Re: American radio is noise pollution!!!

[Rich Wood]

On 30 Jun 2003 16:07:47 GMT, "David Eduardo" >
wrote:

>> The Geneva Concention permits only 3 hours, otherwise it's considered
>> torture and is punishable by 5 hours of Slim Whitman.

>Or a loop of "The Last Farewell" edited from a Shulke matched flow tape.

You truly are a twisted man. The inhumaity of such a thing is mind
boggling.

Rich

[Don Quijote]

"Prai Jei" > wrote in message >...
> "Don Quijote" > wrote in message
> ...
> > What's sad is that $500 are being channeled into shortwave radio to
> > sell the 'American way of life' to the world.
>
> That's not much of an investment. Should that be 500 megabucks? gigabucks?
> I'll stick with Classic FM here in the UK, can't get short wave anyway.

That's $500 million vs. $120 million for the arts. People in Zimbabwe
sure get a good deal out of America's taxpayers... :)

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

[Don Quijote]

Michael Moore > wrote in message >...
> Rich Wood wrote:
> > On 28 Jun 2003 04:47:57 GMT, Michael Moore >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You are hereby sentenced to listen to four hours of polka
> >>king Frankie Yankovic's greatest hits.
> >
> >
> > The Geneva Concention permits only 3 hours, otherwise it's considered
> > torture and is punishable by 5 hours of Slim Whitman.

Does the Geneva Convention cover stupid commercials? How about boring
commercials?

In Scandinavia you look forward to watching smart, funny commercials
but in America they are sooooo boring...

"I have a better suggestion: simply turn off the set, reach for a book
and let your mind take you into a glorious world free from offensive
commercials."

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

[John Harrington]

"Paul Jensen" > wrote in message >...
> "John Harrington" > wrote in message
> ...
> > What bull****. The government doesn't "take" hard earned money, or
> > easily earned money, from anyone.
>
> This is the moat clueless statement in this thread yet.

Don't look now, but yours is the beam clueless statement.

> > If this clumsily loaded question boils down to: do I believe tax
> > monies should be devoted, in part, to preserving and encouraging high
> > culture. The answer is: you bet I do.
>
> Some brain dead person claimed earlier in this thread that we just had to
> have taxpayer-supported government radio, or else how would people "learn"
> about classical music? You know what? The other day I went out and
> *purchased* a 10-CD classical collection, and now I am learning about
> classical music. And I am doing it without government subsidy and no burdon
> on taxpayers.

Um, probably not, in fact. If that CD collection has orchestral music
on it, the probability is high you're listening to music funded in
whole or part by some "evul gubmint" somewhere in the world. In fact,
chances are good that if that 10 CD collection was bought at budget
prices, you're listening to orchestras that were founded by communist
governments (e.g., former eastern bloc nations).


John

[Rich Wood]

On 30 Jun 2003 16:07:48 GMT, Tom Betz > wrote:

>>>You are hereby sentenced to listen to four hours of polka
>>>king Frankie Yankovic's greatest hits.
>>
>> The Geneva Concention permits only 3 hours, otherwise it's considered
>> torture and is punishable by 5 hours of Slim Whitman.
>
>"Ack! Ack ack ack ack!!"

Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on Slim. He did save the planet, after
all.

Rich

[Michael Moore]

John Harrington wrote:
> Perhaps you'd care to respond to the challenge I posted a few days
> ago:
>
> Name five classical musicians, most of whom are and have been funded
> by the "evul gumbint" or by the church, who died of drug overdoses.
>
> At the following URL you will find a table of "rock deaths" compiled
> by a rock "music" fan:
>
> http://rockdeaths.mybravenet.com/rdl/rlistN.html
>
> It lists the causes of death of what appears to be a comprehensive
> list of dead rock stars, by name, date, cause, etc. Last I checked,
> of the 556 deaths listed on this page:
>
> 60 are due to Drugs (10.8%)
> 50 are suicides (9%)
> 31 are homicides (5.6%)
> 12 are due to alcohol (2.2%)
>
> All in all, over 1/4 of the rock stars listed died violently or via
> some form of substance abuse (not including lung cancer, btw). Over 1
> in 5 died by their own hand (suicide or substance abuse).
>
> I invite you to compile a similar list of deaths of classical
> musicians. The table covers 39 years of rock history. If you wish,
> you may draw your data from the last 400 years of classical history,
> over ten times the scope of the above table.
>
> Have fun.

