JohnO

"The Top 10 posters contributed over 35% of the TOTAL posts..." And I'm guessing that two of them probably contributed 90% of those!

Mike - Is it true that the main reason you liked the movie was because the old man with the huge glasses looks like Harry Caray, albeit a sober version?

"Very few of us even know who the Venture are/were, John." Ted - Sad but true....although I do remember various posters here debating the merits of the band when they were announced as finalists for the R&R Hall of Fame a couple of years ago. (And if we had more Japanese members, they'd certainly know who The Ventures are! What's left of the band still tours over there to this day.)

Muzza in his hippie outfit! (check out his new avatar)

"Leon Hess?" Better him than Leon Spinks!!!

...Lew Bundles in a grass skirt!

Bob Bogle, one of the original Ventures (played lead on their original 1960 version of "Walk Don't Run", later switched to bass, flip-flopping with then-bassist Nokie Edwards, who took over on lead) passed away of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma this past Sunday in Vancouver, WA., age 75. He played with the band from their inception in '58 to 2004, and at least lived long enough to see them inducted into the R&R Hall of Fame, although he was unable to attend the induction ceremony. RIP...........

Pat - Have a great one tomorrow!

Ira - My friend Kim & I came back from NYC on Saturday, stopping in Philly early that evening to hit Geno's for a cheesesteak......last Wednesday, on the way to NY, we sidetracked there to sample Pat's King of Steaks cuisine. Overall, I prefer Pat's - slightly bigger sandwiches, much greasier, and a more varied menu. Kim greatly prefers Geno's. Both are God compared to what we have here in DC..........

Interestingly enough, Mr. Borack/Popdude left 7 of these 15 off his Top 200 list, preferring other albums by (1)Cheap Trick (agree with JB), (2)The dBs (agree with Magnet), (3)Plimsouls (agree with JB), (4)Posies (ditto - and I just saw "Frosting..." performed live last Friday- I still like "Dear 23" better), (5)Raspberries (agree with John on "Starting Over"), (6)Shoes (agree with JB again), and (7)Velvet Crush (ditto). John also named the Big Star release which combined both "#1 Record" and "Radio City", versus just their debut album. Of course, John only allowed one LP per artist.

Honestly.....Mr. Hess above is correct, IMO...a killing is a killing, REGARDLESS of what kind of bizarre spin the damn media puts on it! Their chief goal is selling papers, on-line hits, etc., and putting forth their own political agenda, and NOT simply dispensing info and news. Can't really understand why so many people get so bent out of shape over this.....It's a fact of life, fair or not. My friend and I arrived in NYC around 3 PM last Wednesday, 6/10, the day of the Holocaust Museum shooting, having heard nothing about it. The only way we could really figure out what had happened on televison was by going to a local NYC news station. CNN was too busy treating the event like it was a publicity stunt for Janet Langford Cohen's play about Emmitt Till and Anne Frank, which was supposed to be sneak-previewed at the Museum that evening........while Fox was devoting their coverage to the good Reverend Wright's latest quote about "Jews not letting Obama speak to him".....Sad.

Wendy - Hope you had a great one!!!!!!!

Very happy belated B-Day. Hope you had a great one last week!!!

Mitch - Hope you're having an excellent one today!!!!

Giro - Have a great one tomorrow!!!

Count me amongst those who would rather not admit that they've seen it!

Cheap Trick did this with their first 4 albums in '98 at 4 nights in Chicago at the Metro. The most extensive shows of this kind were those done by Sparks last May-June in London (Islington Academy)- 21 different albums in their entirety in chronological order in 21 nights, with greatest hits thrown in each night. The 21st show was the world premiere of their new album, "Exotic Creatures of the Deep".

