. :-/
    
    I'll have to try and limit the parties here to a 50 block radius. ;-)
    
    

RE:         <<< Note 107.397 by TERAPN::PHYLLIS "fly through the night" >>>

        
>    I'll have to try and limit the parties here to a 50 block radius. ;-)
    
 	does MA/NH fall into that radius??  :-)   

  <<< Note 107.398 by LEDS::MRNGDU::YETTO "discover the wonders of nature" >>>

> 	does MA/NH fall into that radius??  :-)   

It did last time! 
:)

    
    This time I think it'll be invitation only!  :-)
    
    

    just in case anyone didn't want to miss this movie on cable tonight
    Cinimax has at 11pm "Chopper Chicks in Zombietown" ! and you people
    don't like TV geesssh :')
    
    Chris_who_couldn't_pass_up_sharing_this_bit_of_news 
    
    

Must be classics week.  No doubt immediately preceeded by Casablanca
or The Philadelphia Story...

BTW - a couple weeks ago my daughter was watching something on the toob,
and asked me what it was - I looked for about a minute and realized it
was Barbarella - Jane Fonda as the Bimbo Blonde from Outer Space.
I bet Ted (Turner) would be proud.

Now THAT's a Classic!

tim

Geez, last nite HBO had Maniac Cop 2.  What a choice, eh?

	~dave

    I haven't gotten to watch much of the Olympics, and what little I've
    seen has focused on the athletes' spouses, parents, and analysts, rather
    than their performances.  But one commercial has caught my attention.
    
    It's the Samson and Delilah Hanes men's underwear commercial.  The
    marketeers have finally realized that women buy more men's underwear
    than men and, in a stroke of brilliance, combined that thought with the
    "sex sells" adage and came up with a beefcake commercial.  So, we see
    Delilah admiring Samson in his new Hane's briefs.  She exclaims, and
    you be the judge of whether the comma belongs, "I can see[,] my Great
    One!"  Yup, you sure can.
    
    Jamie

    
    	Last night was one of my rare television evenings and 
    	I happen to see some footage of an olypiad from 
    	England that pulled a muscle as soon as the race was 
    	started. He limped and hobbled his way to the finish
    	line with a little help from his trainer, he was in 
    	tears the whole time.....I felt badly for the guy.

    re .404
    
    ya but the proper song is missing from that commercial!!!
                             rfb

    Dear M. Universe...
    
    Should I blow off work this weekend in favor something entirely 
    unproductive and if so, what praytell should that be? Perhaps
    break out the beachballs, flip-flops and snorkles for some
    fun in the sun?
    
    Anyone innerested in dechead Beach Blanket Bingo this weekend? Hmmm? 
    If so, where? (We can vote! :-) We haven't had a decent DBBB party since
    Atlantic City in '87. 
    
    Otherwise, I guess I'll werk. :-/

    Well, I think this is an all kinds of wrong note for this, but I'm
    going to be sailing (weather permitting) around Buzzards Bay, maybe 
    the south sid of the Cape or the Vinyard. Make it around that area and 
    I'll try to make it.
     	Where is the voting taking place?
    Geoff

    oops... this is the TV note. Oh well, .407 didn't really belong in
    the Universe note anyways. :-) Actually, I'm just trying to weed out
    anyone with a clue. :-) 

    well,, that counts me out..
    
    						/clueless_and_liking_it_:-)

    ha!

                  __________________
                 /                  \
    |\/\/\/|    |     New episode    |
    |      |    |   tomorrow, man!   |
    |      |     \____  ____________/
    | (o)(o)         | /
    C      _)        |/
     | '___|
     |   /
    /____\
   /      \
    

    THAT'S A GREAT BART!!  Thanks for putting a smile on my face!!
    
    dave

    testing 1 2 3 testing....
    
    tonight on the FOX network its...........(drum roll please !)
    
    the season premiere of the Simpsons !

    good :-)

    
    so did everybody watch Murphy Brown Monday night?  I thought it was
    pretty funny and well done.
    
    

    Caught part of it.
    
    Liked the PotatoEs that were left for the jolly VP!
    
    :) sparkless

    I thought it was great! :-)

    Yup ... and this was the first episode of Murphy Brown I've ever
    watched ... one has to wonder how many Americans tuned in for the first
    time due to Quayle's comments.
    
    I liked the part where she was gonna give an "exclusive" to the
    reporter who was pawing through her trash ... ;^)
    
    ... Bobbb
    

    :-)...yea... me too..

I liked it - thought it was very tasteful, considering what they could have
done.  Who was it that was trying to keep Murphy from a fit by saying, "but
Murphy, it's ONLY Dan Qualye!"  :-)

    so what IS the baby's name??? not Danforth as predicted, obviously, or
    that would have been front page news here in the Springs Gaggette.
    rfb

    
    she didn't name him yet. She's considering Buster Brown though. ;-)
    
    That was Frank, Lisa.
    
    "...there could be several reasons for the fall of western
    civilization.  You could have blamed the media.  Or you could have
    blamed the congress.  Or you could have blamed an administration 
    that's been in power for the last 12 years.  Or you could blame me."
    
    

    
    
    Ok Phyllis, did you memorize this or what?  ;-)  
    
    MJ_whose_memory_is_gone_at_24!  sad

Re:                    <<< Note 107.424 by ISLNDS::CONNORS_M >>>

>    MJ_whose_memory_is_gone_at_24!  sad

	forget your car again kiddo?  :-)

>   "...there could be several reasons for the fall of western
>    civilization.  You could have blamed the media.  Or you could have
>    blamed the congress.  Or you could have blamed an administration 
>    that's been in power for the last 12 years.  Or you could blame me."

That was my favorite bit.  A nice little dig at the Republican's campaigning
concepts ....

Whatever happened to "The buck stops here?"

Related to the Math is Tough for Barbie discussion going on elsewhere....

