I AM NOT PARANOID!
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
-
Mr. Average
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Orange County, Californication
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
-
Mr. Average
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Orange County, Californication
-
noiseradio
- Posts: 2295
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
- Contact:
Ahh.. Stripes.
My first experience at a Drive-In movie theatre was a double bill of Ghostbusters and Stripes.
Oh, the memories
I ate some Nuts & Bolts snack mix. My favourite childhood snack.
My first experience at a Drive-In movie theatre was a double bill of Ghostbusters and Stripes.
Oh, the memories
I ate some Nuts & Bolts snack mix. My favourite childhood snack.
This morning you've got time for a hot, home-cooked breakfast! Delicious and piping hot in only 3 microwave minutes.
-
Mr. Average
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Orange County, Californication
If Noise is our Sergeant Hulka, that makes Blue the Captain Stillman of the Board.
Thats the fact, Jack!
In an attempt to link this post back to the title of the thread, Bill Murray (then, John Winger) later appeared with Dan Aykroyd (as Dr. Ray Stantz) in Ghostbusters, where, in the library basement, Dr. Ray uttered the magical film phrase ..."Listen!...you smell that???"
"Funnily enough" (as John Candy (then Dewey Oxburger) said in Planes Trains and Automobiles as Del Griffith) there are indeed direct neural connections within the central nervous system between the auditory cortex and the olfactory centers of the brain...suggesting that you could "Listen" to a smell.
Daed si Luap.
Thats the fact, Jack!
In an attempt to link this post back to the title of the thread, Bill Murray (then, John Winger) later appeared with Dan Aykroyd (as Dr. Ray Stantz) in Ghostbusters, where, in the library basement, Dr. Ray uttered the magical film phrase ..."Listen!...you smell that???"
"Funnily enough" (as John Candy (then Dewey Oxburger) said in Planes Trains and Automobiles as Del Griffith) there are indeed direct neural connections within the central nervous system between the auditory cortex and the olfactory centers of the brain...suggesting that you could "Listen" to a smell.
Daed si Luap.
"The smarter mysteries are hidden in the light" - Jean Giono (1895-1970)
-
laughingcrow
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:35 am
-
Mr. Average
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Orange County, Californication
as per "Daed si Luap" and keeping the conspiracy theory momentum alive, I offer these websites as accelerants to the conflagration. Come to think of it, I think I got the URL's from a posting right here a few months ago. Warning...this is old stuff, but since there are some who really devour this kind of thing, I offer it anyway. All in good fun.
Fuel for the funeral pyre:
http://uberkinder.5u.com/paul/
and
http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/index.html
And what's all this talk I hear from my Dentist about Morriseys lyrics prognosticating the murder of Princess Diana. As an American, I just assumed that the whole world accepted that her death was just an unfortunate, alcohol-related accident. But when I travelled through Bristol, Brighton, then on to London last year for a few weeks, I was astonished to hear (and learn) from almost every Brit that I met that it is considered 'common knowledge' that she was murdered. Even though I am a consiracy theorist at heart, I will admit to being more than a bit naive (not Steve) about the whole thing. I guess our French friends have released all of the documents, and the case is closed. Whew! imagine that....killing a princess. Could never happen, regardless of her boyfriends ethnicity. Right?
But I don't want to dodi on it...
Fuel for the funeral pyre:
http://uberkinder.5u.com/paul/
and
http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/index.html
And what's all this talk I hear from my Dentist about Morriseys lyrics prognosticating the murder of Princess Diana. As an American, I just assumed that the whole world accepted that her death was just an unfortunate, alcohol-related accident. But when I travelled through Bristol, Brighton, then on to London last year for a few weeks, I was astonished to hear (and learn) from almost every Brit that I met that it is considered 'common knowledge' that she was murdered. Even though I am a consiracy theorist at heart, I will admit to being more than a bit naive (not Steve) about the whole thing. I guess our French friends have released all of the documents, and the case is closed. Whew! imagine that....killing a princess. Could never happen, regardless of her boyfriends ethnicity. Right?
But I don't want to dodi on it...
"The smarter mysteries are hidden in the light" - Jean Giono (1895-1970)
-
laughingcrow
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:35 am
Preaching to the converted MrA...although I've changed my mind about Faul since I posted those way back when...I now think it was a clever publicity stunt.
I think there is an EC conspiracy...THE FAKE STEVE... check out the 'in the park' picture of Steve on the back of PTC, and also on the 'looking Italian' group picture on Trust. That's not him!
I think he was some kind of CIA bodydouble placed with the band sometimes, to assess the mood of the Elvis, whom the governments of the world considered to be potentially dangerous, and could lead a rebellion.
I think there is an EC conspiracy...THE FAKE STEVE... check out the 'in the park' picture of Steve on the back of PTC, and also on the 'looking Italian' group picture on Trust. That's not him!
I think he was some kind of CIA bodydouble placed with the band sometimes, to assess the mood of the Elvis, whom the governments of the world considered to be potentially dangerous, and could lead a rebellion.
-
PlaythingOrPet
- Posts: 959
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 9:42 am
-
verbal gymnastics
- Posts: 13673
- Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 6:44 am
- Location: Magic lantern land
-
laughingcrow
- Posts: 2476
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:35 am
Surely Benmont Tench (who played on Spike and Mighty Like A Rose) or someone like that would be a better replacement than Elton John? Perhaps Mitchell Froom?
Not that Elton isn't a good pianist, but he's kind of an attention hog!
Not that Elton isn't a good pianist, but he's kind of an attention hog!
This morning you've got time for a hot, home-cooked breakfast! Delicious and piping hot in only 3 microwave minutes.
-
Misha
- Posts: 733
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 6:59 pm
- Location: Northern Cold England, and Los Angeles, CA
From what I have seen/heard over the years, Pete Thomas has done just fine with the ladies....
It's that mad scientist quality that Steve has....
Look, Pip and Pop....I want Steve released BEFORE my concert in March....do what you will until then, but he better be ready!!! I know EC can PLAY piano, but it just ain't the same....ain't the same at all......
I'm willing to offer, $ 7.00 in quarters towards the release fund....
It's that mad scientist quality that Steve has....
Look, Pip and Pop....I want Steve released BEFORE my concert in March....do what you will until then, but he better be ready!!! I know EC can PLAY piano, but it just ain't the same....ain't the same at all......
I'm willing to offer, $ 7.00 in quarters towards the release fund....
Where are the strong?
Who are the trusted?
Who are the trusted?
-
HungupStrungup
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 12:14 pm
- Location: NE USofA
I'm paranoid too, to some extent. I just don't go looking for conspiracies that are completely outlandish. The ones I'm sure about are scary enough, thank you very much. The subversion of our democracy doesn't have to happen with flashy events like mass murder and the imposition of martial law. It can happen much more quietly, right in front of us. The more they get away with it, the more likely it is to keep happening.
Although I still hold that Bush has the intelligence of a newt, no curiosity at all about the world, and no patience with any facts that fall outside his preconceptions, he is surrounded by the diabolically clever. Today's NY Times has a fine op-ed piece by ecomomist Paul Krugman, one of my favourite contributors to that page. For those who aren't registered at http://www.nytimes.com (and it's free, so you should be!), here's the text:
January 16, 2004
Who Gets It?
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Earlier this week, Wesley Clark had some strong words about the state of the nation. "I think we're at risk with our democracy," he said. "I think we're dealing with the most closed, imperialistic, nastiest administration in living memory. They even put Richard Nixon to shame."
In other words, the general gets it: he understands that America is facing what Kevin Phillips, in his remarkable new book, "American Dynasty," calls a "Machiavellian moment." Among other things, this tells us that General Clark and Howard Dean, whatever they may say in the heat of the nomination fight, are on the same side of the great Democratic divide.
