golf-forums.net Promoting golf discussion.

Main Date: 25 Sep 2006 13:41:27 From: Dave Baker Subject: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup It's hard to imagine we'll ever see another quite like it. Clearly the emotion of Clarke coming through the torment of personal grief and playing in front of his home crowd at his home club was always going to be the centrepiece of what would turn out to be one of the most dramatic sporting events in history. I'd like to spare a thought for Ian Woosnam though. It's hard to imagine what he went through too in the lead up to this. Should he play a man who might crack under the strain and bring the whole team crashing down around him and if he didn't when Clarke wanted to play how could he ever look him in the face again? All captains have to pick their wildcards but none have ever had to do so in such extraordinary circumstances. In the end he went with his heart and put Lee Westwood, Clarke's best friend, alongside him to lend support. It must have been one of the hardest decisions in his life but it turned out to be an inspired one. It gave the team an emotional centre to operate around, not that Ryder cup teams lack for determination anyway, and must surely make his captaincy one of the best there's been. I'd also like to commend Tom Lehman and the entire American team for the class and sportsmanship they displayed throughout the event. Smiles were not much in evidence but their honest and heartfelt support and admiration for Clarke was. Lehman's closing speech was statesmanlike and much appreciated. Things have not always been like this. You only have to think back to Brookline, but on this weekend the event came back to its roots. Two teams competing to win as hard as they could but also in the spirit of the game and with respect for their opponents. So thank you Tom. You might not have gone home with a cup or even many points but you won the respect of all who watched and memories over here are long. One of the highest compliments an Englishman can pay someone is very simple. You sir are a gentleman and that says all that needs to be said. -- Dave Baker www.puacing.co.uk "Why," said Ford squatting down beside him and shivering, "are you lying face down in the dust?" "It's a very effective way of being wretched," said vin.   Date: 30 Sep 2006 13:31:05 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup X-No-Archive: yes William A. T. Clark wrote: > In article <1159542672.778400.146640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > Can you tell an overcup oak from a post oak without looking them up? > > > > > > > > I thought not! > > > > > > You mean a swamp oak from an iron oak? Yes, I can, as it happens, but > > > that is far less significant than knowing where population centers of > > > the world are. When you look things up like that you show off the lack of knowledge of redundacies bult into taxonomic nomeclature. In Ohio, "Swamp Oak" is Pin Oak. In general, if you refer to "Swamp Oak", you are talking Pin Oak. Now there is a "Swamp Chestnut Oak" and a "Swamp Post Oak", and you can find all three named as I have in the same taxonomic key. Overcup Oak is the swamp post oak. It is as incorrect as calling New York York. York and New York are in fact differnt cities, and swamp post oak and swamp oak are different species of flowering plants. > > > > > > Especially if your government seems hell bent on invading most of them. > > > > > > Wow! What a hypocrit! Firstly, to consider Liverpool and Munster > > population centers! Pretty Eurocentric. I guess we need to look at > > great population centers like Nashville and Omaha while we are at it! > > I should say that Liverpool has had no little influence on our world, > first as the center for the British slave trade to the US, then as the > great UK seaport for transatlantic liners, and then as the center of the > pop music revolution in the 1960s. Not to mention five European Cups. > Nashville and Omaha's influence on the world is . . .? (But I can > certainly pinpoint both on a map of the world). > > Talk music and Nashville has it all over Liverpool. The pop music revolution you refer to is the introduction and popularization of a form of American blues music ("rock and roll") in the UK. Big whoop. I have some stuff by a guy from New Orleans called Slim Harpo, and it sounds a lot like The Rolling Stones. Steal the musical ideas from some guy in New Orleans and play it in Liverpool and that's a musical revolution? As to being the center of a conspiracy whereby English people go to foreign countries and kidnap the people there to work as slaves on their carribean sugar plantations...well that's pretty dastardly. The most dastardly aspect of US cultre was inherited from the English, and we still live with it's after effects today. Make sure you teach that! Are the English planning to make any reparations to the families involed? There is a movement here for such reparations in the US, from the US government, but it was in fact the English who kidnapped these people in the first place. Crimes against humanity anyone? I'm sure the people of Omaha and Nashville are as proud of their cities as you are of Liverpool; doesn't make them any better or worse than Liverpool...although I have always wondered what the heck a Liver pool is anyways. Sounds rather disgusting to me.     Date: 06 Oct 2006 14:37:17 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Fairway wrote: > The_Professor wrote: > > > IMHO, tradional Irish music has a lot more to it than what I hear in > > bluegrass, and Altan is no different in this respect, at least as a > > first impression on me. > And traditional Irish music is in fact borrowed from the French, they > say, so accordingly "bluegrass" should be "pelouse bleu". F I've always wondered about the role of the Harp based Irish music and the more traditional N. European stlye we associate with things like bluegrass. My ancestors were Normans. The original Hamilton was a capo for a Norman warmonger named Robert the Bruce, who double crossed some Edward or another and took northern Britain for himself. He also started the long tradition of invading Ireland. The next Ted along the line took northern Britain back from Bobbies son, Bob II, but that is more than we need to know! In any event, Britain has been dominated by Normans and their ancestors for almost 100 years now. They came over from northen France to England, as we all know! Not that they originated in northern France. In any event, WASPs never really existed in England, as they were catholics when they got booted by the Normans, and the ruling classes in Englnad have been all Norman ever since. Anyhoo, I wonder if that more modal style we associated with traditional English, Scottish and music from Brittany isn't really the music Normas played, while the harp based stuff isn't the real gaelic music?     Date: 06 Oct 2006 14:04:26 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup The_Professor wrote: > > IMHO, tradional Irish music has a lot more to it than what I hear in > bluegrass, and Altan is no different in this respect, at least as a > first impression on me. And traditional Irish music is in fact borrowed from the French, they say, so accordingly "bluegrass" should be "pelouse bleu". F     Date: 06 Oct 2006 11:45:00 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > Try the "Trip to Cullinstown" of Altan's Blue Idol CD, or "The Dispute a > the Crossroads" from their Another Sky album. You'll find a much more > direct, pipe influenced, style than is more usually associated with > Irish music. It isn't hard to morph this into bluegrass. > A lot of jigs and reels in bluegrass that sound very similar to "The Dispute at the Crossroads". Yet Altan's music isn't as intensely annoying as bluegrass. I suspect that rather than focus on one single simplisitc form as bluegrass artists do, artists like Altan have more variety, and more depth in each piece due to a wider range of influences that they incorporate into their music. I've suffered through a lot of bluegrass, BTW. It is at least as rampant in Canada as in the US. When I lived in SE Ohio, it was nearly toxic! I really do believe the form in Canada originated more in Scotland due to the large number of Scottish migrants into Canada, especially in the early days of english speaking migration into Canada. IMHO, tradional Irish music has a lot more to it than what I hear in bluegrass, and Altan is no different in this respect, at least as a first impression on me.     Date: 05 Oct 2006 16:55:19 From: Big_Fan Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > In article <4524638C.E4CC5A37@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > wrote: > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > In article <1160002695.421125.90290@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, > > > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Jack Hollis wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > > > > > >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > > > > > >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > > > > > >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, > > > > > >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. > > > > > > > > > > > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, > > > > > >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster > > > > > >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people > > > > > >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted > > > > > >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal > > > > > >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the > > > > > >plantation. > > > > > > > > > > > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and > > > > > >the music does not bear that idea out. > > > > > > > > > > > >William Clark > > > > > > > > > > The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was > > > > > because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The > > > > > music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music in > > > > > Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get technical, > > > > > it's Celtic music. > > > > > > > > You may be correct, I don't know, but bluegrass sounds waaay different > > > > to me than does Irish gaelic music, and it sound a lot more like > > > > Scottish gaelic music to my ears. I have a large collection of Irish > > > > gaelic music, a smallish collection of Scottish gaelic music and no > > > > bluegrass. My experience with bluegrass comes from having it forced on > > > > me at various social occasions throughout the years! > > > > > > You should try listening to Irish groups from the Northwest region, > > > especially Donegal. Bands like Altan have a playing style that is > > > heavily influenced by Scottish bagpipe music that the Presbyterian > > > settlers brought with them, and contains many of the same embellishments > > > that pipe music does. It is a much more direct, aggressive, style than > > > the fiddle music from, say Kerry and the Southwest. > > > > I give it a listen! > > > > Rob > > Try the "Trip to Cullinstown" of Altan's Blue Idol CD, or "The Dispute a > the Crossroads" from their Another Sky album. You'll find a much more > direct, pipe influenced, style than is more usually associated with > Irish music. It isn't hard to morph this into bluegrass. > > William Clark I've been reading this thread every day and I still don't know what your final thoughts on the Ryder Cup are?       