Blue Train

Don Was is involved with Blue Note? That explains the next to nothing I have bought in years. I just thought it was the whole EMiI thing. I lost track. Does EMI still own Blue Note? Has EMI dropped that deep off the deep end that Don Was was put in charge of anything?

Are we talking about Gregory Porter, or Tom Jones?

It's not the accent that is the issue. Lived in so many places in mutliple continents (some of which they didn't even speak English) you couldn't even place my accent. Anyway, it's having to remember when they use different words that mean the same thing in different areas/countries/whatnot. It's espacially maddening when I go back and forth. Take example going from the UK to the States. You're used to thinking in one way....and next thing you know....Jetlag is much easier to deal with. Not even going near the whole remebering customs.

Found a new online store which was posted on a Peter Brotzmann FB. They seem to have out of print stuff. Some stuff on vinyl that I didn't even know were reissued. Take for example Brotzmann's The Nearer the Bone, The Sweeter the Meat. I thought it was out of print, but they have a vinyl copy of it A never before released Globe Unity disc. http://catalyticsound.com/ 5 pages of vinyl. Many of which I didn't even know were released on vinyl. http://catalyticsound.com/product-category/vinyl/ Even a list of tour dates. http://catalyticsound.com/tour-dates/

Hoax, or pre-reality? I think it's the first time someone died soon after a hoax was started about them. At least I can't remember another instance.

Just a few days ago there was one of those hoax internet things about him being dead. So, a lot of people still think it's a hoax, but it's unfortunately real this time. https://thedoors.com/news http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rkd4a7 Be well,

His grandfather would have been 88 today. His grandmother 79 on the 28th. The fire that would result in his grandmother's death was started 4 days after her 63rd birrthday.

Oops, you posted this while I was typing. But yes, I agree 100%. What bugs me is that many older persons (I'm 66 by the way) don't - or don't want to - see the convenience of a more modern way of living than they were used to. Just an example - I live in an apartment building with quite a few people who are older than I am and they refuse to use a computer for even the simplest things, making life harder for themselves. Their excuse: I'm too old for that kind of thing; they don't even try... In the entire history of mankind....there are always people like that. Why at this point does it bother anyone?

At this point the only reason I have money on me is to pay at places that I know only accept money....or, to give it to someone I can see really needs it.

.

Since you don't do FB. There is at least http://epistrophyarts.tumblr.com/

haha

Same simple mindedned thinking. "Responsabile" drinkers and guns.

I don't know anything about the laws in MA, but in the places I've lived, if you refuse to take the BAC test, you lose your license period, so you've got a few too many ifs there. Ah. I see; you're new in this country. Never mind. Every state now has "implied consent" laws for anyone that gets a DL. You can legally refuse to be tested, but you're also going to get punished in one way or another for refusing. Have to laugh at the 2nd.

May 31st @ 8 pm Peter Brötzmann and Joe McPhee Waller Creek School Auditorium (719 E. 41st Austin, 78751)

I have seen him 8 times. As a result of the last three times I either saw, or bought tickets....I am not sure about seeing him with whomever at this point. Having said that. I really have never understood why he had a group of people that he seemed to play to down to at times. Like he didn't want to embarrass them. P.S. Sonnymmon for Two with Ornette Coleman. EN FUEGO! Not saying it was the best perofmance I have seen involving either of them....but come on. My age and Sonny Rollins and Ornette Coleman together. If they were just warming up....

FTW!

I honestly don't understand your response to what I posted. Under what circumstances will a "perfectly innocent person" be "rousted by the police"? The "ifs" I posited aren't a justification, but an argument against the likelihood that what you fear will happen. The issue is 0.05 equals drunk driving. I'm saying that is just not true. I seriously fail to see how one glass of wine or one beer equals a DUI. Just my thoughts. All but one. ONE person in the entire population of America...really? I honestly don't understand your response to what I posted. Under what circumstances will a "perfectly innocent person" be "rousted by the police"? The "ifs" I posited aren't a justification, but an argument against the likelihood that what you fear will happen. A person with alcohol on his breath. This 0.05 gives the police even more control over our lives and precludes any REAL reasoning relative to detaining a person for hours even if he is innocent.The "ifs" are predicated on the police deciding if the alcohol on your breath means they can detain you for hours while they figure it all out. The responsible drinker is now a criminal. The police gain WAY too much power over people who drive a car. TBH, I am not sure why that is a mystery. I call that tyranny. You guys call that controlling DUIs. A 0.05 is NOT a stone, sloppy drunk. What you guys are advocating for is a police state. I object. I rest my case.

Just my thoughts. All but one.

FTW!^IInfinity symbol

I don't take anyone into account who has a single beer in the 8th inning for multiple reasons. First off...at best they're looking at 20 minutes before the game is over. Then, if they're lucky....another 30-45 minutes to get to their car and get out of the parking lot. If they're somehow arrested...another 2-5 hours before their urine/blood is tested. It's not the breathalyzer that matters but their urine/blood that results in it going further. This also forgets the fact of the all that goes into a field sobriety test before they even get to the point of using a breathalyzer.

You went from the whole numbers thing and .08 wasn't drunk to .05 is a "responsbile drinker? A single drink less makes somone a "responsible drinker",,,,and that's if they could do a urine/blood test right there and then when initally arrested. You keep forgetting the part about how many hours after the fact they're actually tested to confirm they're considered legally drunk.

Drunk drivers...by the time they're tested and still are considred legally drunk.....they really shouldn't be driving from the start. That's keeping in mind we're talking about a single drink between .08 and .05 no matter how obese anyone happens to be and they're not binge drinking.

As in, "Blue Collar" (and I really hate how you keep generalizing this to defend what you like.) ...had/have lower standards? You like Steve Miller. Others don't. À chacun son goût. This isn't a poor/rich conversation.