Most political reporting on the Democratic race, it seems to me, has gotten it wrong. Some journalists do, of course, insist on trivializing the whole thing: what I dread most, in the event of an upset in Iowa, is the return of reporting about the political significance of John Kerry's hair.
But even those who refrain from turning political reporting into gossip have used the wrong categories. Again and again, one reads that it's about the left wing of the Democratic party versus the centrists; but Mr. Dean was a very centrist governor, and his policy proposals are not obviously more liberal than those of his rivals.
The real division in the race for the Democratic nomination is between those who are willing to question not just the policies but also the honesty and the motives of the people running our country, and those who aren't.
What makes Mr. Dean seem radical aren't his policy positions but his willingness — shared, we now know, by General Clark — to take a hard line against the Bush administration. This horrifies some veterans of the Clinton years, who have nostalgic memories of elections that were won by emphasizing the positive. Indeed, George Bush's handlers have already made it clear that they intend to make his "optimism" — as opposed to the negativism of his angry opponents — a campaign theme. (Money-saving suggestion: let's cut directly to the scene where Mr. Bush dresses up as an astronaut, and skip the rest of his expensive, pointless — but optimistic! — Moon-base program.)
But even Bill Clinton couldn't run a successful Clinton-style campaign this year, for several reasons.
One is that the Democratic candidate, no matter how business-friendly, will not be able to get lots of corporate contributions, as Clinton did. In the Clinton era, a Democrat could still raise a lot of money from business, partly because there really are liberal businessmen, partly because donors wanted to hedge their bets. But these days the Republicans control all three branches of government and exercise that control ruthlessly. Even corporate types who have grave misgivings about the Bush administration — a much larger group than you might think — are afraid to give money to Democrats.
Another is that the Bush people really are Nixonian. The bogus security investigation over Ron Suskind's "The Price of Loyalty," like the outing of Valerie Plame, shows the lengths they're willing to go to in intimidating their critics. (In the case of Paul O'Neill, alas, the intimidation seems to be working.) A mild-mannered, upbeat candidate would get eaten alive.
Finally, any Democrat has to expect not just severely slanted coverage from the fair and balanced Republican media, but asymmetric treatment even from the mainstream media. For example, some have said that the intense scrutiny of Mr. Dean's Vermont record is what every governor who runs for president faces. No, it isn't. I've looked at press coverage of questions surrounding Mr. Bush's tenure in Austin, like the investment of state university funds with Republican donors; he got a free pass during the 2000 campaign.
So what's the answer? A Democratic candidate will have a chance of winning only if he has an energized base, willing to contribute money in many small donations, willing to contribute their own time, willing to stand up for the candidate in the face of smear tactics and unfair coverage.
That doesn't mean that the Democratic candidate has to be a radical — which is a good thing for the party, since all of the candidates are actually quite moderate. In fact, what the party needs is a candidate who inspires the base enough to get out the message that he isn't a radical — and that Mr. Bush is.
Although I still hold that Bush has the intelligence of a newt, no curiosity at all about the world, and no patience with any facts that fall outside his preconceptions, he is surrounded by the diabolically clever. Today's NY Times has a fine op-ed piece by ecomomist Paul Krugman, one of my favourite contributors to that page. For those who aren't registered at http://www.nytimes.com (and it's free, so you should be!), here's the text:
January 16, 2004
Who Gets It?
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Earlier this week, Wesley Clark had some strong words about the state of the nation. "I think we're at risk with our democracy," he said. "I think we're dealing with the most closed, imperialistic, nastiest administration in living memory. They even put Richard Nixon to shame."
In other words, the general gets it: he understands that America is facing what Kevin Phillips, in his remarkable new book, "American Dynasty," calls a "Machiavellian moment." Among other things, this tells us that General Clark and Howard Dean, whatever they may say in the heat of the nomination fight, are on the same side of the great Democratic divide.