I watched Northern Exposure last night and couldn't stop laughing when...ooops 
better say that if you watch this show and have it on tape or something and 
haven't seen it yet that there could be spoilers in what I'm about to type so 
hit next/unseen now...one of the characters (Chris) ended up falling in love 
with a woman who was doing heavy math research!!  HAAA, I was dying!  I almost 
thought the writers of that show were reading this discussion in here!  When 
you first meet her she was having the wiring in her house re-done to add more 
power for all her computers.  She was a pet lover (had cats, dogs, birds, you 
name it) and the animal hairs kept getting in her disc drives and crashing her 
systems.  She was doing research into pie (ya know, that number that never 
ends) and even went to Anchorage to get on the super computer to bring pie out 
to 8 million decimal places.  Turns out she couldn't decide which way to go 
with math in college and saw someone working on pie and was captivated by all 
the numbers dancing on the screen and thinks in pie there might be some kind 
of cosmic sign from god or something and everytime she talked about with Chris 
she got all hot and bothered.

Anyway, I just thought it was great that they showed an attractive and smart 
woman who not only thought math was fun, but that it was a turn on!  Take that 
Barbie!  8^)

Scott

It's Pi not Pie...(damned marketing folks! :-) )....

> Anyway, I just thought it was great that they showed an attractive and smart 
> woman who not only thought math was fun, but that it was a turn on! 

Does she have a sister???? ;-)

Dave

Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, 
Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, 
Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, 
Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi...

Consider me flogged.  8^)

Hey, what can I say, I took some advanced math courses in college, it's just 
that I haven't used much if it since then.  Besides I always wrote it as the 
cool little greek character (is there a compose character key for pi??), never 
has to speel it, which is another subject all together 8^)

Scott

    Oh ... don't listen to them, Scott...it's really pie... and it's great
    with vanilla ice cream too. ;-)

    		
    		And if it's apple pie, try it warmed up with 
    		a slice of cheddar melted on top.
    
    		talk about a turn on.  ;-)

"Cut it up - kids eat it up!"

So, everyone ready for the VP debate laughfest tonight?

- DC

re:       <<< Note 107.431 by MR4DEC::WENTZELL "Just a little sweetness" >>>
                                    -< 8^) >-

>Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, Pie is not Pi, 

Well, it is if it has a unit radius. You know, pi r squared and all that. :-)

		Dave

Does anyone know if NPR (or the like) will carry the VP debate on the radio?

JC_just_say_no

Re: vice presidential debate.

I can't wait.  I'm greasin' up the VCR, cooling off the beer, warmin'
up the snacks and praying to GOD that ol' Danny boy doesn't let me
down.

I'm not just talkin' about a goof - something that they have to rewind
the tape and examine before anyone catches it, either.  I'm talkin' 
about a first class, caught-with-yer-pants-down-and-yer-hand-in-the-
cookie-jar, Oh My God how could he say that, world class, genuine,
oh what a supreme BONE HEAD, Quayle speciality.  I wanna see the live
audience rolling in the aisles, and Sander Vanocur spitting his coffee
into the camera lens.  No subtleties for me tonight, I want real
entertainment! I wanna see him drop the ball on the 1 yard line in
the final seconds of the Super Bowl of stupidity.

You may think I have my expectations set too high, and, well, you may
be right.  But I know my Danny-boy won't let me down.

Am I ready for tonight?  Damn right I am!

tim

re:             <<< Note 107.437 by ZENDIA::FERGUSON "Roll me away" >>>

>Does anyone know if NPR (or the like) will carry the VP debate on the radio?

I'm not sure JC, but WBZ radio (1030 AM I think) said they will
carry it starting at 7:00.   It might be good for a laugh...

Ken

    "Hawaii is a unique state. It is a small state. It is a state
    that is by itself. It is a--it is different than the other 49
    states. Well, all states are different, but it's got a particularly
    unique situation."
    
    Dan Quayle discussing Hawaii's universal health-care program

    RE: .439
    
    Hahahahaha!
    
    Gosh, I wasn't gonna watch the debate cuz I didn't think
    it'd be worth the time, but you've convinced me to take
    a look, Tim!
    
    -h.

    
    	Ooops, that was supposed to be RE: .438
    

    
    Tim, you're cracking me up!!
    
    :-) :-) :-)
    
    

Frankly, I'm really hoping that Al Gore decides, just for one brief
moment, to forget he's a southern gentleman of breeding and poise,
and to skewer Quayle.  God knows both men deserve the chance.

I met Quayle in Amherst NH last February just before the primaries.
He's an even bigger putz in person.

I laughed for a solid hour over the "You're no Jack Kennedy" line last
time, and I'm hoping for something similar.  I think Al's just the 
guy to do it, too!

tim

Thank God that Gore served in the military ... we won't have to hear a bunch
of blathering about that.

- DC

I'm intersted in seeing Perot's VP sidekick.  BTW, when is Perot's hour-long
graph-a-thon?   I missed most of his half-hour thing.

I'm incredibly pissed at the St. Louis cops refusing to let Marrou in the CSPAN
studio.  Isn't CSPAN run by the feds?  It isn't a private thing.  I think that
could be why the cops refused to let him in.  The feds are scared of him!

adam

Was it in here that I saw something that went like this:


Clinton is one who ducked the draft for a war he did not believe in.

Quayle is one who ducked the draft for a was he believed in.


?

RE:             <<< Note 107.447 by ZENDIA::FERGUSON "Roll me away" >>>


>Quayle is one who ducked the draft for a was he believed in.
                                          ^^^


  Well, I never saw a was I believed in :-)





 Jum

    
    yes, check the joke note.
    
    Who is Perot's VP?  Is he a politician, businessman, ?
    
    

    He is an ex Vietnam POW, held for 7 1/2 years if I remember correctly.

I have to disagree with people saying Quayle ducked the war by entering the 
National Guard...


someone had to keep Indiana's golf courses safe for democracy!!!!

re: perot's VP.


His name is James Bond Stockdale.  As stated before, he was a POW for 7.5 years,
finally returning to the states in '73.  He was the most senior ranking
military dude to get imprisoned.

He tends to have conservative leanings and some have said that he is the last
person that would want to be VP.  Nobody knows his issues; he is expect to
support Perot's thinking, all the way.

Should be interesting.  

/* Written  6:32 am  Oct  3, 1992 by cberlet in cdp:elections.usa */
/* ---------- "Perot's VP Stockdale & Racism" ---------- */

Stockdale and the Rockford Institute

by Chip Berlet

Perot's choice for running mate, James Bond Stockdale, has a
history of afilliations that raise questions concerning his
sensitivity to issues of racial justice and sexism.

Stockdale served as the president of the Citadel, a southern
military academy that gained noteriety for allowing racially-
based harassment of African-American cadets and for its policies
discriminating against women.

