Chalkhills Digest Volume 5, Issue 338
Date: Monday, 13 December 1999
Chalkhills Digest, Volume 5, Number 338
Monday, 13 December 1999
Today's Topics:
Skid Mark
Yo, later, dudes!
Peanuts!
1999- a crap year by and large
Elvis, Bruce and Andy
Photograph
Re: Glass Onion
cue phil collins...
re: drum solo! cue the bass solo!
End of the Millennium Hodge Podge
re: chalkhills #5_337 / a clarification
They made it!
The Ghetto of Beautiful Things
Butchering your "Senses..."
brief non-XTC plug
The financial status of XtC
More off-topic crap: drugs
Administrivia:
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org> with the following command:
unsubscribe
For all other administrative issues, send a message to:
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org>
Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:
<chalkhills@chalkhills.org>
World Wide Web: <http://chalkhills.org/>
The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.
Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.7 (John Relph <relph@sgi.com>).
Instant desserts just for one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mark Strijbos" <mmello@knoware.nl>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:49:35 +0100
Subject: Skid Mark
Message-Id: <19991212234744.8D0E9A6CDF@mail.knoware.nl>
Dear Chalkers,
First of all a remark about the recent flurry of "Albums of the 90's"
and "Composers of the Century" lists... as this decade, century and
indeed this millenium won't be over for another year don't you all
feel just a bit premature? Who knows, perhaps you'll enjoy Apple
Venus Vol. II even better than Volume I - just a thought.
> And, for my final question of the evening, why was the "And buses
> might skid on black ice" line left out of the version of "Senses
> Working Overtime" that's on _Upsy Daisy Assortment_? Was it that way
> on the single?
to put it plain and simple: yes.
This was the line that was sacrificied by the powers that were at
Virgin to "get to the chorus quicker". They believed this, and the
resulting shorter running time, would make it more radio friendly
and thus more likely to become a hit.
I personally think they should be hanged and quartered for
tampering with XTC material.
yours in xtc,
Mark Strijbos at The Little Lighthouse
http://www.knoware.nl/users/mmello/
or http://come.to/xtc
------------------------------ From: Iain.Murray.70428176@army.defence.gov.au Message-Id: <4A256846.00000C94.00@stagemaster.army.defence.gov.au> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:44:33 +1000 Subject: Yo, later, dudes! I'm tired. I'm tired of trying to express myself on this forum, and having what I write misconstrued as either personal abuse or humourless churlishness. I'm tired of being subjected to public on-list reprisals when what I've written is taken the wrong way. I'm tired of being unable to project the fact that, more often than not, I'm joking (which I've found can be difficult when you're relying solely on the written word). I'm tired of feeling the need to defend myself after every other posting. Basically, I guess I'm tired of being on Chalkhills. I've reached the point where I feel I can get through my day without it. I could have simply gone into "lurk mode", but I probably wouldn't have lasted more than a couple of weeks. I've decided to unsubscribe (actually, I've already done it). Generally, I've had a blast here over the past eighteen months or so, but lately I've been gradually losing interest for the above reasons. I'll try to stay in contact with the friends I've made here (especially ~p@ul, Toni, Chris and the Great White Mudshark), but I won't be taking part in the witch hunts or troll-spotting anymore. Sorry to take up bandwidth. Iain
------------------------------ From: fheaney@erols.com Message-ID: <000901bf4517$ed11e300$78df7ad1@default> Subject: Peanuts! Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 22:12:42 -0500 Megan implicitly asked: > (and it was followed by the piece used for the Peanuts cartoons-- I > can never remember the composer's name-- so that was doubly good). Vince Guaraldi. (The title of the tune is "Linus and Lucy".) -- Francis "I've got a spine, so I can move around." -- Stereolab
