Jazzmoose

$4.23 this morning on the way to work. $4.29 on the way home...

No, I don't think you are. Then again, some have always had a fondness for lynch mobs...

A couple of comments after reading this thread... I'm firmly in the camp of "what's wrong with rock is you grew up". While I admittedly like stuff from the sixties and seventies, I found rock I liked through the grunge period, and even afterward (primarily Garbage and Bjork, but I'll admit that what's left of my sex drive may have influenced me with both). I've found stuff I like that's even more recent, but I think the fracturing of the audience has a lot to do with the problem of the music. In the sixties it was a lot easier to get exposure to the whole of the form, whereas now it isn't. I have to admit I'm puzzled by those who hold up Led Zeppelin as an example of great song writing. I'll admit that their novel approach to the blues was intriguing (anyone who was around can surely remember that "WTF are they trying to do???" feeling when their first LP came out), but reworking Willie Dixon, et al. is hardly great writing, is it?

I've never been accused of that before...

Welcome to the board. However, the reason we're "missing the point" is that we try to keep the political discussions to the politics and religion forum rather than letting it drift all over the board. Admittedly, we're not always successful...

Christiaan Barnard Gary Hart Ann and Nancy Wilson

Alexis Corner Charlie Watts Cyril Davies

Eddie Cochran Eddie Munster Meatloaf

Not to support one side or the other, but that article seemed to be fairly interesting until I saw at the bottom that it was from Investors Business Daily, a newspaper that makes the WSJ editorial page look like it's run by radicals from the leftwing fringe...

Milton Bradley Parker Brothers John von Neumann

Ford Prefect Arthur Dent Zaphod Beeblebrox

Hey, maybe she stood in a chair...

So, Goodspeak (when you get back), if I tell you that the third child back in the second row of your first class is being molested by their uncle, you would immediately report it? I mean, wouldn't you feel kind of foolish? But then you'd be covering your ass, and wouldn't have to do any thinking on your own, so I guess you would...

Calm down, Noj; these are antlers, not horns...

Sorry, but "covering your ass" is not the same thing as "acting in the child's best interests". Once again, would you be willing to take the chance that the child was not being abused? When the consequences, both to the child and to you, are so great? Yes, they were "covering their asses" but they were ALSO "acting in the child's best interests." Based on a vague utterance of a psychic who had never had any contact with the child? Yes, I would be willing to take that chance. Give me a break. That's no chance at all.

Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin Harold P. Brown Napoleon

That's because no one who watches Jerry Springer can write.

Well, that's really not a fair comparison. Emus have better material.

Please. The issue is reporting or not reporting child abuse irrespective of who has an opinion about the source the TA consulted. Apples and oranges, VB. Bull. Shit. The issue is reporting or not reporting allegations of child abuse based on the ramblings of a psychic and the first letter of a possible child's name.

This is one of those pot/kettle jokes, right?

Sorry, but "covering your ass" is not the same thing as "acting in the child's best interests".

Well, other than contradicting your claim of the teacher and administrators not knowing this was based on a psychic's word, yes...

It's bound to make you bitter when you realize that it's not doing any good...

Wow.

Um...where are you getting this? I've reread the article several times, and I can't see where you're getting this theory that the teacher didn't know about the psychic.