JSngry

...this is pretty damn...interesting. And THIS shit is just nuts!

Gotta be Delk Scram or Maverick Lasker. Both are great names though I think you'll have to agree, they pale in comparison with the infamous Rusty Kuntz: KOONTZ!!! :g There was a guy who didn't make it past the first round named Jhonaldo Pozo. I wonder if his walkup music is (or will be) "Manteca"...how cool would that be? From a holistic standpoint, you gotta like Callix Crabbe, who plays second for the fortuitously (for Mr. Crabbe) named New Hampshire Fisher Cats. Crabs, fish, makes me hungry for some gumbo... Hell, I got a pretty good AA team literally 20 minutes from my house. I really should go watch some minor league baseball as well as making the treks out to Arlington.

And was there ever a Cosmopolitan 301, etc?

See, this is why it's ok to own a gun.

MONIKER MADNESS Who Has The Best Name In Minor League Baseball http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/fans/moniker_madness/y2011/moniker_madness.jsp

Look, your mama told you...ah, never mind.

I did watch baseball a lot in the early 80s, most of it on WTBS, and I do remember Ernie Jonson. Fondly too. Sorry to hear of his passing.

Even more disturbing (or disconcertingly "comforting") is the possibility that the real answer is "because it can be done". Really, is their anything that one human being can do to another human being that hasn't been done in some form or fashion for as long as anybody knows about? I've got to think that it's because we as a species realized that truth (and a truth I think it is) pretty early on that we began to form general concepts of "right" and "wrong". But just because we form them doesn't guarantee universal compliance. Obviously.

I got his from Wikipedia: W/o reading the man's actual writings, I would take this to mean that A) "facts" are one thing, "truth" something else altogether; and B) at some point, what we learn ends up being more than want we already know can handle. I'd certainly agree with both. But even if the whole "brain thing" is just another first step on the way to another obsolescence, I do think it moves us ahead nevertheless. But amybe not. Time will ultimately tell. But not off-topic at all, I'd say. This thread is probably more about our reactions to the alleged offense than anything else, and a big part of these reactions almost have to bounce off the "how can anybody do such a thing?" impulse, which is a more than fair question with no, at this point, equally fair answers. So, yeah, quite relevant, I'd think.

You don't believe in science? I mean, the more we learn about behavior, the more it seems to come down to electric impulses and different chemicals. The question we'll never have an answer to, I think, is they "why" of why it's designed to work like this in the first place. That, for me, is where philosophy/religion/whatever come into play. But as far as the "how" of it all, I think we can get there, or at least a lot closer than we do by just vilifying behaviors and then stopping there. That feels good, it sizzles, but...I think we can and should do better than just sizzle.

In the end, I really do think it all comes down to brain chemistry. Certainly environment and genetics feed into that, but ultimately, probably all human (and most monster) behavior is a question of brain chemistry. Just a hunch. Which does not absolve us of individual responsibility, no way. If you don't "get the message" that sexually terrorizing children is a violation of every construct of a civilized society, hey, your bad. No excuses. But as to where the impulses come from, and why they might be difficult-to-impossible to contain without some outside assistance, I think you gotta be looking at brain chemistry. Just thinking, though, if "they" really are monsters and not humans, why don't we just castrate them, lobotomize them, and then put them to work pulling plows in China as payment on our debt? Win-win!

I'd like to think that they're monstrous human beings. It's not like being a human being and being really dangerous and fucked up aren't mutually exclusive qualities. OTOH, if we could round up all the monsters in the world (except the cute ones like Cookie Monster) and execute them at one place and at one time, that would pretty much fix everything, wouldn't it...

I might get this...don't own any of it on vinyl or CD, always depended on radio and/or borrowed LPs/discs when I wanted to get a taste, so...maybe. Much to study and admire in terms of production and presentation, maybe not so much in terms of "art", but...such is life. I like the idea of buying it once and being done with it.

Got that same email, and am wondering what does that mean?

Doesn't appear to have the proper stereo balance though...

Hambone Trombone Shorty Long Tall Dexter

Maude Frickert Maynard Ferguson Ma Ferguson

Mousey Alexander Mose Allison Moises Alou

Lee Morgan Morgan Fairchild The Ugly Stepsisters

Lion Tamer Kramer Gamer

Oldest trick in the book - piss on somebody's shoes and then get them to pay you to shine 'em up.

I just like his vibe. He exudes a certain mischievous fuquitousness that I find sorely lacking in nearly all contemporary "jazz". The man can play, but so can many people. But not everybody who can play is gonna give you this - and make it work:

Yeah, with the CD issues, it's easy/better to see it that way. But with the LPs, which is how I came to this music and the only way I knew it for quite a while, they kind of do divide up...New York Is Now is mostly the "split tempos" album, and Love Call is mostly the "swinging" album. Not unlike how they did the Miles concert with My Funny Valentine being the "ballads" album & Four And More being the "burn" album. Two things about the New York Is Now CD, though - the original LP package is gorgeous, the photography & graphics are just wonderful. There's an amazing "blurry", glowing color photo of Ornette sitting/studying inside Rudy's brick walls, and the back cover photo almost looks like a watercolor, even though it's a photo. The CD just gives the cover shot, and that's waaaaayyy too bad. Also, what the CD does to "We Now Interrupt For A Commercial" is just wrong. First of all, it leads off side two, so you got that impact/"purpose" thing going on. Second, the elimination of the interruptional spoken bits blatantly violates the whole premise/purpose of the piece. It was Ornette's idea, so WTF w/removing it,, eh? Finally, the 2nd tune on that LP side is "Round Trip", so you go immediately from this quasi-chaotic surrealism into this straight-up R&B thing, and the impact is seriously cool. You get none of this on the CD, although you do get a more "objective" presentation of the session itself, which is not w/o a merit of its own. But...