More troubling is Stockdale's current service on the Board of the
Rockford Institute, a leading right-wing think that helped
formulate the battle plan for the "Culture War" discussed at the
Republican convention. The Rockford Institute has drifted so far
to the right in recent years that even elements of the so-called
"New Right" have raised questions concerning examples of anti-
Semitism and racism creeping into the Institute's publications.
When an employee of Rockford suggested the Institute was allowing
anti-Jewish themes to emerge, he was summarily fired, locked out
of his office, and his possessions stacked in the street.

Margaret Quigley of Political Research Associates has studied the
Rockford Institute and concludes that it now has adopted many
core themes of the European neo-fascist movements, including the
aristocratic fascism of Le Pen and Benoist, and the more earthy
"Third Position," which is a re-packaged ideology based on
national socialism, the early political basis of Hitler's Nazi
movement.

Rockford promotes a Euro-centric brand of white supremacy,
considers Jews to have brought an "alien" culture to the U.S.,
and is anti-immigrant. Stockdale's position on the board of the
Rockford Institute is certain to raise questions about his own
political beliefs in these matters, and at the very least shows
an alarming lack of sensitivity to racial issues.

                        -30-


----- End Included Message -----


% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by enet-gw.pa.dec.com; id AA11985; Sun, 4 Oct 92 10:13:41 -0700
% Received: from snail.Sun.COM (snail.Corp.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)id AA18687; Sun, 4 Oct 92 10:13:40 PDT
% Received: from East.Sun.COM by snail.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)id AA27027; Sun, 4 Oct 92 10:13:38 PDT
% Received: from suneast.East.Sun.COM (suneast-gw) by East.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)id AA25467; Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:13:37 EDT
% Received: from kerouac.East.Sun.COM by suneast.East.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)id AA00254; Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:12:56 EDT
% Received: by kerouac.East.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)id AA08900; Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:13:53 EDT
% Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:13:53 EDT
% From: Charla.Mustard-Foote@East.Sun.COM (Charla Mustard-Foote - Sun BOS Information Architecture)
% Message-Id: <9210041713.AA08900@kerouac.East.Sun.COM>
% To: psylo::leo
% Subject: Perot's VP Stockdale & Racism

    in the words of Jum.....YIKES !

It does give one some insight into the Real Ross, huh?

tim
 

    
    		Yeah, I find it pretty scary.
    
    		-helen

	re -1

	What newsgroup did you obtained that article from?
	
	Author seems to be a little off line, although my 
	media sources could be wrong, but I doubt it highly.

    Oh great!  We have one party with three right wings now...
    
    And the police keep Andre Marrou from talking about how he isn't
    allowed to debate.
    
    Amerika... land of the free....
    

    		re: -1
    
    		I don't know what newsgroup it's from. All
    		I know of its origin is what's written in
    		the article I posted.  I can't vouch for
    		its accuracy.  (I'd be very happy to
    		hear that it's all a lie!)
    
                What do other sources say?

    Just an observation: folks who frequent this conference seem to have
    an above-average distrust of the media, so I find it odd that so much
    credence is given to e-mail messages and postings from internet
    newsgroups.

    I'm sure that there are extenuating circumstances surrounding Marrou
    being barred from a C-Span appearance.  These circumstances may be
    every bit as evil as some think, but all we have right now is one side
    of the story, an unconfirmed side at that.  He was on Larry King Live
    the other night, but King doesn't broadcast from St. Louis.  :-)

    The Stockdale story is an assassination piece, proving him guilty by
    association.  It's like blaming Ken Olsen (on GM's board, I think) for
    Pintos blowing up.  Stockdale may make John Birchers look liberal, but
    this article does nothing to prove it. 
    
    Distrust the media, including the liberal media.
    
    Jamie

    	
    	>>I find it odd that so much
    	>>credence is given to e-mail messages and postings from internet
    	>>newsgroups.
    
    	>>Distrust the media, including the liberal media.
    
    	  Good point, Jamie.  Now I'd *really* like to hear what the 
    	  other sources say.

    What other sources?  

    	
    	The ones referred to in .457.

	A couple of the few things they neglected to touch upon-

	Was Stockdale the President of Citadel *at the time of conflict*??
	
	I understand he was not. (interview on I.P.R.)	

	and what evidence is the accusations based on and was it proven
	that the policies were deliberately written not to protect these
	people from dicrimination.  Who has the power to change them?

	or

	What is Stockdales position on the Board at Rockford?

	
	This article has some facts but mainly accusations, many of 
	which are munipulative.

    	
    	Hmmm...
    
    	I'm gonna have to keep an eye out for any more info
    	on Stockdale.  

    .464
    
    You're right...

	re 465

	definitely, I think he may be a focus for alot of fire
	
	Jamie hit it right, that article was written for the 
	soul purpose to uplift doubts and thwart some attention
	to certain items (be it true or not).

Don't know if it's true but I heard that the reason Perot's veep left the 
Citadel is because he was fired for trying to make major changes in the plebe 
system.

FYI, The Lords of Discipline (book and movie) is I believe about the Citadel 
and the abuses that went on there (still do??).

Scott

    
    Hey Scott!!
    
     She's not worth that HARLEY!!!!!
    
    
     Divide Dave
    

>    The Stockdale story is an assassination piece, proving him guilty by 
>   association.  It's like blaming Ken Olsen (on GM's board, I think) for 
>   Pintos blowing up.  Stockdale may make John Birchers look liberal, but 
>   this article does nothing to prove it. 
    
fwiw, I seen other articles which address Stockdale's membership on the board
of the Rockford Inst.  In the Nation, for example, they said he only served
there for two years, and if I remember correctly, he is not currently on the
board of that org. 

Association is everything in Perot's choice of Stockdale as his running mate:
yes, they are long-time friends, but Stockdales's associations are much more 
important to Perot than his political saavy, IMO.

beside: I have yet to see candidate for president in my lifetime whose
character has not been assisnated a million times in a million places, and 
whose choice of running mate hasn't been politically motiviated based on that 
individual's associations and constituencies.

re:          <<< Note 107.470 by CSCMA::M_PECKAR "As the decnet turns" >>>

>Association is everything in Perot's choice of Stockdale as his running mate:
>yes, they are long-time friends, but Stockdales's associations are much more 
>important to Perot than his political saavy, IMO.
    
    I sure hope so, he has no discernable political savvy.  It doesn't
    really matter, he has about as much of a chance as Jum Henderdale.
    
    BTW, the mysterious "civilation" he kept referring to was when he was
    commander of POWs during his imprisonment.
    
    I wonder how bad Clinton's voice will be tonight.  I wonder if he'll
    just admit lying about the draft and get on with it.  Probably not.
    
    Jamie

Hopefully George will be asked a few questions about Iran-Contra.  That
whole mess seems to be about to fall on his head big-time ...

re    <<< Note 107.472 by VMPIRE::CLARK "leave your stepping stones behind" >>>

>Hopefully George will be asked a few questions about Iran-Contra.  That
>whole mess seems to be about to fall on his head big-time ...

better yet, hopefully george will rail clinton about telling the truth and
then clinton will DErail bush by saying he was a liar re: iraqgate.

    (shudder) ... am I up to watching this..?

    
    what time is it on?  7 or 9?
    
    

>Hopefully George will be asked a few questions about Iran-Contra.  That
>whole mess seems to be about to fall on his head big-time ...

No chance in Hell.  All the questions are pre-screened by the camps before 
the debates, only those questions deemed safe topics by the campaigns can be 
asked by the moderators.  Also, the candidates have agreed amoungst themselves 
not to touch certain subjects.  

"All the mud that will be slung has been sterilized for yer listening pleasure".

re:       <<< Note 107.475 by TERAPN::PHYLLIS "in the shadow of the moon" >>>

    
>    what time is it on?  7 or 9?

	Let me put it this way, Cheers won't be on tonight ;-)

	Ken    
    

re:          <<< Note 107.476 by CSCMA::M_PECKAR "As the decnet turns" >>>
   
    >No chance in Hell.  All the questions are pre-screened by the camps
    >before  the debates, only those questions deemed safe topics by the
    >campaigns can be  asked by the moderators.  Also, the candidates have
    >agreed amoungst themselves  not to touch certain subjects.  
    
    Half of tonight's debate will be questions from the audience. 
    Supposedly a random audience, not the 25% supporters for each candidate
    + 25% random folks like the last debate.
    
    What would you (anyone) ask?  Here's my question: "Mr. Bush, do you
    believe that a woman who has an abortion will go to Hell?"
    
    I once got a "no comment" from Ronald Reagan.  And -- go ahead, kick me
    out of this file -- I voted for him in '88.
    
    Jamie

    
>    Half of tonight's debate will be questions from the audience. 

Hmmm. really?  I'm very surprised. 

    yes Jamie, the debate will be like watching Opra/Phil show people at
    this debate are all undecided chosen by the LOWV (I think thats what i
    heard) and all the fun will start at 9pm......
    
    Chris

>    Half of tonight's debate will be questions from the audience. 
>    Supposedly a random audience, not the 25% supporters for each candidate
>    + 25% random folks like the last debate.


I had heard that all the questions would be from the audience of 250
people.

My question(s)...

Mr. Bush, could you please tell us why you have such an aversion to a plant 
that saved your life in WW2, could be a major step in bring this country 
out of the depression that we're in, could help solve our reliance on 
imported oil, could reduce pollution, and is less harmful as a drug than 
alchohol, tobacco or Caffine, namely Marijuana.

Mr. Bush and/or Mr Clinton, could you please tell us what power you and the 
media have that effectively bans any communications by any party other than 
the two major parties, ie, Libertarians, New Alliance, Green et al.

Geoff

    re .479
    
    No, rilly!  The other half will be a single moderator, like the veep
    debate.  Should be interesting . . .
    
    tax & spend		1 sip
    change		1 sip
    trust		1 sip
    vomit		chug
    fisticuffs		social
    
    
    I meant '84.  :-)
    
    Jamie

	re- 481 

	here here 


	......HERE!!! HERE!!!!

The format for tonight from what I heard on WRKO this morning.

The 3 candidates sitting down.  A single moderator asking unscreened 
questions that were gathered from the audience.

The audience will be 250 people selected by the gallop organization. The 
selection process consisted of two questions. 1) Are you a registered
voter? 2)Will you be voting in the presidential election on 11/3/92

Geoff

    Ohhh Geoff.. good questions..

>>    what time is it on?  7 or 9?

>	Let me put it this way, Cheers won't be on tonight ;-)

so they moved the debate because of the simpsons?    

/rich

    Gee... I'd hate to miss the Simpsons.. :-)

re:   <<< Note 107.487 by VERGA::STANLEY "what a long strange trip it's been" >>>

>    Gee... I'd hate to miss the Simpsons.. :-)

	Gee, I'd hate to miss a 1/2 hour of the debate ;-);-);-)

	Ken

For those of you who want to be part of history, I offer you this monumental
piece of information:

(extracted w/o permission from TV notes):

    Tomorrow night (Friday, 10/16) TBS will present the "Gilligan's Island"
    pilot.  According to the paper, it's never been broadcast before.
    
    The familiar theme song is missing, as are the Professor, Ginger, and
    Mary Anne. In their place are a high school teacher and two
    secretaries, Ginger and Bunny.
    
    8:05 pm eastern

No Professor?!  Blasphemy!

{headers removed}

In article <S482.4347@looking.on.ca>, dks@ai.mit.edu (Diana Smetters) writes:
 
 While watching the first presidential debate on Sunday, it suddenly
 struck my husband and I that there was an obvious response:
 
 	The Presidential Debates Drinking Game
 
   Rules: Similar to the Star Trek Drinking Game. Participants get
 	themselves a television, some form of alcohol, and then
	play according to the following rules:
 
 Take a drink when Bush:
 
 1) says "tax and spend" (2 drinks for "spend and tax").
 2) says "gridlock"
 3) every time he makes an odd hand gesture apparently 
 	unrelated to what he's saying.
 4) says "TRUST" (emphasized)
 5) says "(knee-jerk) liberal"
 6) describes children going to bed without the fear of nuclear
 	war. 
 7) brings up draft evasion, or vacation trips to Moscow.
 8) mentions a "tax on the rich".
 9) blames something on the Congress.
 10) mentions Jim Baker perfoming some major role in the new
          administration. (1 drink for previously-mentioned roles: Sec'y of
          State, Reelection Campaign Chair, Deputy President, Chief of Staff.
          2 drinks if Bush mentions appointing him to something new.)
 
