From: Digestifier To: Subject: Dead-Flames Digest #451 Dead-Flames Digest #451, Volume #48 Thu, 29 Sep 05 19:00:01 PDT Contents: Re: DeLay Indicted! (ndc) ("Ray") Re: DeLay Indicted! (ndc) ("Richard Morris") Re: (NDC) Bug Man goin' down? (leftie) GDTSTOO - Just in: Ratdog in Atlanta ("katrinka") anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("garciyalater@hotmail.com") Re: essential AUD recordings... ("Nick's Picks") Re: Gore 08 ??? ("pv34pv3p") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("dwolf") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("king88uy7") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("Andrew Murawa") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("garciyalater@hotmail.com") Re: essential AUD recordings... ("Steve Terry") Re: essential AUD recordings... (diethylether@gmail.com) Re: A Test (bigamps) Re: essential AUD recordings... ("Steve Terry") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? (polasus@my-deja.com) Re: DeLay Indicted! (ndc) (John Doherty) Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("toledo44") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("toledo44") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("toledo44") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("toledo44") Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? ("toledo44") ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Ray" Subject: Re: DeLay Indicted! (ndc) Date: 29 Sep 2005 16:28:37 -0700 king88uy7 wrote: > Ray > >1) Lying about or obfuscating about personal mutually-consensual > >sexual relations -- even under oath -- IMO does not rise to the level of > >"high crimes and misdemeanors" that warrant the impeachment of a > >president. > > I totally agree. > > >2) Contrary to popular belief, Clinton's prosecutors never definitely > >proved that Clinton committed perjury in any event. Here are the > >details: > > This is where I think the Democrat goggles come into play. > Technically, you may be correct, but everyone knows he lied under oath > and that's not OK. If I'm 'technically' correct then, legally, he didn't commit perjury. And 'perjury' means nothing outside of a legal framework. Which is to say: Clinton did not commit perjury. Did Clinton obfuscate the truth here? And, more generally, did Clinton demonstrate piss-poor judgement with this whole thing? And did he lie to the American public about it? Yes, yes, and yes. And for that he should have been censured, not impeached or driven out of office. Ray ------------------------------ From: "Richard Morris" Subject: Re: DeLay Indicted! (ndc) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:32:38 -0700 "king88uy7" wrote in message news:1128028235.353843.25610@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > Richard Morris >>You don't want your wife to find out, so you lie about it. > > Again, I don't think it works to have the person under oath pick and > choose when to tell the truth.... I think perjury punishments make > sense. But that begs the question as to whether or not the questions asked have anything material to do with the investigation at hand. > But I think it's great you are consistent in your judgements on honesty > and integrity, I think partisanship is lame. Thank you ... R. ------------------------------ From: leftie Subject: Re: (NDC) Bug Man goin' down? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:33:11 -0700 Richard Morris wrote: > Reagan and Nixon had very corrupt administrations. That's so true. Thank goodness there was nobody named George Bush involved in either of those fiascos. Oh, wait a minute.... Never mind! "the poison apple doesn't fall far from the tree..." ------------------------------ From: "katrinka" Subject: GDTSTOO - Just in: Ratdog in Atlanta Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:51:04 -0400 When it rains it pours.... Bob Weir and Ratdog will play the following shows. Mail order is now open for these shows. Tuesday and Wednesday, November 15 and 16 at the Variety Playhouse, Atlanta, CA. Doors open at 7:30 PM. Show time is 8:30 PM. All ages welcome. General admission. Mail order tickets are available at $35.50 per ticket. The Crew of GDTSTOO 9.29.2005 -- "It goes to show you don't ever know Watch each card you play and play it slow....." Robert Hunter Web Site: http://www.gdtstoo.com email: GDTSTOO@dead.net Customer Service Number: (415) 898-2364 Monday-Friday, 11am-5pm, PST. Tour information and mail order telephone hotline: 415-457-6388 To subscribe to our email announce list, send empty email to GDTSTOO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com - - - - this message also posted by katrinka, GDTSTOO subscriber ------------------------------ From: "garciyalater@hotmail.com" Subject: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 17:05:32 -0700 okay, so maybe I shouldnt have eaten the mushrooms......but heading into the 8/9 show in maryland I was as psyched to see a band as I have ever been, but 2 songs in, I knew it was a mistake to have driven 9 hours...... Chuck ------------------------------ From: "Nick's Picks" Subject: Re: essential AUD recordings... Date: 29 Sep 2005 17:06:02 -0700 Dave... a $3k stereo makes those SBDs sound even better to. :) ------------------------------ From: "pv34pv3p" Subject: Re: Gore 08 ??? Date: 29 Sep 2005 17:06:43 -0700 >Nope, as I said before, he looks like an O'Brien. >Mark I was thinking more along the lines of Carlos Murphy... pv34pv3p ------------------------------ From: "dwolf" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:31:35 -0400 I find Weir a bit painful singing Jerry's tunes, and even back in the 90's and late 80's when they pulled out some great old Pig tunes... Bob just had no handle on them... No sole, that's the word I was looking for.... But he's still our great friend Bob who belted out some great tunes with Jerry... wrote in message news:1128038732.155187.102940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > okay, so maybe I shouldnt have eaten the mushrooms......but heading > into the 8/9 show in maryland I was as psyched to see a band as I have > ever been, but 2 songs in, I knew it was a mistake to have driven 9 > hours...... > > > > > Chuck > ------------------------------ From: "king88uy7" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 17:32:09 -0700 Yep. Bobby isn't a good band leader, but his ego says otherwise. ------------------------------ From: "Andrew Murawa" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:33:11 -0700 "dwolf" wrote in message news:XH%_e.627$np2.307@fe02.lga... >No sole, that's the word I was looking for.... I dunno man... Sometimes it sure sounds like he has his foot in his mouth... ------------------------------ From: "garciyalater@hotmail.com" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 17:37:41 -0700 i loved ratdog the first tour out in 95, furthur in 96 was a decent show too, but by 97, when he was doing the jerry tunes, I lost it..... ------------------------------ From: "Steve Terry" Subject: Re: essential AUD recordings... Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:39:04 -0500 "Dave Kelly" wrote in message: > FYI...I still rock a kenner close n' play. You work out on a Sit 'n Spin too I bet. ------------------------------ From: diethylether@gmail.com Subject: Re: essential AUD recordings... Date: 29 Sep 2005 17:54:00 -0700 Disclaimers up front - I generally prefer SBDs to AUDs and have a marked preference for '60's & '70's GD vs. '80's & '90's GD. For AUDs that are better than the SBDs of the same show, look to the FOB's of the MSG Sept. '90 shows, imo. Others that come to mind are Jeff Silberman's 10.21.83, or Rango Keshavan's recordings of the Greek '83 shows & 10.10.82. Some would disagree but I'd also take the AUD of 6.30.73 over the rather flat SBD every time. I wouldn't call Jerry Moore's AUDs of 6.22 & 6.23.74 necessarily "better" than the SBDs, but they provide a spectacular reference. When I think essential AUDs, though, I think more of AUDs of killer shows for which no SBD circulates. Some can be a bit skeevy, but the performances are better than a majority of shows that circulate in crispy SBD form. And then some just sound great and are the only form in circulation. A little rough but well worth it - 3.21.70, 5.7.70, 6.24.70, 9.17.70, 11.5.70, 11.6.70, 11.8.70, 9.19.72 for starters Very good recordings and no SBD in circulation, fantastic shows - 11.13.72, 7.1.73, 7.21.74, 1.10.79, 1.12.79, 1.15.79, 9.6.80, 11.29.80, 11.30.80 set II I wouldn't call 6.28.76 a spectacular or particularly bad recording, but you're not going to hear that terrific Eyes > drums > Happiness is Drumming > Wharf Rat otherwise. Same for the 9.24.76 Playin' > Supplication > Playin'. Or the 9.27.76 variation on the Help > Slip > Frank suite. Another category - shows where the cuts in the SBD are a bit distracting, causing me to prefer the AUD - 6.22.73 and 10.15.76 leap to mind. Hope that helps... happy listening! MJ ------------------------------ From: bigamps Subject: Re: A Test Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:56:31 GMT band beyond description wrote: > Here's a moral test for you... > > ...New Orleans...hurricane...You are photo journalist... > ...man in the water...fighting for his life...George > W. Bush. > ...two options-save...President...shoot...photo > THE QUESTION > > Here's the question, and please give an honest answer....... > > Would you select high contrast color film, or would you go with the > classic simplicity of black and white? I gotta nice, hi-rez digital. ------------------------------ From: "Steve Terry" Subject: Re: essential AUD recordings... Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:03:59 -0500 wrote in message news:1128041640.376011.32190@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > Disclaimers up front - I generally prefer SBDs to AUDs and have a > marked preference for '60's & '70's GD vs. '80's & '90's GD. > > For AUDs that are better than the SBDs of the same show, look to the > FOB's of the MSG Sept. '90 shows, imo. Others that come to mind are > Jeff Silberman's 10.21.83, or Rango Keshavan's recordings of the Greek > '83 shows & 10.10.82. > > Some would disagree but I'd also take the AUD of 6.30.73 over the > rather flat SBD every time. > > I wouldn't call Jerry Moore's AUDs of 6.22 & 6.23.74 necessarily > "better" than the SBDs, but they provide a spectacular reference. > > When I think essential AUDs, though, I think more of AUDs of killer > shows for which no SBD circulates. Some can be a bit skeevy, but the > performances are better than a majority of shows that circulate in > crispy SBD form. And then some just sound great and are the only form > in circulation. > > A little rough but well worth it - 3.21.70, 5.7.70, 6.24.70, 9.17.70, > 11.5.70, 11.6.70, 11.8.70, 9.19.72 for starters > > Very good recordings and no SBD in circulation, fantastic shows - > 11.13.72, 7.1.73, 7.21.74, 1.10.79, 1.12.79, 1.15.79, 9.6.80, 11.29.80, > 11.30.80 set II > > I wouldn't call 6.28.76 a spectacular or particularly bad recording, > but you're not going to hear that terrific Eyes > drums > Happiness is > Drumming > Wharf Rat otherwise. Same for the 9.24.76 Playin' > > Supplication > Playin'. Or the 9.27.76 variation on the Help > Slip > > Frank suite. > > Another category - shows where the cuts in the SBD are a bit > distracting, causing me to prefer the AUD - 6.22.73 and 10.15.76 leap > to mind. > > Hope that helps... happy listening! > > MJ > Great info here, and 11/29/80 is one of my fav shows period, sbd or aud. Thanks for reminding me. ------------------------------ From: polasus@my-deja.com Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 18:17:29 -0700 The answer to that is no. I've seen Ratdog on several occasions in several venues and have never failed to have an enjoyable time and a worthwhile musical experience. It is a different experience from seeing the Grateful Dead or the Dead or PLQ in its various incarnations, but that is the idea, isn't it? I for one love the idea that Bob and the boys are out there keeping the flame burning and I would be bummed if I couldn't see someone performing Jerry's songs live now that he isn't here to do it himself. The evil that Jerry did with the Persian lives long after him on this board, why should the good be interred with his bones, or dumped in the Ganges with his ashes or whatever. A day is coming where you won't be able to drive 9 hours or 90 hours and still see Dead tunes perfomed by original band members. Then you'll wish you hadn't ragged on Bob so much, or given Phil shit for spending time with his family -- although I'm happy he's back on the road as well. ------------------------------ From: John Doherty Subject: Re: DeLay Indicted! (ndc) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:19:17 -0400 In article , "DGDevin" wrote: > > Okay, who has the list of Clinton business associates and political > subordinates who went to prison.... That would be a very, very short list indeed (especially compared to Reagan, Nixon or Bush I, all adminstrations with far more convictions of far more serious crimes. I expect this pack of incompetent thugs will top all those lists, eventually) . Let's see, there's the unfairly persecuted Susan MacDougall, who spent a couple of years in leg chains because she wouldn't agree to lie about imaginary crimes of the Clintons for Ken Starr. she was finally released, but was she ever convicted of anything? That was a wonderful moment in the history of jurisprudence. Then there was Henry Cisneros, who I think paid a fine for paying off his former mistress to keep her mouth shut about a long previous affair. another great moment in the GOP war on sin. ;-) And I think Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy was convicted of some hinky money (prior to his service in DC), but wasn't that one overturned on appeal? And poor old Webb Hubbell (was he even a member of the administration?) spent some time in the clink for allegedly lying on his billing records during his private practice