Date: 05 Oct 2006 20:35:57 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1160092519.747867.177750@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > In article <4524638C.E4CC5A37@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > > wrote: > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > > > In article <1160002695.421125.90290@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, > > > > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Jack Hollis wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have > > > > > > >> crossed > > > > > > >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are > > > > > > >> different > > > > > > >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > > > > > > >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and > > > > > > >> English, > > > > > > >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear > > > > > > >> different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually > > > > > > >indistinguishable, > > > > > > >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly > > > > > > >Ulster > > > > > > >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most > > > > > > >people > > > > > > >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted > > > > > > >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the > > > > > > >principal > > > > > > >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the > > > > > > >plantation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, > > > > > > >and > > > > > > >the music does not bear that idea out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >William Clark > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was > > > > > > because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The > > > > > > music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music > > > > > > in > > > > > > Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get > > > > > > technical, > > > > > > it's Celtic music. > > > > > > > > > > You may be correct, I don't know, but bluegrass sounds waaay > > > > > different > > > > > to me than does Irish gaelic music, and it sound a lot more like > > > > > Scottish gaelic music to my ears. I have a large collection of Irish > > > > > gaelic music, a smallish collection of Scottish gaelic music and no > > > > > bluegrass. My experience with bluegrass comes from having it forced > > > > > on > > > > > me at various social occasions throughout the years! > > > > > > > > You should try listening to Irish groups from the Northwest region, > > > > especially Donegal. Bands like Altan have a playing style that is > > > > heavily influenced by Scottish bagpipe music that the Presbyterian > > > > settlers brought with them, and contains many of the same > > > > embellishments > > > > that pipe music does. It is a much more direct, aggressive, style than > > > > the fiddle music from, say Kerry and the Southwest. > > > > > > I give it a listen! > > > > > > Rob > > > > Try the "Trip to Cullinstown" of Altan's Blue Idol CD, or "The Dispute a > > the Crossroads" from their Another Sky album. You'll find a much more > > direct, pipe influenced, style than is more usually associated with > > Irish music. It isn't hard to morph this into bluegrass. > > > > William Clark > > I've been reading this thread every day and I still don't know what > your final thoughts on the Ryder Cup are? Oh, . . . . too EASY!!!! William Clark     Date: 04 Oct 2006 15:58:15 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, > >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. > > > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, > >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster > >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people > >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted > >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal > >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the > >plantation. > > > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and > >the music does not bear that idea out. > > > >William Clark > > The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was > because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The > music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music in > Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get technical, > it's Celtic music. You may be correct, I don't know, but bluegrass sounds waaay different to me than does Irish gaelic music, and it sound a lot more like Scottish gaelic music to my ears. I have a large collection of Irish gaelic music, a smallish collection of Scottish gaelic music and no bluegrass. My experience with bluegrass comes from having it forced on me at various social occasions throughout the years!       Date: 04 Oct 2006 20:27:58 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1160002695.421125.90290@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > > >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > > >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > > >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, > > >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. > > > > > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, > > >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster > > >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people > > >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted > > >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal > > >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the > > >plantation. > > > > > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and > > >the music does not bear that idea out. > > > > > >William Clark > > > > The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was > > because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The > > music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music in > > Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get technical, > > it's Celtic music. > > You may be correct, I don't know, but bluegrass sounds waaay different > to me than does Irish gaelic music, and it sound a lot more like > Scottish gaelic music to my ears. I have a large collection of Irish > gaelic music, a smallish collection of Scottish gaelic music and no > bluegrass. My experience with bluegrass comes from having it forced on > me at various social occasions throughout the years! You should try listening to Irish groups from the Northwest region, especially Donegal. Bands like Altan have a playing style that is heavily influenced by Scottish bagpipe music that the Presbyterian settlers brought with them, and contains many of the same embellishments that pipe music does. It is a much more direct, aggressive, style than the fiddle music from, say Kerry and the Southwest. So my point is that there are many "styles" of Irish music, and it is the Scots/Irish form that was more influential in music of Appalachia and southern regions than much of the softer, more rolling, music found further south in Ireland. William Clark         Date: 05 Oct 2006 01:52:29 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > In article <1160002695.421125.90290@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > Jack Hollis wrote: > > > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > > > >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > > > >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > > > >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > > > >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, > > > >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. > > > > > > > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, > > > >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster > > > >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people > > > >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted > > > >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal > > > >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the > > > >plantation. > > > > > > > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and > > > >the music does not bear that idea out. > > > > > > > >William Clark > > > > > > The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was > > > because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The > > > music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music in > > > Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get technical, > > > it's Celtic music. > > > > You may be correct, I don't know, but bluegrass sounds waaay different > > to me than does Irish gaelic music, and it sound a lot more like > > Scottish gaelic music to my ears. I have a large collection of Irish > > gaelic music, a smallish collection of Scottish gaelic music and no > > bluegrass. My experience with bluegrass comes from having it forced on > > me at various social occasions throughout the years! > > You should try listening to Irish groups from the Northwest region, > especially Donegal. Bands like Altan have a playing style that is > heavily influenced by Scottish bagpipe music that the Presbyterian > settlers brought with them, and contains many of the same embellishments > that pipe music does. It is a much more direct, aggressive, style than > the fiddle music from, say Kerry and the Southwest. I give it a listen! Rob           Date: 05 Oct 2006 08:05:40 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <4524638C.E4CC5A37@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > In article <1160002695.421125.90290@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, > > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > Jack Hollis wrote: > > > > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > > > > >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > > > > >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > > > > >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, > > > > >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. > > > > > > > > > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, > > > > >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster > > > > >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people > > > > >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted > > > > >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal > > > > >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the > > > > >plantation. > > > > > > > > > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and > > > > >the music does not bear that idea out. > > > > > > > > > >William Clark > > > > > > > > The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was > > > > because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The > > > > music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music in > > > > Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get technical, > > > > it's Celtic music. > > > > > > You may be correct, I don't know, but bluegrass sounds waaay different > > > to me than does Irish gaelic music, and it sound a lot more like > > > Scottish gaelic music to my ears. I have a large collection of Irish > > > gaelic music, a smallish collection of Scottish gaelic music and no > > > bluegrass. My experience with bluegrass comes from having it forced on > > > me at various social occasions throughout the years! > > > > You should try listening to Irish groups from the Northwest region, > > especially Donegal. Bands like Altan have a playing style that is > > heavily influenced by Scottish bagpipe music that the Presbyterian > > settlers brought with them, and contains many of the same embellishments > > that pipe music does. It is a much more direct, aggressive, style than > > the fiddle music from, say Kerry and the Southwest. > > I give it a listen! > > Rob Try the "Trip to Cullinstown" of Altan's Blue Idol CD, or "The Dispute a the Crossroads" from their Another Sky album. You'll find a much more direct, pipe influenced, style than is more usually associated with Irish music. It isn't hard to morph this into bluegrass. William Clark     Date: 01 Oct 2006 00:26:01 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159648265.488269.241800@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > X-No-Archive: yes > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > In article <1159542672.778400.146640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > Can you tell an overcup oak from a post oak without looking them up? > > > > > > > > > > I thought not! > > > > > > > > You mean a swamp oak from an iron oak? Yes, I can, as it happens, but > > > > that is far less significant than knowing where population centers of > > > > the world are. > > When you look things up like that you show off the lack of knowledge of > redundacies bult into taxonomic nomeclature. In Ohio, "Swamp Oak" is > Pin Oak. In general, if you refer to "Swamp Oak", you are talking Pin > Oak. Now there is a "Swamp Chestnut Oak" and a "Swamp Post Oak", and > you can find all three named as I have in the same taxonomic key. > Overcup Oak is the swamp post oak. It is as incorrect as calling New > York York. York and New York are in fact differnt cities, and swamp > post oak and swamp oak are different species of flowering plants. When you try to use long words like "redundancies" . . .well, you get the picture, but a dictionary or spell checker would help. If you wanted Ohio nomenclature, then you should have been more specific. I took your question as colloquially as it was asked. Nice try at splitting hairs, but you are really stretching it here. > > > > > > > > > Especially if your government seems hell bent on invading most of them. > > > > > > > > > Wow! What a hypocrit! Firstly, to consider Liverpool and Munster > > > population centers! Pretty Eurocentric. I guess we need to look at > > > great population centers like Nashville and Omaha while we are at it! > > > > I should say that Liverpool has had no little influence on our world, > > first as the center for the British slave trade to the US, then as the > > great UK seaport for transatlantic liners, and then as the center of the > > pop music revolution in the 1960s. Not to mention five European Cups. > > Nashville and Omaha's influence on the world is . . .? (But I can > > certainly pinpoint both on a map of the world). > > > > > Talk music and Nashville has it all over Liverpool. The pop music > revolution you refer to is the introduction and popularization of a > form of American blues music ("rock and roll") in the UK. Big whoop. I > have some stuff by a guy from New Orleans called Slim Harpo, and it > sounds a lot like The Rolling Stones. Steal the musical ideas from some > guy in New Orleans and play it in Liverpool and that's a musical > revolution? As to being the center of a conspiracy whereby English > people go to foreign countries and kidnap the people there to work as > slaves on their carribean sugar plantations...well that's pretty > dastardly. The most dastardly aspect of US cultre was inherited from > the English, and we still live with it's after effects today. Make sure > you teach that! Are the English planning to make any reparations to the > families involed? There is a movement here for such reparations in the > US, from the US government, but it was in fact the English who > kidnapped these people in the first place. Crimes against humanity > anyone? You think? Well, if your taste runs to over-sequined cowboys rehashing Irish traditional tunes, then so be it. And American blues had nothing to do with Nashville. So once again we try to move the goal posts to shore up a fading argument. Should you trouble to read what was written it says that Liverpool was "the center of the pop music revolution of the 1960s", that's all. Want to argue with that? On current form, I'm sure you can try to twist some taxonomy to wriggle out of it. And you new found concern for the victims of the slave trade is truly touching. While you are at it, are you proposing to make reparations too to the Irish (and some English) who, as indentured servants in the South, were no better off than the slaves? I thought not. Oh, and how about the poor old Native Americans? Best not get too involved in that one - it's still a rather sore point. > > I'm sure the people of Omaha and Nashville are as proud of their cities > as you are of Liverpool; doesn't make them any better or worse than > Liverpool...although I have always wondered what the heck a Liver pool > is anyways. Sounds rather disgusting to me. Not, but the discussion here was not about their quality of life of the devotion of their inhabitants, it was about their influence on world history. Please try to stay focussed. William Clark       Date: 03 Oct 2006 14:11:13 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Howard Brazee wrote: > Of course Bessie Smith stared in the 1929 film _S. Louis Blues_, so > popular culture didn't entirely ignore the blues until the 1960s. A telling silly thing was some loser insisting that he ain't going hear of no "boogie woogie" being lain on him, the self proclaimed king of rock and roll! Pronounced it boogee woogee, of course, to drive home the ignorance! Rock and roll is, of course, a style of "boogee woogee" music. The cariacature he was supposedly lampooning was actually correct! Chuck Berry, Fats Domino and Little Richard were all popular throughout the era. If anything the UK acts took the spotlight away from them, and made rock and roll much more modal that it was in it's original form...except for the Rolling Stones! I'm not a big fan of the Rolling Stones, FWIW.       Date: 01 Oct 2006 19:06:32 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: snippit... Some self proclaimed expert on American music you are if you can't see the intermingling at the roots of country and western music and the blues. Not that I made any claim about Nashville and the blues, only that Nashville is far more important to music in general than Liverpool. If this great musical revolution in Liverpool was nothing other than British bands playing American music (Rock and Roll), what was it? Rock and Roll is without any question whatsoever derived from the blues. It was the Brits who let the Irish starve when their little potato plots failed despite all the food you could ever want in Ireland because the Brits had to have that food! How about reparations for that?! If it weren't for that, there would not have been many Irish in the US...and the despicable system of indentured servitude that was used to de facto enslave Irish is another great gift to us from the Brits anyways. So was sharecropping. Rue Britannia! You really don't want to get into genocides against native populations in areas where the Brits found primitive cultures........far worse than anything any Americans did to Native Americans.         Date: 06 Oct 2006 14:54:41 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup The_Professor wrote: >> I've always wondered about the role of the Harp based Irish music and > the more traditional N. European stlye we associate with things like > bluegrass. My ancestors were Normans. The original Hamilton was a capo > for a Norman warmonger named Robert the Bruce, who double crossed some > Edward or another and took northern Britain for himself. Fascinating. Robert the Bruce and King Edward were great characters and behind those names is a fantastic drama - which the famous William Wallace (Braveheart) was a part of. I have travelled Ireland wide and far, mainly visiting historical sites and ancient monuments, but really I don=B4t know much about Irish music (except my former comment on it, which hardly is worth much). > In any event, Britain has been dominated by > Normans and their ancestors for almost 100 years now. They came over > from northen France to England, as we all know! Not that they > originated in northern France. In any event, WASPs never really existed > in England, as they were catholics when they got booted by the Normans, > and the ruling classes in Englnad have been all Norman ever since. > Yes, the Normans conquered England in 1066, and they originally came from Denk, not Norway as some textbooks state. A wonderful, powerful and adventurous race if there ever was one. Some of them went to Italy, they were outstanding in the crusades and as we know they spearheaded the colonization of America. F         Date: 06 Oct 2006 14:40:15 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup The_Professor wrote: > Fairway wrote: > > The_Professor wrote: > > > > IMHO, tradional Irish music has a lot more to it than what I hear in > > > bluegrass, and Altan is no different in this respect, at least as a > > > first impression on me. > > And traditional Irish music is in fact borrowed from the French, they > > say, so accordingly "bluegrass" should be "pelouse bleu". F > > I've always wondered about the role of the Harp based Irish music and > the more traditional N. European stlye we associate with things like > bluegrass. My ancestors were Normans. The original Hamilton was a capo > for a Norman warmonger named Robert the Bruce, who double crossed some > Edward or another and took northern Britain for himself. He also > started the long tradition of invading Ireland. The next Ted along the > line took northern Britain back from Bobbies son, Bob II, but that is > more than we need to know! In any event, Britain has been dominated by > Normans and their ancestors for almost ***1000*** years now. They came over > from northen France to England, as we all know! Not that they > originated in northern France. In any event, WASPs never really existed > in England, as they were catholics when they got booted by the Normans, > and the ruling classes in Englnad have been all Norman ever since. > > Anyhoo, I wonder if that more modal style we associated with > traditional English, Scottish and music from Brittany isn't really the > music Normas played, while the harp based stuff isn't the real gaelic > music?         Date: 01 Oct 2006 15:32:00 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <45200FEA.85D192F1@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > snippit... > > Some self proclaimed expert on American music you are if you can't see the > intermingling at the roots of country and western music and the blues. Not > that I > made any claim about Nashville and the blues, only that Nashville is far more > important to music in general than Liverpool. If this great musical > revolution in > Liverpool was nothing other than British bands playing American music (Rock > and > Roll), what was it? Rock and Roll is without any question whatsoever derived > from > the blues. Again, you just don't want to listen, do you? Of course country (mostly derived, of course, from Irish roots) mixes with the blues from the Delta and later urban roots, but this is the Usenet, and I am not about to write 200 pages just because you feel compelled to nitpick. Once again, although I see you have conveniently snipped it, what I actually said was that Liverpool was "the center of the pop music revolution of the 1960s", a claim that I think even you would be hard put to deny (although I'm sure you will try). Nothing about influences, nothing about anything else, save the importance of the place in the history of modern music. You are the one that seems to want to extrapolate this to taking over the entire civilized world. > It was the Brits who let the Irish starve when their little potato plots > failed > despite all the food you could ever want in Ireland because the Brits had to > have > that food! How about reparations for that?! If it weren't for that, there > would not > have been many Irish in the US...and the despicable system of indentured > servitude > that was used to de facto enslave Irish is another great gift to us from the > Brits > anyways. So was sharecropping. Rue Britannia! You really don't want to get > into > genocides against native populations in areas where the Brits found primitive > cultures........far worse than anything any Americans did to Native > Americans. Being of Irish descent I have no brief for Trevelyan and company. My point is that when it comes to pointing fingers at nations for injustices, there are precious few countries that can do so without being guilty of hypocrisy. Unlike you, I have no problem coming to terms with that, but the anti-British chip on your shoulder seems to be weighting you down some. And I am not sure that you can substantiate your claim about America's treatment of native Americans - have you ever spent time on a reservation? Hmmmm. William Clark           Date: 02 Oct 2006 02:13:02 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: I'm not anti British at all. If you were an American and tried to tell me that Nashville was somehow one of the great cities of the world I would also question it. There is nothing "greater" about Britian, or Ireland (where my family is from), and my great grandfather was in fact a clerk...but he was a Hamilton, not a Clark! You want to run down the US, I will also question that, as I would if you ran down Britain...or Ireland...or Norway for that matter. Americans don't owe anybody anything for being who they are. If you don't like them, leave them alone. They can do quite well without you, no matter who you are! If you do the research, you will find American Country music originated in sw Louisiana and eastern Texas. Early Cajun music is virtually indistinguishable from early country, although the Cajun music pre-dates the Country music. Country music shares a lot with the blues, and is obvious on form alone. Regardless of where string bends, slides, hammer ons and the rest on guitar originated, they characterize country music and the blues and not any other form of music. Blues, Jazz, Country, Cajun, Rock and Roll all originated in the area from east Texas to the Mississippi delta. MHO of course, but I am more of a music officionato than anything else, and will never miss any sort of presentation on the origin and nature of music. I can't see how anyone can research the issue and come to a different conclusion though...but if you do it's no skin off my nose!             Date: 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <452073DF.B8F3E828@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > I'm not anti British at all. If you were an American and tried to tell me > that > Nashville was somehow one of the great cities of the world I would also > question > it. There is nothing "greater" about Britian, or Ireland (where my family is > from), > and my great grandfather was in fact a clerk...but he was a Hamilton, not a > Clark! > You want to run down the US, I will also question that, as I would if you ran > down > Britain...or Ireland...or Norway for that matter. Americans don't owe anybody > anything for being who they are. If you don't like them, leave them alone. > They can > do quite well without you, no matter who you are! I have no desire to "run down" the US - far from it. My wish is to make it better, but the current move towards burying the national head in the sand, and generating enemies daily is not a wise course for the future. I have nowhere claimed Britain to be "great"; this all started because you took umbrage at the very notion that Americans should be a little educated about other areas and places that have influenced their lives. And, in the 1960s, it is indisputable that "British Invasion" that touched the lives of all baby boomers was spearheaded by groups from Liverpool. I could care less if they were playing "Molly Malone" - the point is they were on the charts, on the radio, and on TV. That's all. > > If you do the research, you will find American Country music originated in sw > Louisiana and eastern Texas. Early Cajun music is virtually indistinguishable > from > early country, although the Cajun music pre-dates the Country music. Country > music > shares a lot with the blues, and is obvious on form alone. Regardless of > where > string bends, slides, hammer ons and the rest on guitar originated, they > characterize country music and the blues and not any other form of music. > Blues, > Jazz, Country, Cajun, Rock and Roll all originated in the area from east > Texas to > the Mississippi delta. MHO of course, but I am more of a music officionato > than > anything else, and will never miss any sort of presentation on the origin and > nature of music. I can't see how anyone can research the issue and come to a > different conclusion though...but if you do it's no skin off my nose! Fine, so in spite of the fact that over one third of the immigrants to the US between 1820 and 1860, and almost half of all immigrants in the 1840s came from Ireland, the music they brought with them had no influence on the "popular" music of the time? OK, whatever. And there were no cross influences in the development of the various genres. Oh, my. William Clark               Date: 02 Oct 2006 22:46:51 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >Fine, so in spite of the fact that over one third of the immigrants to >the US between 1820 and 1860, and almost half of all immigrants in the >1840s came from Ireland, the music they brought with them had no >influence on the "popular" music of the time? OK, whatever. And there >were no cross influences in the development of the various genres. Oh, >my. Anyone who can't hear the similarities between bluegrass and traditional Irish music has to be deaf. Bluegrass has some other influences, but it's roots come mostly from the Scotch/Irish immigrants to the US. They were born in Ireland, but were the descendents of Presbyterian stock that came to Ireland from Scotland. They were referred to as crackers by the English, meaning boisterous braggarts. The term still lives on.                 