------------------------------ Message-ID: <45C458C0C9C7D2119F790000F87A42A4AFFF76@s-mulgrave6.faulding.com.au> From: "Van Abbe, Dominic" <dominic.vanabbe@au.faulding.com> Subject: 1999- a crap year by and large Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 13:54:15 +1030 In a particularly piss-poor year for music in general, the following are, for those who give the slightest of shits, my personal faves of 1999: 1. The Ideal Crash: dEUS This is one criminally under-rated band. Hailing from Belgium, they make the most weird but wonderful noises. Sounding completely lackadaisical, somehow managing to hang together, this is most challenging album I have heard since OK Computer. Still sounds magnificent after being repeatedly thrashed during 1999. This is more mainstream than their previous releases (containing less of their obvious Beefheart and Zappa influences) and is all the better for it. Sterling stuff from go to woah. 2. Apple Venus 1: XtC Naturally!!! Despite the fact I'd heard all the songs over and over in demo form, this album still managed to floor me. Someone on the list said it was like watching a movie in colour when you'd only previously seen it in B&W. Amazed me in that some of the songs I found lesser in demo form (e.g. KISK, and ICOH) ended up being amongst my faves on the album. 3. Utopia Parkway: Fountains of Wayne Not quite as good as their debut, but great stuff nonetheless. Marks off for 3 or 4 filler tracks, but the remaining 10 are staggeringly tuneful. 4. "Looking for a day in the night": The Lilac Time File alongside XtC for the most welcome return of the year. Like a campfire tape it'll snuggle up alongside you. Warm, gentle and....erm....fey... 5. Collection: The Clouds A greatest hits album no less. Oz music is in an appalling state at the minute, with the ugly, hackneyed spectre of grunge hanging large and loud. The demise of such perennials as The Clouds, Weddings Parties Anything, Hunters & Collectors and Hoodoo Gurus has left a *HUGE* hole. The Clouds were a magnificent band from start to finish. The two girls were magnificently assisted by Dave Easton (a man who could elicit plenty more tuneful squalls from his axe than Reeves Gabrels could ever manage, and whose departure before the band's ultimate demise sadly took some of the wind outta their sails) and Stuart Eadie and Raphael Whittingham (superb drummers both). More weird time signatures than you poke a stick at, but here are 24 tracks in 78 minutes, each one a mini-epic and each one an Oz classic. 6. Hey! Album: Marvelous 3 Cracking major label debut. A pot-pourri of such rock-pop greats as Cheap Trick, Big Star and TPOH. Witty lyrics, occasional indulgence and clever production. Raw but polished at the same time. 7. Ridiculous: Squeeze OK, this may have come out in 1998 overseas, but for us poor colonials, it took until mid-this year for a release locally. Not Squeeze's best (Difford especially is not his usual self in the lyrical dept) but still some good stuff all the same. They and XtC may have had their differences but I couldnae be bothered with all the guff. 'Tis the music that matters.... 8. She haunts my dreams: Spain File alongside The Lilac Time- loungey, soulful and tuenful. 9. Venus & Back: Tori Amos The studio stuff is easily her best since Little Earthquakes. Not too fussed about the live CD though (live CD's never really have rattled my bones) 10. Shapeshifter: Marcy Playground Less smart-arsery than their debut. Bigger, better arrangements. Beyond that, it was thin on the ground. Hell, Homespun could probably get a guernsey!!!! OK, back to it. Dom VA
------------------------------ Message-Id: <199912130339.TAA07211@eagle.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 21:34:34 -0600 Subject: Elvis, Bruce and Andy From: "Bob O'Bannon" <batchain@earthlink.net> >For an excellent specimen of >Bruce's ability, check out the bass on "Lip Service". ELVIS! CAN YOU HEAR >ME!? I MISS THE ATTRACTIONS! I couldn't agree more, and was just thinking about this minutes before I read this digest. The Attractions added an urgency and directness to Elvis' music that seems to be missing without them. Bruce Thomas is indeed an amazing bass player; in fact, one has his work cut out for him if he's going to pick up on both Bruce's bass playing and the nuances of Elvis' songwriting at the same time. That's too much work for one brain to handle. Personally, my favorite example of Bruce's expertise is "Pretty Words," from "Trust." XTC content? Well, it almost saddens me to admit it, but I think Elvis has nudged out Andy as my favorite songwriter. It seems lately that I reach for Costello's CDs more than XTC's. Only time will tell if this will last. bob obannon
------------------------------ From: RnD426@aol.com Message-ID: <0.4587d8c4.2585ceec@aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 23:24:12 EST Subject: Photograph Nathan Mulac DeHoff said: >>Quite possibly. Of course, it would be easy for someone (not specifically >>referring to Ringo here) just to do subpar work, and then later claim that >>it's SUPPOSED to be that way, so you can't criticize them. Of course, but in this case a "tongue-in-cheek" solo is exactly what Ringo intended here. Furthermore, if anyone doubts Ringo's ability to play a "proper" solo only, you only need to check out "I'm Gonna Sit Right Down and Cry Over You" from the Beatles Live at the BBC.
