got my ROCKS

well, I already got ROCKS by Aerosmith in the mail; that was fast, I swear; took 2 days! Here's hoping my INVISIBLE TOUCH by Genesis can hold a candle to that ideal transit time(!). I was thinking I might sell it (ROCKS, not IT), but, even though it's a got a very old and dusty sound, there's still something very fascinating about the CD. Just not sure its worth letting go of (again...!!!).

tpw returns!?

I used to say (sometimes) that Trespassers William is my favorite band...for the last six months or more that notion has taken a back seat since they only have 2 CDs (plus an EP and a CD they made way back when that they practically condemn...) and I was listening to them CONSTANTLY. Basically, I got tired of them. But I'm listening to trk #11 on DIFFERENT STARS (2004), and it just brings back those feelings of...2004, except I didn't even know who TPW was until after their 2nd CD HAVING (2006) came out...wait, I guess that woulda been a good time to explain what "feelings of 2004" means...

Well, I don't know when indie music started rising up, but if it weren't for Hot Topic coming to Cape Girardeau during my senior year of high school (2001), I probably would have felt just fine sticking to commercial radio. They had CDs that you could listen to for free (and buy them if you wanted to...), CDs mainly falling within the EMO category (as much as I love/d it, I still didn't know what that term meant until a few+ years later...) and the pop-punk category. I remember hearing Saves The Day's STAY WHAT YOU ARE and thinking "wow, this is independently distributed; and it's better than most of what I've been hearing lately!". And then around 2003 the local "college radio" station started broadcasting with more power, enabling more people to listen in...and in 2004 I moved out of my mom's house and started walking to the Kent (college) library, feeling semi-a part of the college community and feeling independent finally...

I felt a warm chill, so to speak, going through my body at those times, from about 2004-2006. Then I was no longer even ABLE to go to the college library and sometime after the kick off of the year 2006, RAGE 103.7 (the local "college radio" station...) decided to mainly stick to Godsmack/Limp Bizkit-esque type music and play more of the same songs more often...now I don't even listen to the radio PERIOD (except for online radio...) unless my computer's off and I happen to be out of CDs or tapes that I'm not sick and tired of...(sometimes the radio can be good background noise that you end up singing along to - so to speak...).


Of course, now DIFFERENT STARS is long gone...well, not literally; I mean, the "CD" (I'm listening to it for free on Rhapsody, you got a problem with that?) ended about 15+ minutes ago, while I was writing this...I think I'm gonna listen to their follow up, HAVING.


BTW, a couple points to mention if you wanna check out TPW yourself; SONYSTYLE.COM has both TPW CDs for $12.99 each (free S&H, I think...) and if you join BIGCRUMBS.COM (just follow the link on the side and I'll get a few cents from you signing up and using me as a referral...) you can save 3.15% off the already low price of those CDs. I know, $12.99 isn't that low of a price for a CD(s), but Amazon, for the most part, has the lowest prices on pretty much everything and TPWs CDs go for about $15+ each on Amazon. I've looked at other websites as well, it's about the same...


Until next time...

I just bought Aerosmith's ROCKS and Genesis' INVISIBLE TOUCH today, via my sister's Amazon account (well, technically, she bought them for me with my money...). I think those "compact disc digital audio" logos that they used to put on CDs in the early days were cool. Hopefully, the seller doesn't mail the 1993 remaster instead of the edition he was supposed to be selling...I think cover art for CDs is kind of important, b/c it gives the CDs on one's shelf or whatever a sense of identity. I'm also a very visual person, so it's kind of like the CD is the heart/soul and the album cover(s) is like the body...looook into my eyes!

dark

I saw THE DARK KNIGHT Monday. On Thursday I got an email from Kmart telling me that if I bought 3 bags of Reese's candy by the 19th (the end of;) that I would be eligible for a free movie ticket for THE DARK KNIGHT. So on Saturday I did that, bought the candy and redeemed the code online, and brought the certificate to the movie theater. I didn't want to go on Saturday, 'cause the theaters are usually quite crowded then. It's bad enough in a small theater, 'cause you still never know whose gonna start talking to the screen like a dang maniac or whose gonna depend on the person sitting next to them to explain the movie to them while they're watching it. And before the film starts, IF you look at the screen then, you'll see SEVERAL warnings like "silence your cell phones", "silence during the film" etc. etc.,; but does anybody actually pay any attention? It wasn't too bad on Monday, prolly 'cause everyone there felt the same as I do about that kind of stuff, which may explain why they chose Monday to see it. It as eleven 0'clock in the morning too, although it was like 1:30 or after when I got out, 'cause the film was 157 minutes long plus the trailers.

But alas, I was not too terribly pleased with the film. It just seemed like a big mess of scenes put together without any cohesive narrative style. The trailers for the movie made it seem like it was going to be GREAT, 'cause they a) took parts of the movie out of context and b) took the few would-have-been good scenes (such as the scene where The Joker's stolen semi-truck was turned upside down) and made them look better than they were.

This wouldn't be such a big disappointment, but the last time I went to the theater prior to THE DARK KNIGHT was to see BATMAN BEGINS and that was over 3 years ago. I had all my money riding on this thing and it fell flat. At least I got the ticket for free...well, sorta; it'd also been awhile since I'd bought candy bars in bags...

wildfires

I just saw the one sentence description of a news story: Bush set to survey Northern California wildfires. I don't know why he even bothers. 75% of the population hates his guts for some reason(s) or another, and the man obviously would rather be dictator than president...just sickens me seeing him trying to act like a decent person...what good is this gonna do for him or anyone else?

arg

PROLOGUE: Technology Is Evil

Ok, what the Hell is an "output"??? an INput, as far as I sorta-might-know, is a hole in an electronics device that a cable goes in to connect two pieces of electronics...is that not the right definition? IF it isn't, then fuck you, 'cause that's what I think it is...if that's not the right definition, tell me the word that fits it or go to Hell, 'k?

CHAPTER 0: VCR gives, VCR takes away...

Ok, well, I hooked up the VCR that my aunt gave me, and it appeared to be working...the only problem was the cord situation, totally messed up, had to re-arrange the electro-furniture...

Basically, the VCR and the TV were/are too damn far apart from another for the cords to connect properly, 'cause the cords are too damn short. I HAVE an entertainment CENTER for a reason so I didn't want to just put the VCR any ol' place...so I tried switching the cords that were with the DVD player, but for some stupid reason the DVD player cords are designed with two RCA-ish-cables + a yellow S-Video cord. My VCR doesn't even HAVE an S-Video jack (is THAT the right word? Or are they both correct to use in this instance?), so the white cord is all that would fit in the VCR, but I thought since the invention of these cords is/was the most retarded thing in the world, maybe the red cord would/could substitute for the yellow cord. Now that I remember doing that, I guess maybe that's why the VCR doesn't work...I woulda just waited, but I don't have any freakin' money to buy another set of cords!!! And whose idea was it to make an S-Video/RCA-cable combination??? S-Video doesn't even perform as well as RCA-cables,...

Well, hopefully time will give it something it doesn't have enough of now to make it work later...or maybe it's just permanently dead...

But I guess it's no big deal. I have a couple VHS tapes, but I don't think too highly of sitting back and watching movies all day when the world is killing its feet trying to bend over for its Money-Gods...movies are a waste of time unless you find one that you REALLY REALLY love, one that gives you high doses of stimulation and satisfaction. Neither of the VHS tapes I have provide that for me...in fact, I've been considering selling my DVD collection for the same reason...but nostalgia's a weird thing, at least to me...sometimes it's there and others, it's like it never happened...I don't know about most people, but my memory doesn't keep feelings/emotions like it does actual things that HAPPEN...

oh, no!; the animals have escaped!!