Unless you are claiming the rock music is evil and the cause
of all the tradgedy, then I consider all of the above stats
irrelevant. If however, you are claiming that rock music is
itself evil, then the burden of proof is yours to
demonstrate it (e.g. how do I know that rock musicians who
overdosed weren't just stupid folks with more money then
they knew what to do with? If so, why should this discredit
rock music?).

--
M2

[Michael Moore]

John Harrington wrote:
> In fact,
> chances are good that if that 10 CD collection was bought at budget
> prices, you're listening to orchestras that were founded by communist
> governments (e.g., former eastern bloc nations).

That's the nature of "central planning".

--
M2

[Don Quijote]

(John Harrington) wrote in message >...
> "Paul Jensen" > wrote in message >...
> > "John Harrington" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > What bull****. The government doesn't "take" hard earned money, or
> > > easily earned money, from anyone.
> >
> > This is the moat clueless statement in this thread yet.
>
> Don't look now, but yours is the beam clueless statement.
>
> > > If this clumsily loaded question boils down to: do I believe tax
> > > monies should be devoted, in part, to preserving and encouraging high
> > > culture. The answer is: you bet I do.
> >
> > Some brain dead person claimed earlier in this thread that we just had to
> > have taxpayer-supported government radio, or else how would people "learn"
> > about classical music? You know what? The other day I went out and
> > *purchased* a 10-CD classical collection, and now I am learning about
> > classical music. And I am doing it without government subsidy and no burdon
> > on taxpayers.
>
> Um, probably not, in fact. If that CD collection has orchestral music
> on it, the probability is high you're listening to music funded in
> whole or part by some "evul gubmint" somewhere in the world. In fact,
> chances are good that if that 10 CD collection was bought at budget
> prices, you're listening to orchestras that were founded by communist
> governments (e.g., former eastern bloc nations).

Capitalism holds a higher promise though. Wait until the People's
Republic of China symphony orchestra jumps on the capitalist wagon,
and you'll find the 10 CD for 1 buck at the dollar store...

What's better, capitalism or communism?

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

[Paul Jensen]

> I know some civilized countries (Canada, the whole Western Europe and
> others) that have government-funded, commercial-free classical radio
> plus many other arts. But of course, investing in the military is a
> wiser investment...

Damn right it is. If it weren't for our military, the people of Western
Europe would today be speaking German or Russian.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Paul Jensen wrote:
>
> > I know some civilized countries (Canada, the whole Western Europe and
> > others) that have government-funded, commercial-free classical radio
> > plus many other arts. But of course, investing in the military is a
> > wiser investment...
>
> Damn right it is. If it weren't for our military, the people of Western
> Europe would today be speaking German or Russian.

Two beautiful and expressive languages. What would be wrong with that?
--
Peter T. Daniels

[John Harrington]

(Don Quijote) wrote in message >...
<snip>
> What's better, capitalism or communism?

Communism is neat.


J

[Don Quijote]

"Paul Jensen" > wrote in message >...
> > I know some civilized countries (Canada, the whole Western Europe and
> > others) that have government-funded, commercial-free classical radio
> > plus many other arts. But of course, investing in the military is a
> > wiser investment...
>
> Damn right it is. If it weren't for our military, the people of Western
> Europe would today be speaking German or Russian.

Don't you think they pretty grown up by now to be let on their own?
Why don't you spend the money home in things like education and the
arts, and perhaps you will start see people talking about quality of
life, instead of having some flag-waving, God-blessing apocalyptic
crowd.

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote