"Prai Jei" wrote in message ...
"Don Quijote" wrote in message
...
What's sad is that $500 are being channeled into shortwave radio to
sell the 'American way of life' to the world.

That's not much of an investment. Should that be 500 megabucks? gigabucks?
I'll stick with Classic FM here in the UK, can't get short wave anyway.

That's $500 million vs. $120 million for the arts. People in Zimbabwe
sure get a good deal out of America's taxpayers...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

Michael Moore wrote in message ...
Rich Wood wrote:
On 28 Jun 2003 04:47:57 GMT, Michael Moore
wrote:


You are hereby sentenced to listen to four hours of polka
king Frankie Yankovic's greatest hits.


The Geneva Concention permits only 3 hours, otherwise it's considered
torture and is punishable by 5 hours of Slim Whitman.

Does the Geneva Convention cover stupid commercials? How about boring
commercials?

In Scandinavia you look forward to watching smart, funny commercials
but in America they are sooooo boring...

"I have a better suggestion: simply turn off the set, reach for a book
and let your mind take you into a glorious world free from offensive
commercials."

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

"Paul Jensen" wrote in message ...
"John Harrington" wrote in message
...
What bull****. The government doesn't "take" hard earned money, or
easily earned money, from anyone.

This is the moat clueless statement in this thread yet.

Don't look now, but yours is the beam clueless statement.

If this clumsily loaded question boils down to: do I believe tax
monies should be devoted, in part, to preserving and encouraging high
culture. The answer is: you bet I do.

Some brain dead person claimed earlier in this thread that we just had to
have taxpayer-supported government radio, or else how would people "learn"
about classical music? You know what? The other day I went out and
*purchased* a 10-CD classical collection, and now I am learning about
classical music. And I am doing it without government subsidy and no burdon
on taxpayers.

Um, probably not, in fact. If that CD collection has orchestral music
on it, the probability is high you're listening to music funded in
whole or part by some "evul gubmint" somewhere in the world. In fact,
chances are good that if that 10 CD collection was bought at budget
prices, you're listening to orchestras that were founded by communist
governments (e.g., former eastern bloc nations).


John

On 30 Jun 2003 16:07:48 GMT, Tom Betz wrote:

You are hereby sentenced to listen to four hours of polka
king Frankie Yankovic's greatest hits.

The Geneva Concention permits only 3 hours, otherwise it's considered
torture and is punishable by 5 hours of Slim Whitman.

"Ack! Ack ack ack ack!!"

Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on Slim. He did save the planet, after
all.

Rich

John Harrington wrote:
Perhaps you'd care to respond to the challenge I posted a few days
ago:

Name five classical musicians, most of whom are and have been funded
by the "evul gumbint" or by the church, who died of drug overdoses.

At the following URL you will find a table of "rock deaths" compiled
by a rock "music" fan:

http://rockdeaths.mybravenet.com/rdl/rlistN.html

It lists the causes of death of what appears to be a comprehensive
list of dead rock stars, by name, date, cause, etc. Last I checked,
of the 556 deaths listed on this page:

60 are due to Drugs (10.8%)
50 are suicides (9%)
31 are homicides (5.6%)
12 are due to alcohol (2.2%)

All in all, over 1/4 of the rock stars listed died violently or via
some form of substance abuse (not including lung cancer, btw). Over 1
in 5 died by their own hand (suicide or substance abuse).

I invite you to compile a similar list of deaths of classical
musicians. The table covers 39 years of rock history. If you wish,
you may draw your data from the last 400 years of classical history,
over ten times the scope of the above table.

Have fun.

Unless you are claiming the rock music is evil and the cause
of all the tradgedy, then I consider all of the above stats
irrelevant. If however, you are claiming that rock music is
itself evil, then the burden of proof is yours to
demonstrate it (e.g. how do I know that rock musicians who
overdosed weren't just stupid folks with more money then
they knew what to do with? If so, why should this discredit
rock music?).

--
M2

John Harrington wrote:
In fact,
chances are good that if that 10 CD collection was bought at budget
prices, you're listening to orchestras that were founded by communist
governments (e.g., former eastern bloc nations).

That's the nature of "central planning".

--
M2

(John Harrington) wrote in message ...
"Paul Jensen" wrote in message ...
"John Harrington" wrote in message
...
What bull****. The government doesn't "take" hard earned money, or
easily earned money, from anyone.

This is the moat clueless statement in this thread yet.

Don't look now, but yours is the beam clueless statement.

If this clumsily loaded question boils down to: do I believe tax
monies should be devoted, in part, to preserving and encouraging high
culture. The answer is: you bet I do.

Some brain dead person claimed earlier in this thread that we just had to
have taxpayer-supported government radio, or else how would people "learn"
about classical music? You know what? The other day I went out and
*purchased* a 10-CD classical collection, and now I am learning about
classical music. And I am doing it without government subsidy and no burdon
on taxpayers.

Um, probably not, in fact. If that CD collection has orchestral music
on it, the probability is high you're listening to music funded in
whole or part by some "evul gubmint" somewhere in the world. In fact,
chances are good that if that 10 CD collection was bought at budget
prices, you're listening to orchestras that were founded by communist
governments (e.g., former eastern bloc nations).

Capitalism holds a higher promise though. Wait until the People's
Republic of China symphony orchestra jumps on the capitalist wagon,
and you'll find the 10 CD for 1 buck at the dollar store...

What's better, capitalism or communism?

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

I know some civilized countries (Canada, the whole Western Europe and
others) that have government-funded, commercial-free classical radio
plus many other arts. But of course, investing in the military is a
wiser investment...

Damn right it is. If it weren't for our military, the people of Western
Europe would today be speaking German or Russian.

Paul Jensen wrote:

I know some civilized countries (Canada, the whole Western Europe and
others) that have government-funded, commercial-free classical radio
plus many other arts. But of course, investing in the military is a
wiser investment...

Damn right it is. If it weren't for our military, the people of Western
Europe would today be speaking German or Russian.

Two beautiful and expressive languages. What would be wrong with that?
--
Peter T. Daniels

(Don Quijote) wrote in message ...
snip
What's better, capitalism or communism?

Communism is neat.


J