I think it's interesting how the indie labels have risen in esteem since the music industry started crying about its low sales. Yet instead of find way(s) to work WITH the consumers, they try to eliminate the competition. Kind of like Jim Carry's line in LIAR LIAR: "I object!/This tape is devastating to my case...".
Face it Hoffa: you can't control the minds of the people any more. They know what they've been missing and they're sick of worshiping the idols that you try to put in front of their faces. The old days where you get filthy stinkin' rich by repackaging the same old crap is over, and it's probably going to get worse.
The ONLY thing you can do about it is to SHOCK people; and there's nothing more shocking than a deeply emotional experience, b/c people have never HAD one. Sure, there's an occasional teary eyed moment on the radio, a few songs here and there that appeal to the "indie rockers" that have that label, but you gotta DIG, high and low, across the mountains and oceans every rock in between; you gotta GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY CRAVE, which is SUBSTANCE. The items on your shelves aren't moving. REPLACE them!

this is just rediculous...

On Amazon.com, there's the opportunity to sell your items or buy from people who choose to do so. When you list your item for sale on Amazon.com, they ask you a) what condition is your item in? and then b) comments. You don't HAVE to have any comments, but people put some of the dumbest comments on their listings. Some sellers say "great CD" or "great price" as if any potential buyers can't figure that out by either LOOKING AT the price and deciding that on their own terms, or reading the avg customer rating of the item on the PRODUCT PAGE. Some sellers waste a lot of time typing out the track listing which again is found on PRODUCT PAGE.
If any of you people are reading this: listen carefully;
there are THREE parts of a compact disc (CD) unless you personally remove one or more of them or buy from someone who did that; a) the disc b) the cover art (front booklet/sleeve/insert & back tray) and c) the jewel case.
That's all there is to it. People can ALTER those parts any number of ways; they can let their 5 year old spill orange juice on the item or any part(s) there-of, they can write their friggin' initials on the item (or any part(s) there-of), they can eat messy food then leaf through the booklet/sleeve/insert (I don't know why anyone would leaf through a one page insert, but this isn't a dictatorship; if someone wants to do something totally pointless, that's up to them...), they can get in a fight with a family or friend and start pulling at one end of the item to the point of ripping it; they can very ROUGHLY leaf through the front cover art, and bend it or part of it...
LIKE NEW SHOULD mean EXACTLY as it was bought at the store. a lot of people say "like new" when there's fingerprints on the item, although honestly, how could there not be? I'll forgive that bit of technicality, but for pity's sake; I've actually looked at sellers' feedback where someone COMPLAINS about stuff like this and there's no reply from the seller with an explanation or apology or both! Obviously, there's at least a few sellers on Amazon who are like eBay sellers that simply DON'T CARE about customer service. I don't know how Amazon lets sellers like that continue selling except perhaps people are just too "rational" to care enough about that kind of thing and thus don't complain to Amazon to let them know and keep future buyers' from buying from bad sellers.

One Man Army

Well, it's "only"(?) been about 6 years since "indie" music became normal instead of something people stayed away from. Yet I've been bored as ever with music with the exception of a few CDs that I stumble upon at just the right time...
The whole "indie" explosion was really neat when it focused on emotions channeled into music (such as "emo" and pop-punk/Blink-182 "ripoffs"), but since then we've retreated back into the whole Radiohead/Pink Floyd landscape where it's all about style and the substance is either extremely dull or not there. It's either that or all this macho crap like Saliva and Godsmack...(I know they were around before the indie explosion, but the music they made/make is still going strong in the albums/singles of their musical offspring...).
Warner Bros is the COOLEST label, as far as labels go, 'cause they don't hire any old band who they think just might sell a couple hundred or more copies of a CD. If you look at the labels on your CD collection (supposing you have an "actual" CD collection - i.e.: one of any significant size...), you'll probably notice very few of your CDs are made by Warner Bros. Of course, Warner Bros. is owned by Time-Warner, who also owns Elektra, Reprise, and...a couple others I know I'm forgetting...but even Elektra, IMO, has a lot of great music under their wing, such as Third Eye Blind, Metallica, The Cars, etc.,...I don't think Elektra is AS cool as WB 'cause there's a lot more under their wing than Warner Bros.'s, but they do come close. And even editors at top magazines can agree with me that Elektra is (or at least was for a while...) a lot more "artist friendly" than some other labels...(I figure any label that lets a member of a new band produce their own debut has some "artist friendly"ness).
And the music itself that Warner Bros. has on its roster is pretty nifty, I think. Van Halen, R.E.M., Built To Spill, Black Sabbath, The Grateful Dead...man, I can't even think of any others, at least not at the moment. And I personally don't LIKE hardly any of those bands, but I do respect them for their vision(s) and their impact on society. However, I think the impact that music makes on society should be emotional not cultural. Friends - true friends - will be bonded regardless of what great band comes along. Music is not a social outing; music is AT BEST when locked alone in your room or house with headphones on. But if all you're gonna do is trip out on wacky sounds or bobble your head to a degrading guitar/drum combination, what's the point? Music can take you to places that rarely are seen by most people; 3EB's "I Want You" from their debut is a good example. That song reminded me of the cover-art for R.E.M.'s CD-single/E.P. STRANGE CURRENCIES before I even saw the thing.
Before my internet cut Rhapsody off, I was listening to Our Lady Peace's HAPPINESS IS NOT A FISH THAT YOU CAN CATCH and I have to admit, it's not a BAD album, but it's only a few or so notches above mediocre. I can probably say that about most of OLP's music. As far as I can tell, the reason I got (at least) one "unhelpful" vote for my Amazon review was b/c I gave it 4 stars instead of 5, but at the same time said it was "OLP's best", which is kind of an oxymoron right? You can't just give an album less than 5 stars and cite it as the band's best! - ...can you? I say you can. The 5 star rating is/was intended to be a signal to potential buyers that the item is a MUST-BUY, something that only really stubborn people will NOT LIKE (stubborn as in: I don't like country, so I don't like that album - even though the album is a beautiful, uplifting, energetic,...etc. etc. etc...perfect in every way!). I think people have a hard time identifying a GREAT album and an above average album. I guess it's just too depressing to think of 99.9% of CDs ever made as being less than perfect. And I guess it's too much work to try to distinguish between a 3 star and a 4 star album...the sucky thing is that any artist who cares about making quality music will most likely stick to their methods of creation if they have no complaints from anybody. Of course, (supposedly) most "rock" artists "don't give a f***" what anybody has to say about their music, but to me, that's part of what has caused music to degrade. Musicians pick up an instrument and yank a note out of it instead of actually PLAY the darn instrument(s), and then half of them can't sing unless a cat dying sounds like singing...you have to ASSUME that the artist is "feeling" something behind his/her/their meandering performances, instead of it being obvious based on the actual performance.
So aside from all these careless rock stars, there's two types of "pop" artists: those in it for the money and those in it for the music. Michael Jackson has always been in it for the music - and has been handsomely rewarded financially. I think his ego has got in the way to some extent, b/c people don't expect anything out of his music except what they get. i personally don't like the same set of notes being repeated for 4 minutes or more, but you know MJ wouldn't give me some unique creative experiment b/c that would alienate fans of his work - or at least those who know he has a new album out based on the fact that the radio is playing a Michael Jackson song they've never heard before...
But that's only the half of it. If you look at MJs personal life and his music, the music has nothing to do with MJ. He sings it the best he can, giving the impression he has experienced these things he sings about, b/c that's how good he is! But as far as writing music, experiencing very human emotions and wrenching them out on paper, he's useless in that respect. He doesn't even pretend to have written half the stuff he is known for.

stupid vs. evil

I still can't get over the last two Presidential elections; the last one had a Democrat who didn't really have anything to offer this country except he was waaaaaay better than his opponent, a Republican.

The election before that was pretty much the same except so much worse. The Democratic candidate not only had nothing to offer this country, but he told people he did or was all of these things that really had nothing to do with how good he was at running the country. Of course, now that same Democratic candidate is bullying people to agree with his global warming craze by making outlandish comparisons to the idea that Global Warming is way over exaggerated and the idea that the Earth is flat.

This election isn't AS bad as the last two, mainly b/c the Presidential nominee, as far as I know at least, isn't a power-hungry thug disguised in a "sophisticated" outfit. George W. Bush has manipulated just about every law in the book to get things in his favor, his favor being who knows what aside from continuing his fathers' Blood legacy. I don't know how any judge can be content with Valerie Plame's plight, and I certainly don't know how that judge (can't remember his name) can legally throw out a lawsuit against people intent on violating another's constitutional right(s) based on the grounds of "that's their job". Of course, he worded it a bit more lengthy than that, but that's what it all comes down to. And then his goons are suspected of crime(s) and Mr. W withholds documents that may or may not be incriminating based on "executive priviledge" (I give up on spelling that word correctly!!) and I don't even know what the heck that is! I guess checks and balances only applies to the President...hey, why don't I rub shoulders with Mr. W so I can get a job from him and then kill somebody and he can say "sorry, survielence tapes aren't accessible b/c of executive privilidge" (dang it, TWO words I can't spell in the SAME SENTENCE...but anyway...)

And I don't even know what to make of the Iraq War. I guess it is helpful, not just to us, but to the world in general (kill two birds with one stone, right?) to help stabilize Iraq and make it a more peaceful place to live while at least trying to root out the terrorist group(s) that committed the atrocities on the WTC & the attempted atrocities of the Pentagon HQ and the White House. I just don't see why the American people can make decisions about who can marry who, but they can't decide if thousands upon thousands of manpower units are killed and wounded.

If America wants to risk looking like wussies to Al Quida, then why can't we? They may be evil, but they're not stupid. They understand that Americans are spoiled and don't have a memory that lasts more than 6 months, why would they claim victory just b/c we ended a war that many who participated, and many who are funding the participation of, say should never have begun but haven't been able to do anything about b/c of this blockheaded President who insists he's a Christian who is intent on "leading" this country in a proper manner? If they really want a Holy War, then there's ways to avoid that. The CIA does a GREAT job at preventing these kinds of things, although they did slack off a bit prior to 9/11 and after the Cold War.

Barack Obama, like the last two Democratic would be Presidents, has little to nothing to offer this country. I have not heard ONE WORD of PLAN in his speakings quoted in any of the articles I've read. He's spent a great deal of time dissing Bill Clinton, since Hilary Clinton was at one time not all that long ago thought to be the obvious Presidential winner.

Evil is kind of like the Biblical definition of "good"; it works in mysterious ways, often times very subtle. Evil is not specific to ONE person; it's in everybody, some more than others. However, stupidity can take an entire infrastructure and destroy it as easily as knocking over a house of cards. And you can't blame anyone for a stupid person winning the Presidential election; intelligence, the ability to reason, is EXTREMELY difficult for like 70+% of this world to measure, b/c of several bias'.
However, EVIL can easily by blamed on those who voted for it. The information is out there; smear ads and "this is what/who I am" commercials are not going to tell you a damn thing. The positive commercials often times distort the facts and the smear ads often make things up out of thin air.
If there's any excuse anyone has for NOT voting, it's not "oh, the system doesn't work" because the only reason the system doesn't work is because people who believe that end up looking like the dumbasses who cried wolf, insisting upon doom and gloom, and the people who DON'T believe that are too freakin' gullable to notice what's going on. Voting is the only way to keep this garbage out.
There's a catch though; you need to know who you're voting for. It takes WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more research than watching a half hour or hour long news program. It can probably add up a month's worth of hours total.

If you can't make sure that our politicians are not drug dealers, murderers, imbezzlers or some other unscrupulous type of person/people, then why the heck are you voting?