------------------------------ From: WTDK@aol.com Message-ID: <0.c83dda0f.2585cc90@aol.com> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 23:14:08 EST Subject: Re: Glass Onion >From "Glass Onion": and here's another clue for you all / the walrus was >Paul. I don't know if he (John) was being sarcastic or not, but... Actually, in Lennon remembers John points out that he was trying to say thanks to Paul for keeping the group together during a time of turmoil. It also was written in response to all those folks that see things in the Lennon & McCartney's music that were never intended. Wayne
------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19991213004009.006f9568@mail.interlog.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 00:40:09 -0500 From: David Oh <davidoh@interlog.com> Subject: cue phil collins... ker-thump! <sound of a stylus dropping on vinyl> crack! pop! pop! ... there must be some misunderstanding (oo-oo-oo-oo) ... there must be some kind of mistake skkkkkrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiitttttcccccccccchhhhhhhhhhh! <sound of the stylus skipping across the grooves> >From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom@hotmail.com> >>travels in nihilon: >>maybe it's me, but i always thought that the ending to this song sounded >>like someone having a veeerrryyy looonnnggg piss! >>perhaps terry after a night down the pub and at the chippy? :-> >Wasn't it recorded in the shower? I think it was supposed to sound like >rain, but the impression didn't come across quite as well as the band would >have hoped. i think you missed the point, ol' chap. i was being facetious. yes, it is a very poor recording of a shower intended to sound like rain, but i said that, to me at least, it _sounded_ like someone taking a very long piss, not like the rain it was supposed to represent. don't you just hate it when you have to explain a joke? if you have read song stories, you might remember when andy said that one night, terry was out on a piss-up with a mate, broke into a chip shop, found nothing worth stealing, so they pissed in a tub of chips. now do you understand the joke? peace & xtc, davidoh
------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19991213010547.00704260@mail.interlog.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 01:05:47 -0500 From: David Oh <davidoh@interlog.com> Subject: re: drum solo! cue the bass solo! i'm reminded of "the kids in the hall" sketch by bruce mcculloch (sp?), "these are the dave's i know (i know)". has anyone seen this video? i'm going from memory here because it's been many years since i've seen the video, but... right in the middle, bruce yells, "bass solo!", and then proceeds to "play" four whole notes before the song goes back into the verses. i think he "plays" a hofner "beatle" bass, too. i guess that with me being a dave, and a canadian, too, this just struck me as funny. or perhaps i'm confusing this with his video for "terriers"? i'm so confused, my brain hurts! peace & xtc, davidoh
------------------------------
Message-Id: <l03130300b47a521b1dc0@[63.23.192.241]>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 04:16:28 -0500
From: MinerWerks <dminer@gte.net>
Subject: End of the Millennium Hodge Podge
As evidenced by some of the previous digests, some of us are in a
reflective mood, looking back at the 90s, or even the whole century. It's
amazing to think where we are and where we've been...
I thought about doing my own list of albums of the nineties, but I didn't
for two reasons. The first is that several others have done this and done
the topic justice. The second is that my taste in music woefully neglects
some very important artists. I can only hope that my tastes will contine to
mature - but hey, I found XTC, so they can't be all bad, right? I still bet
I'd have a hard time finding 'hillers to back me up on albums like The
Juliana Hatfield Three's "Become What You Are," Alanis Morisete's "Jagged
Little Pill," Soul Asylum's "Grave Dancers Union" or Weezer's "Pinkerton."
