sonnymax

... Admittedly, I was wrong about Paterno's involvement during the 2001 incident and subsequent cover-up as was proved in the Freeh Inquiry. But, as you clearly pointed out, once the legal authorities in the 1998 case "cleared" Sandusky, there was no reason to believe, prevent or do anything else... While it's true that the authorities did not have enough information at the time to prosecute Sandusky in 1998, he was definitely not "cleared" of all wrongdoing. Sandusky himself admitted he was wrong to shower with and hug a child while they were both naked, and he promised the investigating detective he would not do it again. Of course, he lied, and he went on to molest and rape children for many years to come. The vast majority of child abuse cases do not result in criminal prosecution, but families and organizations nevertheless take action to protect the safety of the children. Much like the Catholic Church, Paterno and Penn State protected themselves, not the children. They deserve everything they get, imo.

Might I suggest you use a cone next time?

So, are you going to give Simon your copy?

I like the idea, but $17.98 for a 96kHz/24bit album, and a whopping $24.98 for 192kHz/24bit?!? These aren't CDs, they're digital files.

Got this one? Rockwell's one of my favorite tenor players.

From CNET: Dizzy's Club Coca-Cola has a spectacular sound system, the Audiophiliac drops by to listen.

Here's some of my favorites:

This topic was discussed several weeks ago, right in your favorite forum.

Well, we can disagree about how much/in what ways/how often, etc., but not any? It's almost as though you've proved my implicit point, that we human beings have an understandably powerful need not to see what is/has been/can be there. I'm trying not to overreact to Larry's seeming comparison of homosexuality and pedophilia. I hope I'm wrong in my interpretation of his post, because this position is an erroneous and harmful misconception that continues to be espoused by many people within certain religious and political communities. If we follow this illogic, then what is sexual assault by an adult male on a female child, heterosexuality? Sandusky is a sexual predator, a serial rapist, and quite possibly a sociopath as well. The fact that his victims were male (at least the ones we know of so far) does not make him a homosexual. Even hinting at such a connection is dangerous, as it promotes ignorance, intolerance, and often violence.

Another thumbs up for Warfield's work with Stafford. Saw them at the Vanguard last month and they were great, due in no small part to the contributions of pianist/arranger Bruce Barth.

Although I've always admired Beck more than any other rock guitarist (except maybe Hendrix), I agree that his SNL performance with Jagger was rather ho-hum. Silly to dismiss all of his post-sixties work, however, as there are moments of brilliance on most of his albums. For my money, the best thing he's done in the past decade or so is this cover of the Impressions classic (and that goes double for Rod):

Harris Eisenstadt - Canada Day Octet 4.95 at amazon

Thanks GA!

As a child, I was a big fan of the Andy Griffith Show, although Floyd the barber still gives me the creeps. I was just about to update my desktop background (below), but I'll keep it a while longer in his memory.

And he makes a damn good zombie too!

Hey there. I have a $50 Mosaic gift card that I received as a present, and I would like to exchange it for an Amazon gift card of equal value. Thanks for looking.

Allen, I was reacting to an OP that I felt was pointless and frankly, mean-spirited in its criticism of a performer that none of us here know. In hindsight, I can see how my suspicions about possible underlying reasons for your dismissal of this woman might have been hurtful to you. I'm sorry, and I apologize for that. And for spelling your name wrong.

You are as clueless about me and my therapeutic approaches as you are about the issues we've been discussing so far on this thread. Read (slowly) my last post and understand that I'm in the cognitive-behavioral/rational-reality therapy/solution-focused camp for a majority of my clinical cases. Citing John Rosemond, that bible-thumping political conservative who argues against research into childhood disorders, stating that good, old-fashioned parental discipline is all you need to cure whatever problem junior's got. As you said, that tells me exactly where you're coming from.

Me, defensive? Actually, blaming is a defensive behavior. Calling someone out on their defensive behavior, as I've done here, is something different. I don't blame anyone. It's nonproductive, encourages defensiveness, and makes it more difficult for individuals with influence to assume responsibility. Reading isn't the same thing as learning, obviously. I would have expected someone with all those years of "medical practice" to communicate in a more thoughtful and responsible manner. Labeling, overgeneralizing, and blaming hardly seem "professional". For what it's worth, I'll stack my 20+ years as a clinical psychologist, working with teenagers, parents, families, schools, courts, etc., against your professional experience, any day. That doesn't mean my ideas and opinions are necessarily better, correct, or definitive. But my views do have the benefit of education, training, and most importantly - actual clinical experience. I don't believe "bad parenting" is about leniency or permissiveness anymore than "good parenting" is about being strict. From my observations and working with parents and their kids, effective parenting has a lot to do with being clear, consistent, rational, and fair in teaching children about life and their place in it (including rights and responsibilities). Of course, it means saying "no" whenever it's appropriate, but it's much more than that. Even a young child can say "no", just ask any parent of a 2-year-old. I believe it's how you deal with situations after saying "no" (or "yes" for that matter) that is likely to have a more lasting influence on a child, or a person of any age for that matter. Horrible incidents like the one described in the OP naturally elicit strong emotional reactions and a tendency to label and blame individuals so we can assign guilt and lessen our personal discomfort. However, the seriousness of situations like this call for openness, understanding, and thoughtful, effective responses that help resolve the problems that contribute to such tragedies. These are my thoughts, anyway.

Sheer, utter nonsense. You blame one group (psychologists), then another (parents), and then another (children with self-esteem). It's obvious you have little understanding about the different factors that influence individual and group behavior. Please stop blaming and labeling and instead read, learn, and broaden your understanding.

The spokesperson for compassionate conservatism. If that's a humble opinion, I'd hate to see one he's proud of.

Perhaps your "review" would have been more appropriate if posted in the Live Shows forum. As it stands, you appear to be condemning an ensemble of talented artists based on a single performance, rather than sampling other live appearances as well as some of their recorded output. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I feel your conclusions are too sweeping given your limited experience with the Cookers.

This news is extremely difficult for me to hear. I've been listening to Eric Jackson for over 20 years, and Steve is a friend. I cannot see how I can continue to support WGBH financially in light of these changes.

ALERT!!! If you forgot to use your credit by the original expiration date of June 15, the offer has been extended to 11:59 p.m. PST on June 23.

I caught Walrath's first set and liked it very much. I also enjoyed the Jack Wilkins-Jimmy Bruno duo that performed earlier that night. If you plan to continue posting about your latest listening experience, perhaps this thread could be moved to the jazz podcast forum.