From this morning's Washington Post - a somewhat more in-depth look at her judicial record, beyond the sound bites and the New Haven case.......(and I'm sure someone on this board will find other examples of cases beyond what's covered here, proving she's a radical/commie/racist....or will denounce Ruth Marcus as perhaps a worthless hack...) The 'Radical' Who Isn't By Ruth Marcus Wednesday, June 3, 2009 If Sonia Sotomayor is a radical activist eager to push the law leftward or to rule according to personal whims rather than constitutional commands, she's done an impressive job of hiding it all these years. The amazing thing about the case against Sotomayor is how thin it is. The now-famous 32 words about a wise Latina judge. Her vote -- part of a unanimous three-judge panel -- against white firefighters denied promotions. The YouTube comment about judges making policy. And not much else. This is a woman with more years on the bench than any Supreme Court nominee in the past 100 years. During that time, you'd think even the most middle-of-the-road judge would have provided some unintentional ammunition for critics -- maybe freeing an especially unsavory criminal on a supposed technicality. If Sotomayor is the judicial radical of conservative imaginings, certainly there ought to be something more in her paper trail. Except there isn't -- at least from what's known so far. An examination of Sotomayor's decisions shows a careful judge who tends to rule for the government over criminal defendants; who has been skeptical of most civil rights claims that have come before her; and who, to the extent that she has ruled on cases that touch on abortion, has come down against the abortion-rights side. She's not apt to be David Souter in reverse -- a Democratic pick who turns out to be a closet conservative. But there's no evidence that she will be outside the liberal mainstream on the current court. Take one of the few cases deployed against Sotomayor: her vote, again as part of a unanimous panel, that the Second Amendment does not extend to state and local weapons regulations. The court said it was bound by the Supreme Court's 1886 ruling that the Second Amendment is "a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the national government, and not upon that of the state." This is the kind of restraint conservatives claim to like, at least until the outcome doesn't suit them. Indeed, a panel of three Republican appointees on the federal appeals court in Chicago -- including conservative icons Frank Easterbrook and Richard Posner -- yesterday backed the Sotomayor approach. And for all the uproar over Sotomayor's ruling in the firefighters case, the larger record hardly supports Rush Limbaugh's depiction of Sotomayor as a "reverse racist." Tom Goldstein of ScotusBlog analyzed 96 other race-related cases on which Sotomayor ruled. He found that she rejected discrimination claims 78 times and ruled in favor of those claiming discrimination 10 times. (The eight others were disposed of differently.) Sotomayor dissented from her colleagues in just four race-related cases -- only once to back the party claiming discrimination. If Sotomayor is practicing identity politics, she's not doing it very well. In one case, Sotomayor rejected a claim by two African American airline passengers that they were bumped because of their race. She held that the lawsuit was preempted by an international air travel treaty, even though the pact provides no redress for discrimination claims. In another, Sotomayor dissented from a ruling that the New York Police Department could fire a white officer for mailing, anonymously and from his home, racist material to a charitable organization that had solicited him for contributions. Although the material was "patently offensive, hateful, and insulting," Sotomayor wrote, the court was wrong to "gloss over three decades of jurisprudence and the centrality of First Amendment freedoms in our lives because it is confronted with speech it does not like." She has ruled in favor of abortion protesters who claimed police used excessive force in removing them from outside a clinic. She refused to overturn the federal policy barring international family planning funds to organizations that perform or promote abortion. McClatchy Newspapers reviewed Sotomayor's 90 criminal law decisions since 2002 and found that she sided with the government in 65 cases and with prisoners or defendants 25 times. She dissented on a defendant's behalf just once. Sotomayor upheld a New York man's conviction for possessing child pornography; although the search warrant for his home failed to demonstrate probable cause, she allowed the seized evidence to be used because police officers were acting in good faith. Imagine if that one had gone the other way. Perhaps Sotomayor the radical has been biding her time, awaiting the day when the freedom of a Supreme Court seat would liberate her from precedent and moderation. Perhaps she'll stand on the court steps on the first Monday in October and sing "The Internationale." But the record suggests that the first outcome is just as unlikely as the second.

Personally, I can't see LeBron heading to NY unless Knicks management does something themselves over the next year about putting together a decent supporting cast for whatever big star they try to sign. The Cavs are very, very close to their goal now, and all it'll take next year is a break or two their way in how the post-season plays out. For example, had the Celtics beaten the Magic in their game 7 this go-round, I think the Cavs could have handled them. On the other hand, if winning all the marbles isn't what LeBron really wants (but I'm sure it is), and it's all about the dough, endorsements, non-stop publicity, etc., then certainly NYC would appeal to him.