 Take a drink when Clinton:
 
 1) mentions a "tax on the rich".
 2) says "trickle-down economics".
 3) repeats a phrase. (2 drinks for "Jobs, jobs, jobs".)
 4) says "change".
 5) mentions a Bush veto. (2 for vetoing the Family Leave Act.)
 
 Take a drink when Ross Perot:
 
 1) starts a new task force.
 2) talks about the deficit.
 3) says "I love this country".
 4) has an electronic town meeting.
 5) talks about "putting the house in order".
 6) makes an analogy to sports. (2 drinks for "united teams win,
 	divided teams lose".)
 
 These rules can undoubtedly be expanded to cover the vice-presidential
 debates with minimal effort.

 Can we say Woof Woof if Wolf Blitzer pops in :-)





Jum

>     <<< Note 107.490 by VMPIRE::CLARK "leave your stepping stones behind" >>>
>  
>  Take a drink when Bush:

    11) claims to be a Sourthener or mentions the 'South'


>  Take a drink when Clinton:

    7) Says something about Arkansas
    8) Mentions his one-parent childhood

>  Take a drink when Ross Perot:

    7) makes some Southern-like comment like "We gotta clear out the barn."
    8) alludes to his financial prowess.
    9) implies that he can run the US like a business.    

VARSITY RULES:  (otherwise known as Sluggo's Rules)
---------------------------------------------------

Chug a whole beer when:

1)  Anyone mentions drugs and one or more of the candidates in the same
     sentence.
2)  All three are trying to talk over each other at the same time.
3)  One of the candidates actually uses a statistic IN CONTEXT.
4)  The moderator(s) tell(s) one or more of the candidates to shut up.
5)  Bush implies that he's pro-choice or the others don't.
6)  The issue of 'family values' gets politicized (for the @%!$ing 
     millionth time!)
7)  Any candidate voluntarily brings up the topic of the Supreme Court.
8)  Bush barfs on the moderator (finish the case for this one!)
9)  Perot mentions another body part.
10) Bush uses the phrase "read my lips..." or "No, never again. Never ever."
11) Anyone honestly answers a personal attack, saying "Yes, it's true."
12) You actually consider NOT voting for Clinton--even for just a split second.

Happy Debating!!!

- jeff

> could you please tell us why you have such an aversion to a plant 
> that saved your life in WW2,

Huh?  Did MJ (the plant, not the person) saved ol' Georgie's life???

Dave (sleeping???)

It sure did.  When his plane went down in WWII the parachute that he used 
was made from hemp, the lines that connected the parachute to him were made 
from hemp, the clothes that he wore to keep the elements off were made from 
hemp, and I think, but I'm not sure, part of the lubricating oil used in 
the plane was hemp oil.

Source is "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" by Jack Herar(SP?)

Geoff

    My mistake, the third and final debate will feature a split format.
    
    I liked the format last night, even if some of the questions weren't so
    good.  I thought Clinton clearly won, but I don't think the polls will
    change much.  Clinton was a real pro at manipulating the format by
    speaking directly to the audience and usually getting the last word in.
    
    I thought the saddest moment was at the very end, with Bush and Perot
    engaged in a contest to see who could name more blacks and women in
    government posts.  They basically did exactly what the questioner asked
    them not to do.  The biggest gaffe of the night was Bush's failure to
    answer how the recession had directly affected him -- "having means" is
    the old-money phrase for being rich, and it only delineated the fact
    that Bush is a member of a priviledged caste.  I don't think that
    will sit well with those of us in steerage.
    
    The Simpsons was brilliant with its shots at the tobacco industry.  :-)
    
    Jamie

	Yeah, another great Simpsons last night ;-)   I'm glad
	the debates took place afterwards... :-)

	Ken

    thank god the Blues Brothers was on TBS last night !
    
    lots of room in this mall !
    
    
    huthuthuthuthuthuthut

    
        i liked when crusty the clown scrambled into the beauty pagent
     and said "this is the republican nat'l convention, right?" 
    
                                                     ^dave

A couple things rubbed me wrong about this supposed "random" audience...

The debates took place at a college in Richmond, yet all the students were up 
in the balcony. Why weren't there any on the floor? Also, Richmond is an urban 
community of predominantly black, poor people, Why was the audience full of 
nicely dressed, predominantly upper class white men? Even the few women and 
blacks in the audinece seemed like they belonged to a country club. At one 
point, the moderator turned to an audience member and announced to the 
candidates that we were going to here a question on topic X. I forgot what the 
topic was, but how did the moderator know that this individual was going to ask 
a question on a specific topic (unless she had specific people designated to 
ask specific questions on specific topics)?

I highly suspect that all but a few of the audience members were briefed and 
there questions screened before the debate. I think that it was a rediculous
supposition that a real cross section of the uncommited Richmond electorate was 
represented by that crowd of 209 people.

I do agree that this was a better format than the panel format, but please, 
next time have a real cross section of America represented, not Gallops's 
definition of it..

The moderator made some comment at the end about how the audience had
many questions, but they were only able to ask X number of questions
given the time available, and they tried to get questions about a variety
of subjects ... my question is, who chose the questions to be asked?

    I tend to agree with ya Fog ... but I still think the questions asked
    were good ones.  Most especially the early request to the candidates
    that they address issues rather than sling mud ... I actually cheered
    when that one was asked ... ;^)
    
    ... Bobbb
    

    
    
    I see your point Fog...  I agree, but I'm sure most of the people
    selected also went out of their way to look their "best" by putting on
    their most expensive clothes to appear on National Mind control (er
    TV).
    
    I do think that the format was much better than any other so far... 
    (perhaps not saying much).
    
    Tree
    

RE:     <<< Note 107.502 by CUPTAY::BAILEY "Certified Ski Destructor" >>>

>    were good ones.  Most especially the early request to the candidates
>    that they address issues rather than sling mud ... I actually cheered

	I think that one might have been the most staged of all. All the
reports I've been reading have been saying that bush's camp agrees the
mud slinging (or, in Bush's words "mud wrestling") has hindered his candidacy
and that he should fight based on his "presidencial-ness", not the issues, or
Clinton's past record. This is why he defended the point about cahracter.

This is also consistent with his whole "lets get it on" attitute last night.