Most political reporting on the Democratic race, it seems to me, has gotten it wrong. Some journalists do, of course, insist on trivializing the whole thing: what I dread most, in the event of an upset in Iowa, is the return of reporting about the political significance of John Kerry's hair.
But even those who refrain from turning political reporting into gossip have used the wrong categories. Again and again, one reads that it's about the left wing of the Democratic party versus the centrists; but Mr. Dean was a very centrist governor, and his policy proposals are not obviously more liberal than those of his rivals.
The real division in the race for the Democratic nomination is between those who are willing to question not just the policies but also the honesty and the motives of the people running our country, and those who aren't.
What makes Mr. Dean seem radical aren't his policy positions but his willingness — shared, we now know, by General Clark — to take a hard line against the Bush administration. This horrifies some veterans of the Clinton years, who have nostalgic memories of elections that were won by emphasizing the positive. Indeed, George Bush's handlers have already made it clear that they intend to make his "optimism" — as opposed to the negativism of his angry opponents — a campaign theme. (Money-saving suggestion: let's cut directly to the scene where Mr. Bush dresses up as an astronaut, and skip the rest of his expensive, pointless — but optimistic! — Moon-base program.)
But even Bill Clinton couldn't run a successful Clinton-style campaign this year, for several reasons.
One is that the Democratic candidate, no matter how business-friendly, will not be able to get lots of corporate contributions, as Clinton did. In the Clinton era, a Democrat could still raise a lot of money from business, partly because there really are liberal businessmen, partly because donors wanted to hedge their bets. But these days the Republicans control all three branches of government and exercise that control ruthlessly. Even corporate types who have grave misgivings about the Bush administration — a much larger group than you might think — are afraid to give money to Democrats.
Another is that the Bush people really are Nixonian. The bogus security investigation over Ron Suskind's "The Price of Loyalty," like the outing of Valerie Plame, shows the lengths they're willing to go to in intimidating their critics. (In the case of Paul O'Neill, alas, the intimidation seems to be working.) A mild-mannered, upbeat candidate would get eaten alive.
Finally, any Democrat has to expect not just severely slanted coverage from the fair and balanced Republican media, but asymmetric treatment even from the mainstream media. For example, some have said that the intense scrutiny of Mr. Dean's Vermont record is what every governor who runs for president faces. No, it isn't. I've looked at press coverage of questions surrounding Mr. Bush's tenure in Austin, like the investment of state university funds with Republican donors; he got a free pass during the 2000 campaign.
So what's the answer? A Democratic candidate will have a chance of winning only if he has an energized base, willing to contribute money in many small donations, willing to contribute their own time, willing to stand up for the candidate in the face of smear tactics and unfair coverage.
That doesn't mean that the Democratic candidate has to be a radical — which is a good thing for the party, since all of the candidates are actually quite moderate. In fact, what the party needs is a candidate who inspires the base enough to get out the message that he isn't a radical — and that Mr. Bush is.
"But it's a dangerous game that comedy plays
Sometimes it tells you the truth
Sometimes it delays it"
Sometimes it tells you the truth
Sometimes it delays it"
-
PlaythingOrPet
- Posts: 959
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 9:42 am
1. Hung/Strung - EXCELLENT post. i am registered w/ the Times, but it's a pain in the ass to log in. so i never bother.
2. PoP - okay, i'll be right over. just send me directions. PM, of course, we don't want you being innundated w/ people who just want to get their hands on steve.
and if davey wore glasses, i bet i'd be gaa-gaa over him too. yes, it is a weakness on my part.
2. PoP - okay, i'll be right over. just send me directions. PM, of course, we don't want you being innundated w/ people who just want to get their hands on steve.
and if davey wore glasses, i bet i'd be gaa-gaa over him too. yes, it is a weakness on my part.
... name the stars and constellations,
count the cars and watch the seasons....
count the cars and watch the seasons....