Date: 03 Oct 2006 06:41:18 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <ifi3i21tn1nfa3lg7vptjf22g67gsotlkd@4ax.com >, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote: > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > >Fine, so in spite of the fact that over one third of the immigrants to > >the US between 1820 and 1860, and almost half of all immigrants in the > >1840s came from Ireland, the music they brought with them had no > >influence on the "popular" music of the time? OK, whatever. And there > >were no cross influences in the development of the various genres. Oh, > >my. > > Anyone who can't hear the similarities between bluegrass and > traditional Irish music has to be deaf. Bluegrass has some other > influences, but it's roots come mostly from the Scotch/Irish > immigrants to the US. They were born in Ireland, but were the > descendents of Presbyterian stock that came to Ireland from Scotland. > They were referred to as crackers by the English, meaning boisterous > braggarts. The term still lives on. My point exactly. William Clark               Date: 02 Oct 2006 22:24:22 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >And, in the 1960s, it is indisputable that "British Invasion" that >touched the lives of all baby boomers was spearheaded by groups from >Liverpool. I could care less if they were playing "Molly Malone" - the >point is they were on the charts, on the radio, and on TV. That's all. To get to a more pleasant topic, rock and roll was already in decline in the US for a few years until the Brits saved the day. The big groups in the US were the Four Seasons and the Beach Boys. Motown was probably the best stuff the US was producing. Elvis was gone in the Army, Jerry Lee was disgraced when he ried his 14 year-old cousin. Chuck Berry was in the same boat for a different reason; he got locked up. Buddy Holly and Eddie Cochran were dead. Alan Freed was banned from the airwaves in the payola scandal. All of this happened before 1960. Some of the conspiracy people around here should look into this one. Was there a CIA plot to kill rock and roll? Beatle music hit the US in the late summer of 1963 and it was a lot better than what was being produced in the US with the exception of some of the stuff coming from Motown, which was as good as any of the early Beatle music. The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues.                 Date: 02 Oct 2006 19:38:04 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: (snip) > The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please Dave                   Date: 03 Oct 2006 06:43:21 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <42kUg.105$Wu2.38@newsfe04.lga >, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > (snip) > > The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. > > as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this > statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats > before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the > pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please > Dave So were a number of us, but the fact is that it was groups like the Beatles and Rolling Stones, with their open admiration for the likes of Chuck Berry and Muddy Waters, etc., that brought this music into the mainstream of pop music. William Clark                   Date: 02 Oct 2006 23:01:01 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:38:04 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: >Jack Hollis wrote: >(snip) >> The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. > >as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this >statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats >before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the >pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please >Dave No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong.                     Date: 03 Oct 2006 06:59:54 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:38:04 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > >> Jack Hollis wrote: >> (snip) >>> The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. >> as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this >> statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats >> before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the >> pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please >> Dave > > > No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into > the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. > However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of > white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot > of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This > is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever > was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no > "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong. and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :)                       Date: 03 Oct 2006 11:47:22 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 06:59:54 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: >John Mayall proved them wrong. > >and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the >Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) Clapton played on that classic Bluesbraker album with John Mayall before he played in Cream. Of course, the Stones had a number of blues songs. Another English blues man was Jeff Beck. The US also had some blues players like Paul Butterfield, Johnny Winter and Canned Heat, but their popularity came after the English groups "introduced" the sound to white America. There were a few early American rock and roll bands that played the blues like Booker T. and the MGs and who can forget the classic Muleskinner Blues hit that Jimmy Rogers has in the 50s.                         Date: 03 Oct 2006 10:44:14 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 06:59:54 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > >> John Mayall proved them wrong. >> >> and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the >> Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) > > Clapton played on that classic Bluesbraker album with John Mayall > before he played in Cream. Of course, the Stones had a number of > blues songs. Another English blues man was Jeff Beck. > > The US also had some blues players like Paul Butterfield, Johnny > Winter and Canned Heat, but their popularity came after the English > groups "introduced" the sound to white America. > > There were a few early American rock and roll bands that played the > blues like Booker T. and the MGs and who can forget the classic > Muleskinner Blues hit that Jimmy Rogers has in the 50s. Paul Butterfield = best guitar player I ever heard. I first saw the Paul Butterfield Blues Band at Provo park near UC Berkeley in '67 or '68 when there were free Sunday afternoon concerts there. Also playing there at times: Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane, Country Joe & the Fish, Creedence Clearwater Revival (John Fogerty lived a block over from me in El Cerrito, CA). Good times there back in the day :) Provo Park was not it's real name. It was officially Civic Park, then changed to tin Luther King Jr. Park in '83 http://tinyurl.com/rqz7y Dave long live the Blues!                           Date: 03 Oct 2006 16:38:34 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:44:14 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: >Paul Butterfield = best guitar player I ever heard. More likely you're talking about Mike Bloomfield, who was the lead guitarist of the band. No doubt about it, Bloomfield was one of the best of all time. If you look at lists of the best rock guitarists Bloomfield seldom appears, but he belongs up there with Hendrix, Clapton and Stevie Ray.                             Date: 03 Oct 2006 14:28:02 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:44:14 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > >> Paul Butterfield = best guitar player I ever heard. > > More likely you're talking about Mike Bloomfield, who was the lead > guitarist of the band. No doubt about it, Bloomfield was one of the > best of all time. > > If you look at lists of the best rock guitarists Bloomfield seldom > appears, but he belongs up there with Hendrix, Clapton and Stevie Ray. correct you are, sorry for the brain fart...must be the '60's drugs ;)                               Date: 03 Oct 2006 19:59:07 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 14:28:02 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: >Jack Hollis wrote: >> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:44:14 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Paul Butterfield = best guitar player I ever heard. >> >> More likely you're talking about Mike Bloomfield, who was the lead >> guitarist of the band. No doubt about it, Bloomfield was one of the >> best of all time. >> >> If you look at lists of the best rock guitarists Bloomfield seldom >> appears, but he belongs up there with Hendrix, Clapton and Stevie Ray. > >correct you are, sorry for the brain fart...must be the '60's drugs ;) It's fresh in my mind because I've been listening to BBB recently. Bloomfield's work on the 1966 East-West Live album is the prototype for all the psychedelic guitars that came after it. I'm sure that Bloomfield had heard Sandy Bull, who originated the "guitar raga," but what Bloomfield did was so much better. Tell all the sailors at sea that the smoking lamp is lit.                                 Date: 03 Oct 2006 20:48:20 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 14:28:02 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > >> Jack Hollis wrote: >>> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:44:14 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Paul Butterfield = best guitar player I ever heard. >>> More likely you're talking about Mike Bloomfield, who was the lead >>> guitarist of the band. No doubt about it, Bloomfield was one of the >>> best of all time. >>> >>> If you look at lists of the best rock guitarists Bloomfield seldom >>> appears, but he belongs up there with Hendrix, Clapton and Stevie Ray. >> correct you are, sorry for the brain fart...must be the '60's drugs ;) > > > It's fresh in my mind because I've been listening to BBB recently. > Bloomfield's work on the 1966 East-West Live album is the prototype > for all the psychedelic guitars that came after it. I'm sure that > Bloomfield had heard Sandy Bull, who originated the "guitar raga," but > what Bloomfield did was so much better. > > Tell all the sailors at sea that the smoking lamp is lit. Sandy Bull! Now there's a name from the past. Guitar in a different octave universe, if that's the correct musical term for being "out there" :) Paul Butterfield, The Elektra Years "Work Song" or Al Kooper and Mike Bloomfield's "Really" from the Super Session album. On my iPod today and great to play golf to!! Dave long live the Blues!                                   Date: 04 Oct 2006 14:29:51 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:48:20 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: >Sandy Bull! Now there's a name from the past. Guitar in a different >octave universe, if that's the correct musical term for being "out there" :) Sandy Bull was out there to be sure. However, despite the fact that he's a virtual unknown, he's been very influential if for no other reason than he was into Classical Indian music before everyone else. The basic formula in 1963 when he recorded "Fantasias For Guitar And Banjo" was the 2 minute song. It took a few years, but eventually all the rock bands were doing what Sandy Bull had done with his "guitar raga." What Mike Bloomfield and the BBB did in 1967 was to take what Sandy Bull did and make it more "commercial." I don't mean that in a negative way. For the average rock music fan, Mike Bloomfield's "guitar ragas" were much easier to relate to than Sandy Bull's work. Of course, the fact that there was a lot of LSD going around by then also helped.                                     Date: 04 Oct 2006 18:05:14 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:48:20 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > >> Sandy Bull! Now there's a name from the past. Guitar in a different >> octave universe, if that's the correct musical term for being "out there" :) > > Sandy Bull was out there to be sure. However, despite the fact that > he's a virtual unknown, he's been very influential if for no other > reason than he was into Classical Indian music before everyone else. > The basic formula in 1963 when he recorded "Fantasias For Guitar And > Banjo" was the 2 minute song. It took a few years, but eventually all > the rock bands were doing what Sandy Bull had done with his "guitar > raga." > > What Mike Bloomfield and the BBB did in 1967 was to take what Sandy > Bull did and make it more "commercial." I don't mean that in a > negative way. For the average rock music fan, Mike Bloomfield's > "guitar ragas" were much easier to relate to than Sandy Bull's work. > Of course, the fact that there was a lot of LSD going around by then > also helped. LSD and Sandy Bull, a perfect mix :) not that I'd ever do such a thing... Dave                                       Date: 05 Oct 2006 00:27:57 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 18:05:14 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: >> What Mike Bloomfield and the BBB did in 1967 was to take what Sandy >> Bull did and make it more "commercial." I don't mean that in a >> negative way. For the average rock music fan, Mike Bloomfield's >> "guitar ragas" were much easier to relate to than Sandy Bull's work. >> Of course, the fact that there was a lot of LSD going around by then >> also helped. > >LSD and Sandy Bull, a perfect mix :) > >not that I'd ever do such a thing... >Dave I was turned on to Sandy Bull by a Dutch guy that I knew when I lived in Amsterdam in the early 70s. That was after my "acid period" so I never listened to him while tripping. I still listen to his music.                                         Date: 05 Oct 2006 07:54:42 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 18:05:14 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > >>> What Mike Bloomfield and the BBB did in 1967 was to take what Sandy >>> Bull did and make it more "commercial." I don't mean that in a >>> negative way. For the average rock music fan, Mike Bloomfield's >>> "guitar ragas" were much easier to relate to than Sandy Bull's work. >>> Of course, the fact that there was a lot of LSD going around by then >>> also helped. >> LSD and Sandy Bull, a perfect mix :) >> >> not that I'd ever do such a thing... >> Dave > > > I was turned on to Sandy Bull by a Dutch guy that I knew when I lived > in Amsterdam in the early 70s. That was after my "acid period" so I > never listened to him while tripping. I still listen to his music. you probably didn't need acid in Amsterdam in the early '70s :)                           Date: 03 Oct 2006 16:07:15 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <QjxUg.14$572.12@newsfe07.lga >, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 06:59:54 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > > wrote: > > > >> John Mayall proved them wrong. > >> > >> and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the > >> Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) > > > > Clapton played on that classic Bluesbraker album with John Mayall > > before he played in Cream. Of course, the Stones had a number of > > blues songs. Another English blues man was Jeff Beck. > > > > The US also had some blues players like Paul Butterfield, Johnny > > Winter and Canned Heat, but their popularity came after the English > > groups "introduced" the sound to white America. > > > > There were a few early American rock and roll bands that played the > > blues like Booker T. and the MGs and who can forget the classic > > Muleskinner Blues hit that Jimmy Rogers has in the 50s. > > Paul Butterfield = best guitar player I ever heard. I first saw the Paul > Butterfield Blues Band at Provo park near UC Berkeley in '67 or '68 when > there were free Sunday afternoon concerts there. Also playing there at > times: Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane, Country Joe & the Fish, > Creedence Clearwater Revival (John Fogerty lived a block over from me in > El Cerrito, CA). Good times there back in the day :) > > Provo Park was not it's real name. It was officially Civic Park, then > changed to tin Luther King Jr. Park in '83 > http://tinyurl.com/rqz7y > Dave > long live the Blues! Yep, somehow Good Charlotte and 'N Sync don't have the same magnetism. I took my then six year old daughter to see the Rolling Stones live in Ohio Stadium some years back. Seat twenty yards from the stage and right beside the little club stage they play a set from. Magic! William Clark                         Date: 03 Oct 2006 13:04:33 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <n905i2p0pigmai0iucdh3ai1pa3f4bvglp@4ax.com >, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 06:59:54 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > wrote: > > >John Mayall proved them wrong. > > > >and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the > >Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) > > Clapton played on that classic Bluesbraker album with John Mayall > before he played in Cream. Of course, the Stones had a number of > blues songs. Another English blues man was Jeff Beck. > > The US also had some blues players like Paul Butterfield, Johnny > Winter and Canned Heat, but their popularity came after the English > groups "introduced" the sound to white America. > > There were a few early American rock and roll bands that played the > blues like Booker T. and the MGs and who can forget the classic > Muleskinner Blues hit that Jimmy Rogers has in the 50s. That's right - most of the blues/R&B artists that were popular in the UK at that time (Berry, SB Williamson, Muddy Waters, BB King, John Lee Hooker, Little Richard, etc.) were not in favour in the US. You are quite correct that the "British Invasion" brought them back to the attention of the American public. William Clark                         Date: 03 Oct 2006 10:02:13 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Of course Bessie Smith stared in the 1929 film _S. Louis Blues_, so popular culture didn't entirely ignore the blues until the 1960s.                           Date: 03 Oct 2006 13:47:10 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:02:13 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net > wrote: >Of course Bessie Smith stared in the 1929 film _S. Louis Blues_, so >popular culture didn't entirely ignore the blues until the 1960s. Many of the big bands, like the Dorsey Brothers and Benny Goodman played blues songs in the 30s and 40s. Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong did a lot of blues numbers as well and they were popular with white audiences. However, after WW2, the blues was all but dead in the US as far as white audiences were concerned because the big bands were also all but dead. A lot of early black rock artists like Fats Domino and Chuck Berry, came from the blues tradition, but they abandoned it in favor of rock and roll. So in a sense, the English blues-rock players revived the white interest in the blues.                           Date: 03 Oct 2006 13:06:21 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <b925i2ddf3s9rg0o68e6nhu5svrkga68rb@4ax.com >, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net > wrote: > Of course Bessie Smith stared in the 1929 film _S. Louis Blues_, so > popular culture didn't entirely ignore the blues until the 1960s. Quite, but the same religiosity that nailed Elvis for swivelling his hips really came into play in popular music in the 1950's and '60's, and sunk most of these guys with "interesting" pasts. William Clark                       Date: 03 Oct 2006 10:46:10 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <i1uUg.4$J01.2@newsfe04.lga >, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:38:04 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Jack Hollis wrote: > >> (snip) > >>> The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. > >> as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this > >> statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats > >> before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the > >> pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please > >> Dave > > > > > > No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into > > the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. > > However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of > > white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot > > of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This > > is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever > > was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no > > "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong. > > and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the > Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) I used to see Eric Clapton every Saturday at the Star Hotel in Thornton Heath, playing R&B with the Yardbirds (plus Sonny Boy Williamson and sundry other American R&B/blues artists). Also on his way to art school at the local station. Then with John Mayall at the student union, and then with Cream, and so on. Now he has a house a mile from me in Dublin, Ohio - her ried a Columbus girl. Strange how things come full circle. William Clark                         Date: 03 Oct 2006 11:07:08 From: John van der Pflum Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:46:10 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: >In article <i1uUg.4$J01.2@newsfe04.lga>, > long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> wrote: > >> Jack Hollis wrote: >> > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:38:04 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Jack Hollis wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >>> The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. >> >> as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this >> >> statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats >> >> before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the >> >> pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please >> >> Dave >> > >> > >> > No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into >> > the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. >> > However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of >> > white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot >> > of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This >> > is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever >> > was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no >> > "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong. >> >> and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the >> Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) > >I used to see Eric Clapton every Saturday at the Star Hotel in Thornton >Heath, playing R&B with the Yardbirds (plus Sonny Boy Williamson and >sundry other American R&B/blues artists). Also on his way to art school >at the local station. Then with John Mayall at the student union, and >then with Cream, and so on. > >Now he has a house a mile from me in Dublin, Ohio - her ried a >Columbus girl. > >Strange how things come full circle. > >William Clark Hmmm, I thought I saw him last night at the Carraba's restaurant near my house in Cincinnati. Hey William -- If you live in Dublin, Ohio how come you have never come to an RSG Cincinnati or Columbus?!?!?!?! -- jvdp Myke Plough-in-skee is not mentioned in this thread. http://www.rsgcincinnati.com/files/OH_2006_make_a_putt.avi http://www.rsgcincinnati.com                           Date: 03 Oct 2006 13:02:23 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <23v4i29rk384tv7rsqi583k3iqgosm37hn@4ax.com >, John van der Pflum <jpflumjr@ughookugh.com > wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 10:46:10 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote: > > >In article <i1uUg.4$J01.2@newsfe04.lga>, > > long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> wrote: > > > >> Jack Hollis wrote: > >> > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:38:04 -0700, long&left <nospam@diespammers.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Jack Hollis wrote: > >> >> (snip) > >> >>> The Brits also get credit for introducing white America to the blues. > >> >> as a long time blues aficionado, I'd like your explanation of this > >> >> statement. I was listening to T Bone Walker and many other blues greats > >> >> before '60, long before I ever heard any music from across the > >> >> pond...I'm white, and I'm American so 'splain please > >> >> Dave > >> > > >> > > >> > No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into > >> > the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. > >> > However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of > >> > white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot > >> > of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This > >> > is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever > >> > was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no > >> > "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong. > >> > >> and then Eric Clapton, who I saw live with Cream in '67 (IIRC) at the > >> Fillmore. Those are blurry times for me :) > > > >I used to see Eric Clapton every Saturday at the Star Hotel in Thornton > >Heath, playing R&B with the Yardbirds (plus Sonny Boy Williamson and > >sundry other American R&B/blues artists). Also on his way to art school > >at the local station. Then with John Mayall at the student union, and > >then with Cream, and so on. > > > >Now he has a house a mile from me in Dublin, Ohio - her ried a > >Columbus girl. > > > >Strange how things come full circle. > > > >William Clark > > Hmmm, I thought I saw him last night at the Carraba's restaurant near > my house in Cincinnati. > > Hey William -- If you live in Dublin, Ohio how come you have never > come to an RSG Cincinnati or Columbus?!?!?!?! I'd love to, but I have Ohio State football season tickets, a daughter in a high school ching band, and a friend's son playing for the Browns. Weekends in the fall are pretty much obliterated! William Clark                             Date: 03 Oct 2006 14:35:21 From: John van der Pflum Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 13:02:23 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: >> Hmmm, I thought I saw him last night at the Carraba's restaurant near >> my house in Cincinnati. >> >> Hey William -- If you live in Dublin, Ohio how come you have never >> come to an RSG Cincinnati or Columbus?!?!?!?! > >I'd love to, but I have Ohio State football season tickets, a daughter >in a high school ching band, and a friend's son playing for the >Browns. Weekends in the fall are pretty much obliterated! > >William Clark Well, RSG Cincy is held in July........ No football to worry about then. -- jvdp Myke Plough-in-skee is not mentioned in this thread. http://www.rsgcincinnati.com/files/OH_2006_make_a_putt.avi http://www.rsgcincinnati.com                               Date: 03 Oct 2006 16:02:55 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <q9b5i25kqp5ghg411vcudktee64f4gljae@4ax.com >, John van der Pflum <jpflumjr@ughookugh.com > wrote: > On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 13:02:23 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote: > > > >> Hmmm, I thought I saw him last night at the Carraba's restaurant near > >> my house in Cincinnati. > >> > >> Hey William -- If you live in Dublin, Ohio how come you have never > >> come to an RSG Cincinnati or Columbus?!?!?!?! > > > >I'd love to, but I have Ohio State football season tickets, a daughter > >in a high school ching band, and a friend's son playing for the > >Browns. Weekends in the fall are pretty much obliterated! > > > >William Clark > > Well, RSG Cincy is held in July........ No football to worry about > then. I will keep that in mind. Better practice some first, however! William Clark                                 Date: 04 Oct 2006 08:15:09 From: John van der Pflum Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:02:55 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: >In article <q9b5i25kqp5ghg411vcudktee64f4gljae@4ax.com>, > John van der Pflum <jpflumjr@ughookugh.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 13:02:23 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" >> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hmmm, I thought I saw him last night at the Carraba's restaurant near >> >> my house in Cincinnati. >> >> >> >> Hey William -- If you live in Dublin, Ohio how come you have never >> >> come to an RSG Cincinnati or Columbus?!?!?!?! >> > >> >I'd love to, but I have Ohio State football season tickets, a daughter >> >in a high school ching band, and a friend's son playing for the >> >Browns. Weekends in the fall are pretty much obliterated! >> > >> >William Clark >> >> Well, RSG Cincy is held in July........ No football to worry about >> then. > >I will keep that in mind. Better practice some first, however! > >William Clark You've got plenty of time. :-) -- jvdp Myke Plough-in-skee is not mentioned in this thread. http://www.rsgcincinnati.com/files/OH_2006_make_a_putt.avi http://www.rsgcincinnati.com               Date: 02 Oct 2006 22:01:29 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >I have no desire to "run down" the US - far from it. My wish is to make >it better, but the current move towards burying the national head in the >sand, and generating enemies daily is not a wise course for the future. This line of reasoning has been around for years. Think back to the Reagan years when he wanted to deploy mid-range missiles in Europe to counter the Soviet SS-20 mid range missiles. There were demonstrations all over Europe denouncing the US as a warmonger. Everyone on the left was supporting the nuclear freeze treaty offered by the Soviets. The demonstrations were not only in Europe. The streets were full in the US. There was a demonstration in Central Park in the hundreds of thousands demonstrating in favor of the nuclear freeze treaty. I don't question the good intentions of many of these people, but they were wrong. Just think of the possibility that the left is wrong again.                 Date: 02 Oct 2006 22:30:27 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <t2g3i25naqvs9e7fus5au0n0d30v9gvgfg@4ax.com >, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote: > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > >I have no desire to "run down" the US - far from it. My wish is to make > >it better, but the current move towards burying the national head in the > >sand, and generating enemies daily is not a wise course for the future. > > > This line of reasoning has been around for years. Think back to the > Reagan years when he wanted to deploy mid-range missiles in Europe to > counter the Soviet SS-20 mid range missiles. There were > demonstrations all over Europe denouncing the US as a warmonger. > Everyone on the left was supporting the nuclear freeze treaty offered > by the Soviets. The demonstrations were not only in Europe. The > streets were full in the US. There was a demonstration in Central Park > in the hundreds of thousands demonstrating in favor of the nuclear > freeze treaty. You've got the two confused here. The nuclear freeze was no more nukes - there were more than enough already on both sides to turn us all to ash. Besides, a peaceful standoff is a totally different proposition from an ill-conceived war that is is getting us more and more long-term enemies every day. > > I don't question the good intentions of many of these people, but they > were wrong. > > Just think of the possibility that the left is wrong again. I don't think it was wrong in the first place. There is no evidence that history would have turned out any differently. William Clark   Date: 29 Sep 2006 08:11:12 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup X-No-Archive: yes William A. T. Clark wrote: > In article <451C8B27.32EB6AD4@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > wrote: > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > In article <451C3DDA.88E029EF@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to > > > > > feel > > > > > any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > > > > > it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > > > > > world's most powerful nation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are lots of things other people think you "should be" or "should > > > > know". > > > > Are > > > > you planning to conform to those, and if not, why should your students > > > > conform to > > > > such issues? Whay not show them where these places are if you think they > > > > are > > > > so > > > > important? > > > > > > Like what, for example? And for your information, 65 more students now > > > know where Liverpool and Munster are - can you k them without looking > > > it up? > > > > > > I thought not. > > > > > > William Clark > > > > Can you tell an overcup oak from a post oak without looking them up? > > > > I thought not! > > You mean a swamp oak from an iron oak? Yes, I can, as it happens, but > that is far less significant than knowing where population centers of > the world are. > > Especially if your government seems hell bent on invading most of them. Wow! What a hypocrit! Firstly, to consider Liverpool and Munster population centers! Pretty Eurocentric. I guess we need to look at great population centers like Nashville and Omaha while we are at it! To me, Post Oak and Overcup Oak are real things in nature; just as real as humans, and as such at least as significant as minor "population centers" of humans. Overcup oak is actually fairly rare, but who cares if humans need a parking lot, right? People like you are bringing the day where we will have to do more than just go to the superket for our food a lot closer, and I almost relish the day just to see the look on the faces of people like you when you try to go to the superket for some food, and there's nothing there but an angry mob worrying about what some politician thinks or said about this or that! > > William Clark     Date: 03 Oct 2006 14:19:51 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup The_Professor wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > >Fine, so in spite of the fact that over one third of the immigrants to > > >the US between 1820 and 1860, and almost half of all immigrants in the > > >1840s came from Ireland, the music they brought with them had no > > >influence on the "popular" music of the time? OK, whatever. And there > > >were no cross influences in the development of the various genres. Oh, > > >my. > > > > Anyone who can't hear the similarities between bluegrass and > > traditional Irish music has to be deaf. Bluegrass has some other > > influences, but it's roots come mostly from the Scotch/Irish > > immigrants to the US. They were born in Ireland, but were the > > descendents of Presbyterian stock that came to Ireland from Scotland. > > They were referred to as crackers by the English, meaning boisterous > > braggarts. The term still lives on. > > Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish as English, > French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different.     Date: 03 Oct 2006 14:14:36 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > >Fine, so in spite of the fact that over one third of the immigrants to > >the US between 1820 and 1860, and almost half of all immigrants in the > >1840s came from Ireland, the music they brought with them had no > >influence on the "popular" music of the time? OK, whatever. And there > >were no cross influences in the development of the various genres. Oh, > >my. > > Anyone who can't hear the similarities between bluegrass and > traditional Irish music has to be deaf. Bluegrass has some other > influences, but it's roots come mostly from the Scotch/Irish > immigrants to the US. They were born in Ireland, but were the > descendents of Presbyterian stock that came to Ireland from Scotland. > They were referred to as crackers by the English, meaning boisterous > braggarts. The term still lives on. Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different.       Date: 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159910076.505391.205610@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:02:42 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > > > >Fine, so in spite of the fact that over one third of the immigrants to > > >the US between 1820 and 1860, and almost half of all immigrants in the > > >1840s came from Ireland, the music they brought with them had no > > >influence on the "popular" music of the time? OK, whatever. And there > > >were no cross influences in the development of the various genres. Oh, > > >my. > > > > Anyone who can't hear the similarities between bluegrass and > > traditional Irish music has to be deaf. Bluegrass has some other > > influences, but it's roots come mostly from the Scotch/Irish > > immigrants to the US. They were born in Ireland, but were the > > descendents of Presbyterian stock that came to Ireland from Scotland. > > They were referred to as crackers by the English, meaning boisterous > > braggarts. The term still lives on. > > Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed > over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different > styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard > European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, > French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the plantation. It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and the music does not bear that idea out. William Clark         Date: 04 Oct 2006 14:46:35 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different >> styles of music with different origins. If you define C&W as the music of people like Jimmy Rodgers and Hank Williams, Sr,, then you are correct. Bluegrass has been around a lot longer than C&W. C&W music certainly has some influences from bluegrass, but it also has influences from folk music, blues, gospel and zydeco.         Date: 04 Oct 2006 14:09:57 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:31:01 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >> Country and Western music is not Bluegrass. Many artists have crossed >> over between the two, and lots of intermixing, but they are different >> styles of music with different origins. I hear a lot of standard >> European modal music in bluegrass. Not so much Irish and English, >> French and Scottish. Just my ears though. Others may hear different. > >Well the Irish and Scots influences are virtually indistinguishable, >since these immigrants, as Jack rightly points out, were mostly Ulster >native Irish Presbyterians of Scottish origin. Ironic that most people >associate Irish political immigrants to the US with persecuted >Catholics, but in the late 18th and early 19th century the principal >protesters against the Crown were Presbyterian descendants of the >plantation. > >It is hard to see how these influences can be so neatly separated, and >the music does not bear that idea out. > >William Clark The reason I identified the main origins of bluegrass as Irish was because the people who brought it to the US were from Ireland. The music is not totally Irish because you can also find similar music in Scotland, Wales and Brittany in France. If you want to get technical, it's Celtic music.     Date: 29 Sep 2006 14:28:55 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159542672.778400.146640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > X-No-Archive: yes > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > In article <451C8B27.32EB6AD4@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > > wrote: > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > > > In article <451C3DDA.88E029EF@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to > > > > > > feel > > > > > > any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance > > > > > > about > > > > > > it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit > > > > > > the > > > > > > world's most powerful nation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are lots of things other people think you "should be" or > > > > > "should > > > > > know". > > > > > Are > > > > > you planning to conform to those, and if not, why should your > > > > > students > > > > > conform to > > > > > such issues? Whay not show them where these places are if you think > > > > > they > > > > > are > > > > > so > > > > > important? > > > > > > > > Like what, for example? And for your information, 65 more students now > > > > know where Liverpool and Munster are - can you k them without > > > > looking > > > > it up? > > > > > > > > I thought not. > > > > > > > > William Clark > > > > > > Can you tell an overcup oak from a post oak without looking them up? > > > > > > I thought not! > > > > You mean a swamp oak from an iron oak? Yes, I can, as it happens, but > > that is far less significant than knowing where population centers of > > the world are. > > > > Especially if your government seems hell bent on invading most of them. > > > Wow! What a hypocrit! Firstly, to consider Liverpool and Munster > population centers! Pretty Eurocentric. I guess we need to look at > great population centers like Nashville and Omaha while we are at it! I should say that Liverpool has had no little influence on our world, first as the center for the British slave trade to the US, then as the great UK seaport for transatlantic liners, and then as the center of the pop music revolution in the 1960s. Not to mention five European Cups. Nashville and Omaha's influence on the world is . . .? (But I can certainly pinpoint both on a map of the world). > > To me, Post Oak and Overcup Oak are real things in nature; just as real > as humans, and as such at least as significant as minor "population > centers" of humans. Overcup oak is actually fairly rare, but who cares > if humans need a parking lot, right? Whatever, but I did know what they were, so your point then is? > > People like you are bringing the day where we will have to do more than > just go to the superket for our food a lot closer, and I almost > relish the day just to see the look on the faces of people like you > when you try to go to the superket for some food, and there's > nothing there but an angry mob worrying about what some politician > thinks or said about this or that! How the hell to you get here from there? This is just typical of the "little islander" mentality that was supposed to be the preserve of the Europeans. Extrapolate a discussion of the shortcomings of our education system to a defence of the far right. Amazing. William Clark       Date: 04 Oct 2006 15:55:29 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > A particular style of electric guitar playing was invented by Eddie > > Taylor. ...... > > "Invented"/ Hardly "invented". He evolved earlier styles into the more > familiar Hicago urban blues style, but "invented"? That's like saying > Mozart "invented" the symphony. And I wouldn't get too bent out of shape > about "upscale" clubs - they probably wouldn't let you in, anyway. OK. The presentation style where you have a lead guitar, a bass and drums, and play the blues from that, wit the all too familiar stylings, the shuffle sorta base and drums and the virtuoso lead guitar...that's what Eddie Taylor invented. Throw in a harp blower, a keyboard, a rhythm guitar, whatever, but that basic lead/bass/drums form for the blues is what Eddie Taylor invented. Came to be called rock and roll. We will never know if I would or would not get into upscale London clubs, as I can find a lot better music in the low down joints...where you would certainly get in...but whether or not you would get out could be a serious issue! > > I read prose in this thread claiming that somehow the blues scene in > > the US died and was saved by the "british invasion", which is > > ridiculous, and hence my objection. Not to take anything away from a > > lot of great british bands, but they were not needed to keep the blues > > going in the US...at all! > > Total BS. This began from the notion that it was reasonable to know > where Liverpool was on account of its influence on pop music in the > 1960s, and you veer off into this nonsense. > Liverpool's influence on British music. Fine. It is perhaps the place where Brits first started playing American style R&B. No quarrel from me on that issue! That it saved American blues and whatever else is the nonsense that was veered into! The poor, tiny town of Clarksdale MS is more important to the blues and it's derivatives than Liverpool.         Date: 04 Oct 2006 20:36:39 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1160002529.398581.39160@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > > > A particular style of electric guitar playing was invented by Eddie > > > Taylor. ...... > > > > "Invented"/ Hardly "invented". He evolved earlier styles into the more > > familiar Hicago urban blues style, but "invented"? That's like saying > > Mozart "invented" the symphony. And I wouldn't get too bent out of shape > > about "upscale" clubs - they probably wouldn't let you in, anyway. > > OK. The presentation style where you have a lead guitar, a bass and > drums, and play the blues from that, wit the all too familiar stylings, > the shuffle sorta base and drums and the virtuoso lead guitar...that's > what Eddie Taylor invented. Throw in a harp blower, a keyboard, a > rhythm guitar, whatever, but that basic lead/bass/drums form for the > blues is what Eddie Taylor invented. Came to be called rock and roll. Plus a certain special finger style of playing that was unusual for urban blues. He also had a sense of disciplined tempo that few others could match. Whether he was the first to put this kind of combo together is, I think, open to question. > > We will never know if I would or would not get into upscale London > clubs, as I can find a lot better music in the low down joints...where > you would certainly get in...but whether or not you would get out could > be a serious issue! Oh, I think after four years in Liverpool, I can handle these. I have been in quite a few in my time in the US. > > > > I read prose in this thread claiming that somehow the blues scene in > > > the US died and was saved by the "british invasion", which is > > > ridiculous, and hence my objection. Not to take anything away from a > > > lot of great british bands, but they were not needed to keep the blues > > > going in the US...at all! > > > > Total BS. This began from the notion that it was reasonable to know > > where Liverpool was on account of its influence on pop music in the > > 1960s, and you veer off into this nonsense. > > > > Liverpool's influence on British music. Fine. It is perhaps the place > where Brits first started playing American style R&B. No quarrel from > me on that issue! That it saved American blues and whatever else is the > nonsense that was veered into! The poor, tiny town of Clarksdale MS is > more important to the blues and it's derivatives than Liverpool. Again you miss the point. Actually there were lots of places in the UK in the 1960s where blues based Rock & Roll was being played. And it is Liverpool's influence on musical tastes in the US that was the discussion (after the geography question). No one ever claimed that it "saved" anything, but it certainly helped to bring back into the mainstream a number of influential artists who were out of the limelight for all but the hardcore fans. William Clark           Date: 05 Oct 2006 02:06:04 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > In article <1160002529.398581.39160@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > > > > > A particular style of electric guitar playing was invented by Eddie > > > > Taylor. ...... > > > > > > "Invented"/ Hardly "invented". He evolved earlier styles into the more > > > familiar Hicago urban blues style, but "invented"? That's like saying > > > Mozart "invented" the symphony. And I wouldn't get too bent out of shape > > > about "upscale" clubs - they probably wouldn't let you in, anyway. > > > > OK. The presentation style where you have a lead guitar, a bass and > > drums, and play the blues from that, wit the all too familiar stylings, > > the shuffle sorta base and drums and the virtuoso lead guitar...that's > > what Eddie Taylor invented. Throw in a harp blower, a keyboard, a > > rhythm guitar, whatever, but that basic lead/bass/drums form for the > > blues is what Eddie Taylor invented. Came to be called rock and roll. > > Plus a certain special finger style of playing that was unusual for > urban blues. He also had a sense of disciplined tempo that few others > could match. Whether he was the first to put this kind of combo together > is, I think, open to question. I can't recall the exact years, but Taylor came up with this stuff playing for a guy named Reed in the early 1950's.Taylor, like most of them, was a Mississippian, so I am a little biased here too! At the time, most blues was played on acoustic instruments, up to and including big bands. The idea of drums and some sort of rhythm instrument providing a foundation for a singer, guitarist, keyboard guy, whatever was invented by Taylor by all accounts. Reeds band was probably the first of the archetypical band with that sort of foundation with electric guitars. T-Bone, for example, worked mostly with big bands. I was wrong with the idea of a bass though. As I recall, Taylor played rhythm guitar for Reed, but be it a guitar, bass, keyboard, you have something providing that solid tight rhythm line as the foundation of the small group using electric guitars. It is the essence of the rock and roll style, and did not exist before Taylor, or so I am told by people I wouldn't argue with on the point. The urban blues thing is something else I don't buy. Taylor learned to play delta blues on acoustic instruments, and could play a lot of different things. These guys can/could play anything. The music is the same. Most of these guys learned their stuff playing on the front porch or in small venues in rural Mississippi. Segregating out the use of acoustic vs electric instruments as different forms of the blues has no meaning. What difference does it make if you play "Baby Please Don't Go" with an electric guitar or an acoustic guitar? It's still the same piece. While some artists prefer electric or acoustic instuments, I can't see any sort of rural/urban preference one way or the other.       