Jazzmoose

Beats me. What's the use of living... Sorry; too much Fawlty Towers!

Wow! That's a hella cool idea, Ed!

Okay, I picked Tyner, but only because my jazz interest blossomed through listening to Coltrane's quartet. He must have something going for him to hook me so thoroughly. On the other hand, I don't have any discs issued with him as the leader...

Paul, I guess it's the history student in me, but I'm stunned at the idea that things that were occuring less than a hundred years ago possibly not having any effect on today. I think this is one of the main problems we have in dealing with race in this country: we (whites) think "slavery happened so long ago; what could it possibly have to do with today?" However, the effects are very much with us today. Moving on for a bit, here's one thing that amazes me, and tells me that the problems we experience are more than just "racism". I can't speak for anyone else, but I know that if I'm talking to several African-Americans, the vibe and my feelings are very, very different than when talking to several Africans. It's a totally different situation. Suddenly, when I hear an African accent, the baggage just isn't there anymore. Maybe it's just me, maybe it isn't. Has anyone else out there gone through this?

That's one damned weird place...

A Period of Transition.

The calender doesn't say April 1st...at the risk of being stuffed and mounted as the catch of the day, I'll say COOL!!!!

I thought it was licorice, but slsmcgrew may be on to something...

Sly and the Family Stone: Greatest Hits Seventies Soul Classics, vol. 2 The Big Three (Hawkins, Young & Webster) Funked Up: The Very Best of Parliament Average White Band: The Essentials ...Thank god P. Funk isn't here; I almost felt him staring into my back at the store yesterday when I agreed with my wife to put "Maggot Brain" back on the shelf. Maybe if I sneak back today...

THANK YOU!!! I always want to address you as Paul (mainly because of my fear of reversing the o and the i in your handle!), but didn't want to presume anything...

Shoot. All this time I thought it meant "possum" in some obscure language...

Like Chaney, I'm borrowing an animals name. For me, my cat Moose: My handle is a variation on Moose pretty much everywhere I go on the net. Here, I added "Jazz" to it. On ebay, it's Mr._Mooster. But all Moose.

I must admit, this shocks me. I really don't think you understand what it means to be black in America. (Yeah, right; like I do! ) I don't think too many whites would be able to function in the long run if they suddenly "became black" overnight. Without the family training and life experiences that African-Americans have with dealing with the daily racism, I think it would most likely overwhelm us. I know that, with my personality, if I had to deal with the crap I've seen African-American friends go through, I couldn't take it.

You people are scaring me....

Sorry about the "italics" gone mad in the above post; I just don't have time to fix them right now...

[Connoiseur, I see nothing in your argument that convinces me. At the risk of reminding everyone of Greg (the horror!) let me go through this point by point... 1) Affirmative Action is nothing but reverse racism: Null point. The term "reverse racism" is simply a buzz word, an "advertising jingle" for the right as it were. The reverse of racism is no racism. If you think it's a racist law, please say so. 2) It is a racist law that promotes inequality: Wrong. What we have NOW is inequality. Affirmative Action seeks to correct this inequality. Whether it is successful or fails, we can debate, but saying that a law correcting inequality promotes inequality is ludicrous. As far as it's being a racist law, I can see the argument to a degree: it is a law that deals with race, and therefore could be construed as racist, but certainly no more than the constitutional ammendment ending slavery. 3) It is exclusionary: Wrong. It is most definitely NOT exclusionary. It is designed to include those who in the past HAVE been excluded. Again, the success or failure of Affirmative Action in meeting these goals can be debated, but calling it exclusionary simply makes no sense. 4) It is "not what America is all about": I agree with this to a degree, it is not what America is all about in the practical sense. However, it is very much what America is all about in the theoretical sense of everyone having an equal shot at the American Dream, and everyone being treated equally. 5)You claim that blacks are excluded from the American dream based on their race. I respond that they are not: Okay, heres the core of our difference. If you could convince me of this one, the rest of your argument would be a given. If I could convince you of the opposite, perhaps you could see my point. Unfortunately, that's probably not going to happen. I guarantee you won't convince me of your side, because I've studied American history in general and African-American history in particular too much to not realize that the culture of the United States has been designed from day one to insure that African-Americans as a group will fail to reach equality with whites. Frankly, it sounds as if you are arguing that racism does not exist, or at least is not effective. It's one of those arguments that just causes me to stare wide-eyed in disbelief. 6)And they definitely have the legal protections: Perhaps, but these legal protections are always weak, and they can always be worked around. The real solution to racism will never be a legal one, society itself must change. 7)That last thing I want to see is some kind of legal backing for an unequal and racist policy such as Affirmative Action. Now that's scary, and sends the wrong message. To me it as scary as the legal sanctioning of murder, which is what the death penalty is about. To me, the laws must defend equal opportunity and equal rights. That such things don't exist on a social basis, well, there's some work to do there; but don't seek legal sanction for privileged status for any race or sex: Whoa. This is the same old racist right wing argument I've been hearing for years. The bottom line is that American laws, and the society that created them, are already racist! What scares me is your inability to see this. Yes, the laws must defend equal opportunity and equal rights. That's what Affirmative Action does! The playing field was not level before Affirmative Action. You speak as though Affirmative Action granted a privileged status for African-Americans. This is so incredibly naive I can't believe anyone would seriously write it. Do you really think trading places with African-Americans would benefit whites in any way, economically or otherwise? The basic problem I have with your arguments, and I've certainly heard them all before, is that they make a obviously faulty assumption that equality in America exists. Therefore, there is no need for these programs, and using them would be racist. The thing I find offensive about these arguments is that they are used quite often by racists who were perfectly happy with quotas, exclusionary laws and guidelines, etc., as long as the system was set up to benefit only whites. There's one more bit of faulty logic that seems to be accepted as gospel truth by the right: Affirmative Action gives benefits to those who don't deserve them. Wrong. What Affirmative Action does is guarantee that people who are excluded from the benefits of society purely on the basis of their skin color are included. This "promotion of underachievers" argument is effective only because it is simplistic, NOT because it is accurate. As for your examples of music, there's really nothing I can respond with. Whether you realize it or not, the white majority in this country has never appreciated the contributions of African-American artists at the time those contributions are made. In addition, the artists remembered as great decades later when the majority does accept the work are not always the artists popular at the time the music was made (of course, this goes for all popular music, not just that from African-Americans.). This argument of yours is a great argument about the inherent racism in our society, but not much else. Unfortunately, as I said earlier, we are never going to agree on this one.

As long as she finishes ahead of Vijay, I'll be happy.

Hard to believe Brooks is winning this even with his votes split over three discs...

Forgive it? I'd rather hear more!

I'm curious as to what this means. I personally support affirmative action and feel that it was a good thing. I also think giving the disadvantaged a helping hand is a good thing; why would it not be? As for fostering a culture of underacheivement, that just seems absurd to me. I think the basic difference you and I have on this issue is that you see the individual as responsible for everything. Sort of a social Darwinism as it were. I feel otherwise. When I see a culture that penalizes African-Americans in so many ways, I find it hard to understand why the one corrective action that we've tried to come up with is attacked so vehemently. I find it odd (and this is NOT directed at you personally!) that so many who are against Affirmative Action talk about the evil of basing decisions on race when they were just fine with basing decisions on race when the decision was to exclude African-Americans from the American dream...

Sorry; no discipline whatsoever...

Man, that was a nasty crack...

Jeez, I wish I hadn't looked now...

I really haven't bought much Blue Note stuff since the board closed, and nothing from Mosaic, but that's just the way it's worked out. Assuming that Mosaic has their usual summer sale with True Blue again, that will change. The plastic is fresh and ready for sacrifice.

Speaking as an ex-sailor who doesn't even have a tattoo, I'm simply in shock...