But I will say I heartily concur with Scott Barnard's choices (in digest
#5-335) of "Nonsuch," Blur's "Parklife," and especially The Breeders' "Last
Splash" - to which I reply "what about Frank Black's eponymous disc?"
In digest #5-332, DavidOh gave a list of his favorite concerts of the
nineties. This struck me for two reasons - One, because in the last month,
I saw two concerts I'd rank as favorite of all time, and two, because of
the number of times he saw the Red Hot Chili Peppers. I bring the second
point up because I doubt very few people could say they saw a national
touring act in concert four times in ten years (unless you're one of those
diehard Dead or Phish fans, I imagine) - so I wanted some comparisons. I
went back to count my tickets and discovered that in the last eight years,
I saw They Might Be Giants *eight* times. Who else has seen one band/artist
in concert four or more times in the last decade?
On my other concert point - I recently caught shows by Barenaked Ladies and
"Weird Al" Yankovic. Now, I'll give you that just hearing these artists
performing their hits live would make for a rather weak "show." But both
shows provided enough entertainment value to make it worthwhile (especially
considering I plunked down $35 to see Al). Yankovic puts his band and
himself through a rigorous routine, chaning costumes at least seven times
throughout a two and 1/2 hour show. While those changes occur, the crowd is
entertained by a hodge podge of video clips, including hilarious send-ups
of old black and white educational films. And while most of the stage
versions of Al's hits could sound just like the discs, the unusual twists
really make the show. Witness a performace of "Like A Surgeon," revamped to
parody Madonna in "Truth or Dare." And if you see Al in concert, you'll
most likely get to hear some unreleased material - like Alanis Morisette
and Celine Dion whipped up in a food medley ("Thank you Pizza Hut, thank
you Taco Bell..." "Near, far, I'll hop in my car. Just say what you want
and the toppings go on...").
As for those Canadian Barenaked Ladies, I don't think I've ever
(intentionally) laughed so hard at a band in my life. I remember a writer
in Yeah Yeah Yeah magazine wondering why those Barenaked Ladies had to rap.
Well, I for one hope they keep on doing it, because they rap some of the
best stream-of-consciousness humor. I can't verify if they preplan some of
their material, but it certainly seems improvised. For instance, in their
show here in Clearwater, Florida (home of Scientology), they made up a rap
that rhymed "alien biology" with "Church of Scientology." The group also
continuously evolves a segment that I've heard called the "Barenaked Rap,"
where they riff some lyrics of current hit songs to old school beatbox
backing. Very funny stuff. And early on in their show, they invited one of
the security guys from the front of stage up to play a repeated riff on the
guitar which the group turned into a singalong of the Kinks' "You Really
Got Me." The group also has incredibly funny banter that pops up between
(and sometimes in) songs. And lest we forget that this band plays songs,
they did their catalogue of pop gems justice as well. Too bad I had to
battle a bunch of teenyboppers who wanted to get a glimpse of Enrique
Iglesisas to get close to the stage.
Hopefully you might now indulge me a bit of talk on movies... I trust my
judgment on them far more than I do on music (unfortunately).
One 'hiller (forgive me for not remembering your name) asked what might be
the best movie of the century - a question almost equal to asking "what's
the best movie ever?" I bet nobody thought back to the work of Eisenstein
and Griffith, whose work in montage certainly paved the way for filmmaking
as we know it. I suggest these pioneers somewhat in jest - even in film
classes, I never heard anyone making a strong case for "Birth of a Nation"
as their favorite film of all time (although I can picture some of the more
socially impaired students trying to champion "Potempkin" as the best of
all time). ;)
In the post referenced earlier, DavidOh also gave a list of his all time
favorite movies, which included my favorite of '99, "American Beauty." I
don't consider it a stretch to place it in the same league with
"Casablanca," "Citizen Kane" and "A Hard Day's Night," as he did. "American
Beauty" is, for better or for worse, a striking portrait of American
families at the end of the century. I can't remember the last time I saw a
film that seemed as truthful in its portrayal of teenagers, much less a
film that dealt in equal weight with the foibles of teens and adults. Other
favorites of mine from the last year (pending viewing of "The Green Mile,"
"Man on the Moon," and "Magnolia"): "Fight Club," "Three Kings," "South
Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut," "Toy Story 2," "Election," "The Sixth
Sense," "Being John Malkovich," and "Dogma."
