Dan Gould

Speaking of spoof phishing emails, I got one from "Paypal" in which the URL of the "sign-in" page was at a URL paypal-2.com. Anyone who falls for that deserves what they get.

Well, I heard her cover of "Pink Cadillac" before I heard Springsteen's original version.

she's got a frightfully high opinion of herself "I've done a lot of great work in the jazz genre" but this line really cracked me up: I seriously doubt that in today's market it took any arm twisting to get Verve to do this album. In fact its more likely that they came to her with the idea, and she just doesn't want to say that publicly.

Almost as bad as Celine Dion - You Shook Me All Night Long And I just had to go and click on that link. When will I ever learn?

How can someone who get's hold of the Ebay login data access the Paypal login data or use the Paypal account? Aren't these seperate? They're nominally separate but if someone uses the same password for paypal as ebay, and a person has already hacked the ebay account, there's nothing stopping them from accessing the paypal account. Everyone knows they're supposed to have different passwords and change them regularly, but I doubt that too many people follow that advice. Most have a handful of passwords they use, and if one doesn't work they try the other til they get in.

What Hans said!!! I hope you don't have a paypal account associated with the ebay account.

thanks Steve. I wonder if the sessions survived at all. I would think that when Grant became a "name" again, that would have been the perfect opportunity for Vee Jay - or Collectables, who owns the American rights to reissues, to put the disc out. Then again, they put out five discs of Vee Jay blues recordings but never bothered to include the Baby Face Willette singles, so maybe they just don't know what they have.

Is this aimed at me or the people bitching that I was the one to start this thread? It's aimed at your behavior of late. I was looking for a photo along the lines of "it's my ball and I'm going home" but struck out. So, I'm the target of an utterly ridiculous attack claiming that people don't wish to post on a thread I start, but I'm the one who's being a baby. Sounds reasonable to me.

Is this aimed at me or the people bitching that I was the one to start this thread?

Over ath the Blindman's Blues board, I just noticed this statement: Anyone here heard this rumor before? Any hope that its true? I could see a special Mosaic Single for this: Grant's unreleased session plus the 45 Baby Face Willette cut.

Go here. Thank you.

did you check to make sure he actually paid the cover charge?

Very astute observation. Then start another f-ing one and I'll delete this. Otherwise, piss off. Wouldn't have expected such harsh words from a class act like yourself, Dan. I learned long ago about getting into pissing contests with skunks. It's best to just walk away. Sayonara, Danny boy. that mean you'll stay away from all baseball threads I start? Good deal, because I'm going to be on top of all of them, and keeping your Yankee loving ass away will be a nice little side benefit.

Is Dee Dee's show broadcast on the web? Anyone? Bueller?

Be thankful it was Kedis and not the idiot bassist who performs nude.

Very astute observation. Then start another f-ing one and I'll delete this. Otherwise, piss off.

Thanks! Is there any reason we can't have a thread called Baseball (Non-Dan, Non-Yankee/Red Sox melodrama)? I don't think that's a cantankerous suggestion at all. Cool it And I'm to be banned from this thread? No, not a cantakerous suggestion at all. No one has ever been stopped from posting non-Yankee-Red Sox comments in any baseball thread.

I already explained that - it was a list of faults that one can find with past champions. It was for illustrative purposes, not necessarily that I believe all of those were cases of poor champs. Then you should have made it clear in your initial post that you don't believe these championships are all tainted. Your wording was hardly clear in this regard.

I was pissed at my team's three and out "defense" of its title but I'm pretty certain that I gave credit where it was due (even if I clung to the "cursed for eternity" last line of defense a bit too long ). The simple fact is that if the Cards had won five more games in the regular season, the worst I would have said was that they were fortunate to be in a crap division. But c'mon, injuries are no excuse, even as I curse what befell the Red Sox in August. They fall under 'shit happens' and as Massarotti said, the long season is designed to weed out the mediocre and the brittle. I fully understand the idea that less worthy teams can win in an expanded playoff system. The motivating force behind the Red Sox philosophy is that sometimes it takes luck and good fortune to win those last 11 games, so the idea is just to get to the playoffs and believe that eventually, you'll win one, and I think they have it exactly right.

And they ultimately lost. That's what I find annoying about this result - a team only slightly less pathetic than those Mets - one more win - is now World Champions. Its a new low, and it obliterates the previous low, which was 88 (or was it 87?) wins by Minnesota. You ought to hope that we get an even worse team to win a championship - it will lessen the stank on this "champion". I love how you start out this way: Yet after I point out only a couple of those cases and having no such "taint" you come back with Pick a story and stick to it.

By any measure, this is the ultimate tainted championship and so many of your examples do not even qualify as "tainted": The presence of the Padres nullifies what the White Sox achieved? The Astros were a legitimate contender. If the Padres had made the Series and then spit the bit, yeah, OK. But their presence? Tell me, if the Tigers had beaten the Mets, would you be talking about a "tainted championship" because the pathetic Cards were in the playoffs? Pot, meet kettle. The Red Sox won 98 games in 2004 and were obviously of championship calibre. They kicked the crap out of their WS opponent and any team that comes back from 0-3 against the Yankees isn't any sort of "taint". How does a 116 win team losing the LCS qualify as a "taint"? No one said that blow-out records give you a bye to the World Series. There are more in your list, but this is boring me, so let's hear from Jayson Stark: BTW, that Pirates stat more than makes up for the so-called "bs" of the Royals comparison.

Sonny Clark, Mopin' and Lopin'

"Reach Out" and particularly "Going Out of My Head" were misfires, imo, but I've always enjoyed the rest of the album. So while I don't dismiss it completely as some do, at the same time, its probably the closest I know to "non-essential" Hank. And Hank is very essential to me!

In my book the season ended the week before, when as I recall the Sox lost five straight games to two last place teams. Well that certainly was a taste of what was to come. Two in a row to Tampa (which I witnessed; thankfully I couldn't stick around for the bullpen arson of the second game) and then swept by KC. But that was actually 8 days before the Massacre. In between we got healthy against the hapless O's (three game sweep) and lost two of three to Detroit. Then we stepped out of an airplane sans parachute.

Here's a command for you....f*** you and your wife....poor sport! Enjoy the long winter! m~ Well that's certainly consistent with you "not caring about my opinion" and not being upset by my blathering. Here's a thought for your long winter: Enjoy it, because no one is concerned about "breaking up the Cards". It will take another 102 World Series for a piece of shit team like that to win again.