If Tiller forced these women to undergo these procedures, then I'd say he got what he deserved. If not, then I guess women desiring this service from now on will have to avail themselves of the other two practitioners. (And killing those two as well still won't eliminate the need for this particular service, I'm guessing. Will just drive it underground....) And BTW, I don't think anybody in their right mind agrees with late-term abortions, except in the most extreme cases imaginable....or in using abortion as a afterthought, after-the-fact birth control means. There certainly ARE, however, legit reasons for having to undergo one. "....but charges were brought and a change in the political landscape in Kansas saved Tiller from prison, plain and simple..." I thought the reason charges were brought wasn't because he had performed late-term abortions, which weren't illegal in Kansas, per se, provided a 2nd independent opinion from another doctor confrms the primary doctor's diagnosis....but because it was doubtful that Tiller had gotten legit 2nd opinions. And if that were true, then he broke the law and should have gone to jail.

I think it goes without saying that everybody on this board is grateful that they're alive, that they weren't aborted. And it's very, very easy to pronounce judgment and say that any pregnancy, regardless of circumstances, must be seen through, since it's a "win-win" situation. (It's even easier for men to say this, since they're not the ones getting pregnant or the ones personally faced with the situation.) However, last time I checked, women in this country also had a right to choose under the law, albeit to a limited extent, whether they want to give birth or terminate the pregnancy. And just as the human race is going to continue to procreate, a significantly large number of women are going to continue to want and demand to keep their options open....with, whether anybody considers it right or wrong, ethical or not, abortion is one of them! This is NOT going away anytime soon!......and saying it will or should is as realistic as saying that abstinence must be practiced except for procreation only. And this being the case, I'd prefer that such procedures be performed by a medical professional, versus some sort of a back-alley, underground, less-than-sterile arrangement - the kind that still goes on in countries/cultures who don't permit abortions. Personally - it's none of my business...as I'm not a woman, and cannot get pregnant. If I were, however, I'd prefer that I had a choice....which is NOT the same as saying I'd automatically exercise that choice and terminate the pregnancy. I personally know several women, including one in my family, who've had abortions over the years....and they did not reach their decisions lightly or as a post-birth control device. (In two cases, they would have put their lives in danger continuing the pregnancy. In one of those cases, she lived to have 3 more children later). Not every woman who gets an abortion is an "irresponsible, selfish or immature" person who considers it the same as having a mole removed. It's called "pro-choice", by the way, and not "pro-abortion" for a good reason!

LeBron got trashed in this morning's Wash Post by Mike Wilbon.....seems he also forgot to shake hands with any of the Magic players after the game, choosing to email them his congrats later. WTF??? His quote: "It's hard for me to congratulate someone after you lose to them. I'm a winner. It's not being a poor sprt or anything like that. But somebody beats you up, you're not going to congratulate them on beating you up. That doesn't make sense." Sorry, King J, but it does, and I think you'd be used to it by now, having no world championship rings yet. Jesus...can you imagine what kind of negative press Kobe would get over a quote (or action) like this? So I guess LJ's not perfect after all!

I don't think the Cavs' management should do much except maybe add a player or two to upgrade their bench. Winning 66 games in the regular season is one Hell of an accomplishment, any way you look at it. The playoffs in ANY sport is a big crap shoot, luck of the draw situation, and the Cavs could conceivably win it all next year with the exact same cast intact if everything falls into place for them....or they could never win it all....as in the case of Ewing & the Knicks, Karl Malone/John Stockton & the Jazz, etc. Many of the all-time greatest players either never won a title or didn't do so until late in their career (Oscar Robertson & the Bucks). LeBron did all he could this year, but it's a team game. and sometimes great individual performances aren't enough in the post-season.

It looks like that 9 day lay-off didn't help the Cavs. It appears their momentum went down the crapper while they rested. Also, I don't think their kicking the crap out of the Pistons and Hawks in very short order helped. One of those teams is still a very young work-in-progress (Atlanta), while the other one was wrecked by dumping their bext player (Billups) for the aging and getting-more-selfish-as-he-ages Allan Iverson. The Cavs would have been better off with some real competition. I understand LeBron hightailed it out of the locker room last night immediately after the game, without a word to the press, his teammates, or anyone else. While the Cavs looked like they got a better supporting cast for him this past season, they were only able to put it together for 90 games (82 regular season, plus the first 2 playoff series).....Just hope this year's lack of playoff success doesn't bring the team down too much. They have a lot to be proud of....whether they feel like it at this moment or not!

Very interesting in that it looks like nothing has apparently changed at DOJ, where career lawyers just put up with 8 years of being overruled and/or fired or demoted by the Bush-appointed politicos whenever they disagreed or butted heads. (And also interesting to see the Wash. Times confirmed this in this article.)