</digression>
= Derek "How come I can get Weird Al's autograph but not Andy Partridge's?"
Miner =
------------------------------ Message-ID: <385502CE.438A@schoollink.net> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 06:29:34 -0800 From: dan phipps <phipps@schoollink.net> Organization: cic Subject: re: chalkhills #5_337 / a clarification hello all... just a small wrickle to iron put -- todd bernhardt in 5_337 stated: > Pete Phipps' brother Dan asked: (snip> for the record, pete's not my brother. would be nice though being associated with partridge and co. in *that* direct a manner, wouldn't it? (sigh) waiting for av2 and warbles that are fuzzy... -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /Dan and Ginger Phipps <phipps@schoollink.net> "As long as we are open, our hearts will make us free." (Jon Anderson) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------ Message-ID: <03b501bf4555$6c410380$2d64a8c0@emigre> From: "Simon Curtiss" <mduffy@clear.net.nz> Subject: They made it! Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 23:28:05 +1300 Hi Y'all I'm 37 chalkhills behind so I have no idea what everyone is talking about at the moment, are we in full on flame fest or is there peace and calm in the hills? Anyway on to the important stuff. Belinda and Dave have made it to the top of world (it's the northern hemisphere that's geographically challenged from our point of view) and are gadding about the country as we speak. They arrived here in Tauranga (hang on I'll wait while you go and get your atlases out...... tum te tum te tum.......<drums fingers>......dee dede dee dede la la la....... <whistles tunelessly>. ..... oh good you're back) about six days ago, and of course caught me by surprise as I thought they were coming a day later (mainly due to not listening to wife properly - but then who does?). So were we ready for them - in a word NO. No food, no drink, no organisation at all. We did have a lot of mess, kids all over the place etc etc. I did manage to nip down to the off-licence and get some beer and wine, so of course when they arrived they asked for a cup of tea! For some reason I was expecting Belinda to have black hair, so of course she was blonde. Anyway we bored them senseless with maps and places to go along the way, interspersed with putting kids to bed etc. Then they disappeared into the night - hopefully missing the full on tropical downpour that is an interesting feature of living up on this 'ere hill. They will be visiting two other hillian's along the way, who will hopefully do better in the hospitality stakes. Who are you anyway - I know there's someone in Otago - what other Kiwi is lurking on the list? When you see them, tell Belinda & Dave to come and see us on the way back (with more than 10 hours notice this time please) and I will be prepared this time - no really! g'night Simon
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19991213121820.11858.qmail@web1601.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 04:18:20 -0800 (PST) From: Al LaCarte <allacarte@yahoo.com> Subject: The Ghetto of Beautiful Things Folxtc, A few issues back, Chris opted to give us even more information about his personal philosophy, and it has since been reiterated: >>but you can't cheapen beauty by reducing it to >>chemical reactions and scientific phenomena, it >>misses the point. To do so would be curmudgeonly >>(though technically correct). Some of us find the scientific explanations of the mysterious and the naturally beautiful to be enlightening, adding to the overall appreciation of the experience. Earlier in that same post he revealed: >With that in my mind, here are some of the phenomena >that occur on this planet that prove to me God >exists: <<the Scissor Man cometh>> >How I feel when I make love with my wife Oh, praise Andy! I'm glad that I don't know what the two of you look like, or any time an Air Supply record came on, (which thankfully is as rare in these parts as carpaccio!) I'd have to start singing "Flintstones, Meet The Flintstones!" at the top of my lungs just to vanquish the inevitable ensuing images that would be thrust upon me by my Catholic-bred superego! Mr. Dunks is at it again. Help me Colin! If only he didn't like XTC. >If I recall correctly, I had been gagging over just >such a list in either Q or Mojo Magazine, which >ranked Phony Bennett, Frank Cosanatra and Luciano >Pavarotti alongside Bono and Stipey; it listed Aretha >but ignored Patti Labelle, who can still pretty >nearly sing the ass off anyone on the planet >simultaneously). Ok, so you don't like Tony Bennett? Fair enough, but he isn't, by any definition that I can unearth, "phony." His reputation in the business is one of a generous gentleman, loved my millions. He turned down an acting career because the "Hollyweirds" insisted