with Hillary. Lord knows no attorney ever overbilled anyone in the history of law before that. ;-) How do any of these "crimes" measure up to Tom Delay's forcing corporations to pay protection money so that he could re-jigger the Texas map to produce more GOP congress people? How do they measure up to Karl Rove's outing a CIA agent to maintain a Stalinesque state of fear? ------------------------------ From: "toledo44" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 18:28:57 -0700 polasus@my-deja.com wrote: > The answer to that is no. I've seen Ratdog on several occasions in > several venues and have never failed to have an enjoyable time and a > worthwhile musical experience. > > It is a different experience from seeing the Grateful Dead or the Dead > or PLQ in its various incarnations, but that is the idea, isn't it? > > I for one love the idea that Bob and the boys are out there keeping the > flame burning and I would be bummed if I couldn't see someone > performing Jerry's songs live now that he isn't here to do it himself. > The evil that Jerry did with the Persian lives long after him on this > board, why should the good be interred with his bones, or dumped in the > Ganges with his ashes or whatever. > > A day is coming where you won't be able to drive 9 hours or 90 hours > and still see Dead tunes perfomed by original band members. Then you'll > wish you hadn't ragged on Bob so much, or given Phil shit for spending > time with his family -- although I'm happy he's back on the road as > well. ------------------------------ From: "toledo44" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 18:29:55 -0700 polasus@my-deja.com wrote: > The answer to that is no. I've seen Ratdog on several occasions in > several venues and have never failed to have an enjoyable time and a > worthwhile musical experience. > > It is a different experience from seeing the Grateful Dead or the Dead > or PLQ in its various incarnations, but that is the idea, isn't it? > > I for one love the idea that Bob and the boys are out there keeping the > flame burning and I would be bummed if I couldn't see someone > performing Jerry's songs live now that he isn't here to do it himself. > The evil that Jerry did with the Persian lives long after him on this > board, why should the good be interred with his bones, or dumped in the > Ganges with his ashes or whatever. > > A day is coming where you won't be able to drive 9 hours or 90 hours > and still see Dead tunes perfomed by original band members. Then you'll > wish you hadn't ragged on Bob so much, or given Phil shit for spending > time with his family -- although I'm happy he's back on the road as > well. ------------------------------ From: "toledo44" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 18:30:00 -0700 polasus@my-deja.com wrote: > The answer to that is no. I've seen Ratdog on several occasions in > several venues and have never failed to have an enjoyable time and a > worthwhile musical experience. > > It is a different experience from seeing the Grateful Dead or the Dead > or PLQ in its various incarnations, but that is the idea, isn't it? > > I for one love the idea that Bob and the boys are out there keeping the > flame burning and I would be bummed if I couldn't see someone > performing Jerry's songs live now that he isn't here to do it himself. > The evil that Jerry did with the Persian lives long after him on this > board, why should the good be interred with his bones, or dumped in the > Ganges with his ashes or whatever. > > A day is coming where you won't be able to drive 9 hours or 90 hours > and still see Dead tunes perfomed by original band members. Then you'll > wish you hadn't ragged on Bob so much, or given Phil shit for spending > time with his family -- although I'm happy he's back on the road as > well. ------------------------------ From: "toledo44" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 18:31:30 -0700 RIGHT ON ------------------------------ From: "toledo44" Subject: Re: anyone else find ratdog painful to see in concert? Date: 29 Sep 2005 18:31:37 -0700 RIGHT ON ------------------------------ ** FOR YOUR REFERENCE ** The service addresses, to which questions about the list itself and requests to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, are as follows: Internet: dead-flames-request@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames-request%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames-request You can send mail to the entire list (and rec.music.gdead) via one of these addresses: Internet: dead-flames@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames End of Dead-Flames Digest ****************************** .