I thought the debate last night was pretty good.  I think all the candidates
did a good job.  Of course, I'm biased against Bush and predisposed to see all
the flaws in his debating, but, considering who he is and his rhetoris, he did
OK.  Clinton clearly got more admiration from me than the other two.  I must
also admit, I thought Perot had some good answers.  My housemate still
complains he's a racist.  Maybe so, but he sounds like he can run the country,
at least economically.  And I firmly *do* believe that this country is a
business, nothing more, nothing less.  (ain't that a nice sentiment :-))

I was hoping for more questions to Perot about foreign policy.  Unfortunately,
there was only 1 of this type, and it was mostly an economic question.  He did
answer the one question about the nuclear freeze/arms control pretty well.

The lamest Bush moment for me was his closing.  He said nothing other than
using many adjectives to describe himself that we are supposed to believe is
true.  I know they aren't true, so it went in one ear and out the other.

I also thought Carole Simpson was unprofessional in her continued jokes/lines
directed at Perot.

I think Clinton's ideas on health care will win big for him.

And yes, the Simpsons episode was great!

adam

I agree with everything everyone has said therefore so I won't add my
2 cents.  There is one remark Adam made that hasn't yet been agreed to
so let me be the first...

>I also thought Carole Simpson was unprofessional in her continued jokes/lines
>directed at Perot.

	jokes and *flirting* (IMHO as a flirt) with all of them, Perot
	especially.  It was insulting and downgrading of the fantastic 
	job that she had been given.  I hope to see someone with more
	respect in that position next time.

Lisa

    
    I would like to know how someone, anyone thinks that Perot will help
    the economy.  Please don't say he'll cut the deficit.  HOW?  A .50c
    gasoline tax over 5 years will hardly do it, and that's the only
    substantive thing I've heard him say.  Is there some (major) thing I've
    missed?
    
    

  <<< Note 107.489 by EZRIDR::SIEGEL "The revolution wil not be televised" >>>
>    Tomorrow night (Friday, 10/16) TBS will present the "Gilligan's Island"
>    pilot.  According to the paper, it's never been broadcast before.

do i have this channel if we've got basic cable?

/rich_who_just_about_never_watches_tv

 RE .507...watch H Ross tonight on NBC..I'm sure he'll give clear answers to
 all your questions :-/






 Jum

re:       <<< Note 107.507 by TERAPN::PHYLLIS "in the shadow of the moon" >>>

	One thing I think Perot is talking about is mega changes with 
	overseas forces, like saying we can't be responsible for everyone 
	else.  US spends $300+ billion/year while Germany say, spends $30B.
	"It's time for other countries to foot the bill".  Withdrawal
	of [all?] forces in Europe ["they don't want us there anyway"].
		
	I don't know, Perot really opened up my eyes the first debate, 
	and Clinton turned me off then, but last night Clinton reaffirmed
	why I'll vote for him.   He's got some good idea.  Like with reducing
	health costs by reducing lawsuits.  Clinton said md's won't deliver
	babies and won't stop to help a roadside victim for fear of getting
	sued, which is ridiculous!  I think he said he would come up with
	a clearly defined checklist for acceptable tests that are to be 
	performed, and if you do them, you won't get sued (unless you did
	something negligently).  This would reduce unnecessary, costy,
	cover yer ass tests.

	Perot is too naive, but I do like a lot of the things he's talking 
	about...  

	Ken

re:       <<< Note 107.507 by TERAPN::PHYLLIS "in the shadow of the moon" >>>
 
    >I would like to know how someone, anyone thinks that Perot will help
    >the economy.  Please don't say he'll cut the deficit.  HOW?  A .50c
    >gasoline tax over 5 years will hardly do it, and that's the only
    >substantive thing I've heard him say.  Is there some (major) thing I've
    >missed?
    
    Phyllis, there's lots of notes on this subject lying around this file. 
    Lots of very good notes written by very smart people.  All it takes is
    for one person to form a committee to look at these notes and put
    together one note with the best explanation of the plan.
    
    Jamie

    
    HAH!  :-)
    
    

  <<< Note 107.489 by EZRIDR::SIEGEL "The revolution wil not be televised" >>>

>    Tomorrow night (Friday, 10/16) TBS will present the "Gilligan's Island"
>    pilot.  According to the paper, it's never been broadcast before.

well, i taped this and watched it last night; i can understand why it's never
been broadcast before - it's really stupid; i can't get over that i watched
this show so as much as i did as a kid; adam, if you do want to watch it, act
soon before it gets erased

after the pilot they showed "rescue from gilligan's island", of which i
captured some of on tape; i watched a little bit of it before turning the tube
off; one thing i heard them mention was the ropes they had that they made
from hemp!  now i know how they kept happy on the island for all those years ;^)

/rich

>off; one thing i heard them mention was the ropes they had that they made
> from hemp!  now i know how they kept happy on the island for all those
    years ;^)
    
    Is it just my confabulting memory, or don't I seem to recall back in
    grade school, when studying world geography they would always talk 
    about major products from a particular country.  Weren't a lot of
    them hemp producers?  Or am I thinking about jute?
    
    PeterT
    

did anybody get the snl special (was it a special or just the regular sat nite
episode?) about the elections, on vhs?

/rich

 It was a special, and I have it on VHS.  







 Jum

The question is, Rich ... how much are you willing to pay?

;^)

>The question is, Rich ... how much are you willing to pay?

one homebrew, when our first batch is done

/rich

I have it too, but I can't make copies (one VCR).

Has been a grate week to add to my collection of late nite movies on tape since 
I don't get any premium cable stations.  Monday was Twins, last night was 
choice of Trading Places or Caddyshack (chose Trading Places, have Caddyshack), 
tonight is Terminator, and both tomorrow and Friday have good ones but I can't 
remember what (I programed the VCR for on Sunday night).  These are 
all on channel 38 or 56 in Boston.

Scott

I saw a little bit of the SNL special... I liked the "Ask the President"
sketch.  Bill Murray is an ancient Walter Cronkite, hosting Dan Ackroyd
as President Jimmy Carter on a telephone-call-in show.
Some guy who dropped too much LSD and is on a bum trip calls the Pres...

Carter: "Are the pills orange and <something-or-other".
Guy On Phone: "Yup".
Carter: "Ok, you just dropped some Orange Sunshine.  You'll be fine.  Drink
	the rest of that beer you got.  Oh yeah, and you got any Allman Bros.?"

;-)  ahh the good 'ole SNL daze...

Josh

    I liked the old Ron Reagan Jr. skit doing a take off on the Risky
    Business film, with Ron lip synching the Bob Seager tune "Old Time 
    Rock 'n Roll" in his underwear in the White House.
    
    Classic.  A real collector's item.  How many times do you figure the
    son of a sitting (or, in this case sleeping) President goes on
    television, dancing in his underwear  in a skit that makes fun of his
    parents.  I loved it.
    
    tim
    

	So, who here watches Seinfeld?  It's a show about "nothing".
	Very random and very entertaining if you ask me (which you
	didn't but I told you anyway!).  Anyway, who watched it last
	night??  I am still laughing about it, that had to be the
	funniest thing I have seen in a while!!!  :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

    It was definitely a classic episode. You don't see something like that
    on network tv every day. :-)

    
    I saw it.....I don't understand what the big deal was about George
    reading Glamour magazine......and why couldn't they sleep at night?!?!
    
    What a dumb show....
    
    ;^) ;^) ;^)
    
    Hogan

Amazing how they can create an entire episode around something without
saying what that something is. ;^)  Just "my mother discovered me!"

 @%#$^#^& I keep forgetting to watch it and I love the damn show :-/

    me too... :-)

	I didn't see it but I heard it,
	
	the one about imagining you parents 
	having sex.  :-)))

    We usually tape it since it's often the going down for the night time
    for Hannah (I'd love it to be earlier, but it doesn't often work ;-)
    Last night was pretty good.  My wife and I were laughing pretty hard 
    through the whole thing (even though I had to delay watching it due
    to the last few minutes of the Celtic's).  And he grew up only 
    two towns away from me!  (Like that means anything ;-)
    
    PeterT
    

    PeterT, can I borrow your tape ! the guys in the cable station would
    not let me watch it last night ! we had to watch what was on our
    station....geesh ! what boring crap that was ! :')
    
    Chris

Notice how Seinfeld didn't do one of his comedy monologues?  I don't think he
could do one that would fly on network TV.

That George is sure a trusting and open-minded guy!

A new era for TV...  :-)

adam

I guess if you're really subtle about getting your filth and corruption
on TV, you can get away with it.  ;^)

- DC

p.s.  that Kramer ... no will power ...

 Yep, I guess he has a firm grip on things, eh?





 Jum

Yeah, but you've gotta hand it to him ...

    geesh theres just no beating around the bush with you guys huh !

                      Punsters: Is *nothing* sacred? :-)

 Well, I have to admit that there's a couple I've considered, but will decline
 posting them :-)





 Jum

> Well, I have to admit that there's a couple I've considered, but will decline
> posting them :-)
    
    Oh, go ahead... take a whack at it. :-)

    
    
    yeah, stop jerking us around!!!
    
    

    I almost choked on that one GerG....hahahahaha

All this waxing poetic...

It's definitely rubbing me the wrong way,
I just can't get a finger on why...

:-)

Dave

I can't stand Seinfeld.  I feel that he is one of the most whiney 
Egotistical idiots to ever take the stage.

IMHO of course

Geoff

    Tell us how you *really* feel, Geoff. :-)

And he's always had such nice things to say about you, Geoff. :-)

		Dave

    I agree with Geoff. That was the first time I watched the show and
    I was NOT impressed. You could see every joke coming a mile away.
    
    - Dave

Yeah, well I hate the Grateful Dead.


;^)

- DC

I used to feel the same way Geoff but in the past few months
something has changed and now I love the show!  Go figure.....

    I heard so many good things about the show that I decided to give it a
    try.  But I screwed up and watched the show after it by mistake, which
    turned out to be almost identical.  Do the network folks think that no
    one will notice?
    
    Seinfeld doesn't do much for me, I get enough of whiney neurotic people
    at work.  :-)  :-)
    
    Mr. Plow . . . HA!  Call Mr. Plow, that's my name, that name again is
    Mr. Plow.
    
    Jamie

re: Seinfeld

I really like the show, and Kramer makes the show for me.  That dude is
hilarious!   Anyone remember him from the old "Friday Night [Live]" that 
was on a few years ago ?  He made that show what it was too.  Total
maniac! :-)

Mindy and I visited some castle in CT about a year or 2 ago, one
that overlooks the CT River.  One of the caretakers there must have
been Kramer's twin.   

Ken

    PLOW KING!  (BURP!)

    
    
    Re: .550
    
    ...The Gilette Castle

    Ken,
       Fridays  was the name I believe, and a few years I think is more
    like ten or more I'd say ;-)  I immediately recognized Kramer
    from that show.  Now if we could only find the Rasta Chef ;-)
    
    PeterT
    

>                      <<< Note 107.553 by SMURF::PETERT >>>
>                    -< I hit the pigeon wit my moped, mon! >-
>
>    Ken,
>       Fridays  was the name I believe, and a few years I think is more
>    like ten or more I'd say ;-)  I immediately recognized Kramer
>    from that show.  Now if we could only find the Rasta Chef ;-)
>    
>    PeterT
 

Where's the Pharmicist??!?!?   

    
    
    I believe Kramer was also a member of Sha na na
    
    Hogan

    I think you're thinking of Bowser. I don't believe they're the
    same person. 
    
    ger's fun fakt:
    
    I met some of those guys in a bar at the Cape once (they were dressed
    normal). We had a few cocktails and headed over to some after hours
    party. They were the funniest people I've ever met.

Ger partying with Sha na na .... now there is a thought to bring a smile
(and a HARDY-HAR-HAR laugh out loud) to my face!!  :-)

    My wife and I watch Sienfeld.  Just started this season regularly.  I
    also disliked the show before. Don't know what happened.  I guess "Home
    Improvement" got to repeticious!
    
    Anyway, last weeks episode we tuned in a little late and missed the
    first part where they made the "bet" or whatever.  I think we finally
    figured it out but felt like we were on the outside of an inside joke
    or awhile.
    
    But NOW I REALLY GET IT!!  Them laying in bed awake was a kinda of a
    giveaway.  And Kramer dropping out quickly after viewing the lady in
    the window across the street.
    
    I love this show!!
    
    dave

    wow, talk about bizarre ...
    
    I was laying around friday afternoon, recovering from my in-law's
    visit, watching a "Johnny Quest-fest" on TBS. I used to watch this
    show all the time way back when, so it brought back a lot of
    memories. Anyway, Johnny and crew (Dr. Quest, Race Banner, and
    Hadji) landed in a jungle in Thailand. Naturally, Race has to
    ask Dr. Quest why they're in Thailand. Dr. Quest explains that
    "for thousands of years, it has been known that certain plants
    have the power to alter human conciousness. They are called
    hallicinogens." He holds up a plant and says "if we can 
    synthesize the chemicals in this plant into a pill form, we
    can provide it to deep space crews to relieve the tedium of
    space travel. Sort of like a tranquillizer that would last
    20 years". 
    
    cool, I used to watch this show and never know the writers were
    so, uh, aware.

    Ever notice that Johnny Quest (a blond), Race Bannon (an albino), 
    Dr. Quest (a redhead), Hadji (an Indian) and Bandit (a dog) all 
    have black eyebrows? Whyzzat Mr. U? :-)

    Why black eyebrows?  Given the limitations of cartoon character 
    facial expressions, eyebrows are one of the more important means
    of conveying emotional content.  Black eyebrows stand out best and
    are therefore preferred over matching with the persons real 
    hair color.  Or maybe they all had dark hair and dyed it? Bandit
    was a failed tye-dyed experiment.
    
    Ok, this one is a real reach.  Any one out there watch/tape
    Quantum Leap?  I just watched part one of the trilogy, and
    found out that the next episode (broadcast before turkey day)
    was a two hour show.  I only taped an hour (or 50+ minutes)
    of it and would like to catch up.  Or I could wait till 
    reruns...  sigh....  Nothing like being behind the times ;-)
    
    PeterT

    IMHO, if they can make a cat's face take the form of a frying pan,
    they can put the correct color eyebrows on the Quests, et al. :-)
    You don't see Yosemite Sam with black eyebrows now, do you? Hmmm? :-)

    I HATES RABBITS!!!!!
    
    ysrfb

                      <<< Note 107.561 by SMURF::PETERT >>>
                     -< so much to do, so little time.... >-
    >> Ok, this one is a real reach.  Any one out there watch/tape
    >> Quantum Leap?  I just watched part one of the trilogy, and
    >> found out that the next episode (broadcast before turkey day)
    >> was a two hour show.  I only taped an hour (or 50+ minutes)
    >> of it and would like to catch up.  Or I could wait till 
    >>reruns...  sigh....  Nothing like being behind the times ;-)
    
    
    Chris and I watched the entire trilogy . .. I wish we had taped
    it -- good stuff!  He's probably better at explaining what happened
    (I'm blonde ya know! ;-)  <- take note of the WINKEY FACE!), so
    you might want to ask him to tell you what happened.
    
    
    :) sparky
    

    I MISSED IT!!  I USED TO LOVE JOHNNY QUEST!!  What a drag.
    
    I liked the one about the visible monster that was attracted to the
    light from, say light bulbs.  I guess it obsorbed it's energy.  Quest &
    Co. bombarded the creature with paint to make it visible.  They then
    lured it into a cave with light bulbs.  In the cave they had this huge
    electricity generating machine that killed it by overload.
    
    That's probably my most acurate memory of my childhood!!  Figures it
    one of fantacy.
    
    I did have an invisible friend by the name of Joe that lived outside
    the bathroom window on the porch roof.
    
    dave

JURAN::CLARK 
    
>    synthesize the chemicals in this plant into a pill form, we
>    can provide it to deep space crews to relieve the tedium of
>    space travel. Sort of like a tranquillizer that would last
>    20 years". 
    
     Man... sign me up for that flight.. :-)

RE: Leaping...

I taped it because now that it's on at 8:00 I just can't see it because of 
getting the kids to bed.  I think I recorded over it, but maybe only the 
first half.  I'll check at home.  If I still have it you are welcome to 
borrow it.  The bummer is that I used the same tape to record this past 
STNG episode only to find out afterward that it was a repeat:-(

Geoff

    > I taped it because now that it's on at 8:00 I just can't see it
    > because of getting the kids to bed.
    
    That's my reasoning too.  Aside from the fact that my wife is not 
    particularly interested in it.  But not having viewed the first
    one until last night, I didn't realize the 2nd part was a two
    hour one.  I thought they were going split the 3 leaps between 
    two shows.  Imagine my surprise!  If you do have the 2nd half
    of last week, that would be fine, as I've got most of the 
    first part.  And, just so you know, the next new ST:TNG episode
    will be sometime towards the end of December or beginning of
    January.  It will be a two parter (and I'll check the timings
    this time around ;-) called Chain of Command, and will be a tie-in/
    introduction to the new Trek show Deep Space Nine.  I'm looking
    forward to it.
    And Sparky, don't play that blonde stuff on me!  You seem quite 
    capable of expressing yourself.  :-)
    
    Later,
    PeterT
    

and while we're on the topic, can somebody post the days and times that
STTNG is on the toob?

- jeff-who-realizes-that-TV-is-still-good-for-SOMETHING!

>and while we're on the topic, can somebody post the days and times that
>STTNG is on the toob?

Each and every weeknight night at 7:00 - 8:00 on channel 56 in Boston, I've 
been taping some lately.  I think the new episodes are on Sunday nights not 
sure what time though.  I think the last episode ever? is on the weekend after 
Christmas, then we'll just have repeats.

Scott

>I think the last episode ever? is on the weekend after 
>Christmas, then we'll just have repeats.

what?  they're going to bag one of the few good shows on tv?  (and one of the
shows that i've been missing quite a bit over the course of the past year,
simply because i don't plan my schedule too much around tv, never know what's
on when, and don't have a vcr to tape things when i'm busy even if i did know)

say it isn't so . . .

- rich

>what?  they're going to bag one of the few good shows on tv?  (and one of the
>shows that i've been missing quite a bit over the course of the past year,
>simply because i don't plan my schedule too much around tv, never know what's
>on when, and don't have a vcr to tape things when i'm busy even if i did know)

Well, from what I've heard, several (all?) of the actors/actresses had 7 year 
contracts, and that time is up at the end of the current season.  Several 
(all?) of them felt it was time to move on.  There will be a new show that will 
continue the Star Trek universe that will be called Deep Star 9 or something 
like that.  It will take place on a remote space station and may include guest 
appearances of STTNG characters (that I'm not sure of).

For more info check out NOTED::STAR_TREK.

Scott