that he get a nose-job. (They already had Karl Malden you see.) When he played The Radio City Music Hall back in mid-eighties (which would have made him about 60 at the time) he performed a number without the benefit of a microphone and was heard clearly in the back-row. He has won the admiration of his peers and the respect of many musicians from younger generations. I'm not surprised that *you* don't like him, but I am a bit bemused by your persistence in labeling him a "phony" when all prevailing evidence points to the contrary. Granted, Frank Sinatra had some serious flaws in his character, but the man was an incredibly gifted singer who created (along with Nelson Riddle) some of the best records of this century. Open your mind and listen to "Songs For Swingin' Lovers" and "In The Wee Small Hours." On second thought don't. It makes sense that you don't like him either. And, comparing Patti LaBelle to Aretha Franklin is like comparing The Bay City Rollers to The Beatles. Thank you, and Dave bless us all, everyone! Michael "Harrison started this, and now everybody wants to get into the act" Versaci
------------------------------ From: JStrole@aol.com Message-ID: <0.8f9d8e8c.25865a36@aol.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:18:30 EST Subject: Butchering your "Senses..." << why was the "And buses might skid on black ice" line left out of the version of "Senses Working Overtime" that's on _Upsy Daisy Assortment_? Was it that way on the single? >> Yes, the 7-inch single cut out the "...buses..." line out, I think they cut out a set of "doo-doo-doos" as well. The American version (yes, Epic did release it as a single) faded out just before Terry's triplet figure at the end, how anti-climatic is that. Harry
------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 99 8:55:31 EST From: Jeff Rosedale <rosedale@columbia.edu> Subject: brief non-XTC plug Message-ID: <CMM.0.90.4.945093331.rosedale@sawasdee> Those of you who actually joined the Hello record club when the news broke that Andy was contributing a demo sampler will also have received a John Linnell CD. It contained songs named after US states. There is now a full-length "State Songs" CD, and John Linnell is concluding a brief tour in support of it. I believe the last places he will be touring are Boston and DC. The NY show on Dec. 10 was a blast. Pick up the CD if you can't see him live. Several of the songs are real gems. He's also got a green vinyl US-shaped single on the market... --Jeff <rosedale@columbia.edu>
------------------------------ From: "Damian Wise (Foulger)" <damian@imclaser.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:58:37 -0600 Subject: The financial status of XtC Message-Id: <19991213075439.14718ec6.in@ceo.ceolasers.com> <<On another topic, someone here recently stated that XTC are no longer poor with AV1 sales around 250,000? >> Can one of you lucky Chalkhillians actually ask Mr. P or Mr. C how many they have sold and whether they are making any money from the project? Obviously we don't need to know how many spondoolicks (sp?) they have made, but I would certainly be happy to know that they aren't mired in poverty. Dames tWd -- Waiting for AV2
------------------------------ Message-Id: <C1D2BBBA6310D2118B5500805FA7AF3F01DFDCB4@xch-mes-04.msc.az.boeing.com> From: "Johnson, Tom" <tom.johnson@boeing.com> Subject: More off-topic crap: drugs Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 07:00:14 -0700 I'm sorry to do it, I really am. I'm going to regret doing this. I didn't want to post on completely off-topic material, but here goes. Forgive me everyone. From: David Oh <davidoh@interlog.com> > drugs: > i believe in the decriminalization of all forms cannabis for two reasons. > > first point: why should a person go to jail for simple possession? what > harm has that person done to society? I DO NOT stand behind the decrimilization of any drugs. Why? I'm not meaning to sound like some old codger, but the moral fabric of this country in specific and the world in general has been on a steady decline since the 60's. No one cares about what anyone thinks, says, does, or wants to do anymore. No one cares, period. People have been given free reign to do whatever they want to do, "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else." The problem is, we are becoming animals again. If people are given the "right" to act as they wish, the outcome will be detrimental to society as a whole. No one wants to believe this, but it's true. Just take a look around - do you *really* like the way society is going? > how does that quote go? "a bad law > tries to protect me from myself?" whether you do or don't is still a > matter > of choice. And here's a great example of what I'm talking about. Everyone thinks the law is about themselves. It is not. Laws are here to protect society from *you*, should you decide to do something bad. Laws serve two purposes, one is to protect the people from physical harm, the other is to uphold a sense of moral dignity. There has to be some kind of reward/punishment system for laws to work, for morals to remain. Take those laws away, and no one will know what is right and what is wrong. Do you see what I'm saying? The "good" people of the world are being forced to subject themselves to the "bad" people in the world. Why should I have to worry about my future children becoming drug users just because YOU want to be one right now? How do you feel about the possibility of your children using drugs LEGALLY? I don't know anyone who feels good about it, including those who use or have used drugs. Again, it's another case of "do as I say not as I do." And once they legalize marijuana, what's to stop other drugs from being legalized? I live in Arizona, and the voters of this state were tricked into voting for a "medical marijuana" legalization act that turned out to be a VERY bad deal. Included in the rider for the bill was the provision to legalize other drugs (can't think of them at the moment, but they're considered "hard" drugs) and to let people out of prison who had simple "possession" charges. Why is that a problem? Because a LARGE number of dealers had plea-bargained in order to get their charges down to simple possesion. Luckily, the state legislature was smart enough to overturn this very badly thought out law. So you tell me, are the pro-pot organizers such good people? Doesn't sound like it to me, they happily let these riders get attached to the bill in order to satisfy their habits. These are people who want society to adjust itself to their lifestyles. I say, if you want to do drugs, do them. But take the consequences as they come, and don't expect me to feel sorry for you if you get thrown in jail for it. If it were up to me, cigarettes and alcohol would be illegal too. It's hypocritical for me to say that one drug is okay and another is not. I don't use nor have i ever used drugs of any kind. I don't want to, I don't care to. I've seen what idiots people turn into because of this stuff. > second point: i believe that there are medicinal properties that are > beneficial to cancer/chemo patients and aids/hiv suffers. it has been > proven to stop nausea and increase their appetites, which leads them to > get > the nutrients that their bodies need to stay healthy. as well as those > points, there are those who suffer from chronic pain. And you may be right. However, studies have shown that the "medicinal" properties can be gained from extracting the substance from the plant and giving it in a pill form. Do the "medical marijuana" proponents want you to know this? No, they don't. Why? Because it's not about legalizing a substance for medical use, it's about legalizing it for their own use. I'm all for anything that will help TRULY sick people. Marijuana doesn't need to be "legalized" for this. > do what you will but harm none. If this could possibly be true, then I'd like to see how. Prove to me that legalizing drugs now will not harm the future potential of our children, that they will not become lethargic addicts, junkies, and losers. Prove to me that in a few years after marijuana is legalized that something worse won't be legalized. You can't prove it, you can't prove any of it. And that is exactly why we have laws against these substances. From: Randy Hiatt <rhiatt@gte.net> > Although testing has most likely gone underground there is a wealth of > data from past work. I wouldn't be so quick to shove this into the > category of hippies, school kids or the "week" either. The list of > influential people who took LSD is staggering. Timothy Leary's book > "Flash Backs" is another good history lesson. You are exactly right. LSD was being studied for use on alcoholics, and the results were stunning. The problem is that idiots like Leary and the hippies came along and exploited what could have been a very promising drug. And just because "influential people" took LSD makes it okay? > LSD is not for recreation or for helping you get through a tough time > with the inlaws, seems it's potentually mind expanding when the > experiment is set up properly and the subject is capable, willing and > positive. LSD is not for any of these purposes. Again, this is yet another example of someone who wants to make it "okay" for them, but not *everyone*, to use drugs. "Mind expansion," a common "excuse" for drug use. If you need drugs to "expand" your mind, then you've got other, more serious, problems going on that need to be addressed. Tom
------------------------------ End of Chalkhills Digest #5-338 *******************************
Go back to Volume 5.
14 December 1999 / Feedback