Date: 04 Oct 2006 07:55:58 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > Who ever claimed that the British originated Rock and Roll? That is just > ridiculous nonsense, and you need to read a bit more carefully before > launching onto the keyboard. The entire discussion has been about US > blues/R&B artists and their influence on the British pop music of the > early 1960s, and you somehow interpret that as claiming the origins of > R&R? Wow. Good to know, however, that the entire UK pop scene was based > on Eddie Taylor - A particular style of electric guitar playing was invented by Eddie Taylor. Robert Johnson played an acoustic guitar. I'm not a big fan of "upscale clubs". I like the low down kinds of joints where you get a lot of improvisation and a lot of audience interaction and participation. I read prose in this thread claiming that somehow the blues scene in the US died and was saved by the "british invasion", which is ridiculous, and hence my objection. Not to take anything away from a lot of great british bands, but they were not needed to keep the blues going in the US...at all! The blues has never been "pop", IMHO, and that's one of the best things about it. "Pop" performers steal from the blues and work blues things into the insipid 4 part modal sewage that has been passed of as "music" for well over 100 years now, from the Christy Minstrels to Michael Jackson...not to mention Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake! The fact that Michael Jackson sold more records in a day than Luther Tucker ever sold is evidence of the nature of pop culture, and a good measure of what not to buy...so I'm listening to Luther sing a song about me and you...little bitty man.......         Date: 04 Oct 2006 13:58:29 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159973758.383731.281740@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > Who ever claimed that the British originated Rock and Roll? That is just > > ridiculous nonsense, and you need to read a bit more carefully before > > launching onto the keyboard. The entire discussion has been about US > > blues/R&B artists and their influence on the British pop music of the > > early 1960s, and you somehow interpret that as claiming the origins of > > R&R? Wow. Good to know, however, that the entire UK pop scene was based > > on Eddie Taylor - > > A particular style of electric guitar playing was invented by Eddie > Taylor. Robert Johnson played an acoustic guitar. I'm not a big fan of > "upscale clubs". I like the low down kinds of joints where you get a > lot of improvisation and a lot of audience interaction and > participation. "Invented"/ Hardly "invented". He evolved earlier styles into the more familiar Hicago urban blues style, but "invented"? That's like saying Mozart "invented" the symphony. And I wouldn't get too bent out of shape about "upscale" clubs - they probably wouldn't let you in, anyway. > > I read prose in this thread claiming that somehow the blues scene in > the US died and was saved by the "british invasion", which is > ridiculous, and hence my objection. Not to take anything away from a > lot of great british bands, but they were not needed to keep the blues > going in the US...at all! Total BS. This began from the notion that it was reasonable to know where Liverpool was on account of its influence on pop music in the 1960s, and you veer off into this nonsense. > > The blues has never been "pop", IMHO, and that's one of the best things > about it. "Pop" performers steal from the blues and work blues things > into the insipid 4 part modal sewage that has been passed of as "music" > for well over 100 years now, from the Christy Minstrels to Michael > Jackson...not to mention Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake! The fact > that Michael Jackson sold more records in a day than Luther Tucker ever > sold is evidence of the nature of pop culture, and a good measure of > what not to buy...so I'm listening to Luther sing a song about me and > you...little bitty man....... No argument with that, but those Merseyside groups of the 1960s were as far from boy bands as can be. They came from gritty, hard scrabble, backgrounds, and served long and hard apprenticeships before hitting the big time. The Beatles in Hamburg, for example. They has some kind of identification with the spirit of the blues, if from very different roots. No so for the Monkees and the other plastic gnomes now masquerading as pop stars. William Clark       Date: 03 Oct 2006 14:01:52 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into > the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. > However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of > white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot > of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This > is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever > was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no > "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong. This is a little silly. On the one hand we have claims about the impact of Elvis and Buddy Holly waning in the 1960's, and now, on the other, no blues influence until the 1970's! Your basic rock and roll is a variant of the blues, and that includes all rock and roll from the 1950's on. Elvis, for example, was rejected by the mainstrean because he played "N" music. Same for Jerry Lee Lewis. It was very popular for all americans throughout that era. The Beatles, for example, were one of the less bluesy of the UK rock acts, whereas the Rolling Stones were very bluesy; however they came in after the form became popular in the US, and copied what was being done in the US. Rock and roll was totally dominant throught the 1960's in the US. Add in that country and western music also has a strong blues influence, and it too was very popular during the 1960's. Straight blues acts like Albert King, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin and many others not so well known were also very popular in the US in the 1960's. The blues actually took a nosedive in the 1970's in the US, when you had acts like Muddy Waters sitting in a chair representing "the blues" to a lot of people. A big difference from the dynamic Muddy Waters of the 1950's. I find John Mayall to be really boring. English blues is an oxymoron to me. A lot of great music came from the UK, but not blues, IMHO anyways. My favorite blues guitarists are people like SRV, Albert Collins, Buddy Guy (he also went downhill in the '70's), Albert King and Jeff Beck. Gimmie Pinetop Perkins or Ray Charles on the piano while you are at it..and add in Little Walter or Kim Wilson on Harp! Too bad Beck got into that fusion garbage. Wasted his career IMHO. He could really play the blues as good as the best of them. Too many people still see the blues as some old guy with a dobro, which has always been a perception problem for the blues. It's why those jerks at Montreaux booed SRV, IMHO. The blues is a tad more dynamic and colorful than that, and has had a far reaching impact on American music forms including Jazz, Country and Western and Rock and Roll, as well as Cajun, Creole and Zydeco.         Date: 03 Oct 2006 20:41:38 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159909312.106413.137240@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > > No offense meant Dave. I have no doubt that some Americans were into > > the blues prior to the mid 1960s, I knew a few of them myself. > > However, blues wasn't mainstream at the time, which means that most of > > white America knew nothing about the blues. By 1970, there was a lot > > of blues music around, being played mostly by white Englishmen. This > > is one of the great paradoxes of life if you ask me. If there ever > > was a nation that has been accused of being stuffy and having no > > "soul" it's the English. John Mayall proved them wrong. > > This is a little silly. On the one hand we have claims about the impact > of Elvis and Buddy Holly waning in the 1960's, and now, on the other, > no blues influence until the 1970's! Your basic rock and roll is a > variant of the blues, and that includes all rock and roll from the > 1950's on. Elvis, for example, was rejected by the mainstrean because > he played "N" music. Same for Jerry Lee Lewis. It was very popular for > all americans throughout that era. The Beatles, for example, were one > of the less bluesy of the UK rock acts, whereas the Rolling Stones were > very bluesy; however they came in after the form became popular in the > US, and copied what was being done in the US. Rock and roll was totally > dominant throught the 1960's in the US. Add in that country and western > music also has a strong blues influence, and it too was very popular > during the 1960's. Straight blues acts like Albert King, Jimi Hendrix, > Janis Joplin and many others not so well known were also very popular > in the US in the 1960's. The blues actually took a nosedive in the > 1970's in the US, when you had acts like Muddy Waters sitting in a > chair representing "the blues" to a lot of people. A big difference > from the dynamic Muddy Waters of the 1950's. No, in the early 1960s, most of the US blues-based R&B acts could only find good gigs in the UK, where they were very popular in the clubs, playing with and alongside the Liverpool and other groups later to spearhead the influx into the US. Many of them settled there for an extended period of time, until the British Invasion brought them back into the limelight. Jimi Hendrix, for example, was a fixture at the big London clubs, and them went back to the States on the back of his big hits like "Purple Haze". Now I suppose you are gong to claim that it was Britain in the 1960s that led to the demise of Muddy Waters. Well, if you have to, then have it your own way. > > I find John Mayall to be really boring. English blues is an oxymoron to > me. A lot of great music came from the UK, but not blues, IMHO anyways. > My favorite blues guitarists are people like SRV, Albert Collins, Buddy > Guy (he also went downhill in the '70's), Albert King and Jeff Beck. > Gimmie Pinetop Perkins or Ray Charles on the piano while you are at > it..and add in Little Walter or Kim Wilson on Harp! Too bad Beck got > into that fusion garbage. Wasted his career IMHO. He could really play > the blues as good as the best of them. Well, aren't we superior? I suppose it's like Americans trying to speak English, eh? ;-) No, you clearly never saw the early Yardbirds, before Clapton left because they sold out to pop. If you want the blues, how about Elmore James, King Oliver, Scrapper Blackwell, and Sonny Terry/Brownie McGee? Beck was a sell-out, playing whatever he needed to make money. > > Too many people still see the blues as some old guy with a dobro, which > has always been a perception problem for the blues. It's why those > jerks at Montreaux booed SRV, IMHO. The blues is a tad more dynamic and > colorful than that, and has had a far reaching impact on American music > forms including Jazz, Country and Western and Rock and Roll, as well as > Cajun, Creole and Zydeco. See the list above for evidence of that. William Clark           Date: 04 Oct 2006 02:39:12 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > No, in the early 1960s, most of the US blues-based R&B acts could only > find good gigs in the UK, where they were very popular in the clubs, > playing with and alongside the Liverpool and other groups later to > spearhead the influx into the US. Many of them settled there for an > extended period of time, until the British Invasion brought them back > into the limelight. Jimi Hendrix, for example, was a fixture at the big > London clubs, and them went back to the States on the back of his big > hits like "Purple Haze". Now I suppose you are gong to claim that it was > Britain in the 1960s that led to the demise of Muddy Waters. Well, if > you have to, then have it your own way. This is really silly. When did Eddie Taylor or Albert Collins or Albert King or Muddy Waters or Jimmy Rogers or John Lee Hooker or Junior Wells or Freddie King or B.B. King or Little Walter or Luther Tucker any of the other great American blues players of the era "settle" in England? I'm sure some of them played there...maybe? They were popular in the NE US and in California, especially San Franciso, and still are. Before the "British Invasion" people like that were in fact more prominent than after. The 1960's were their heydays. If the Eric Claptons and Paul Butterfields don't acknowledge the fact that they got their basic bluesy style from Eddie Taylor, they are either ignorant or lying. There is a nice DVD of Muddy Waters. Starts off with Muddy at the Newport (Rhode Island) jazz festival and then goes on to a couple of European venues. The European concerts are almost antiseptic. The crowds look like they are minutes from rigor mortis! > > > Well, aren't we superior? I suppose it's like Americans trying to speak > English, eh? ;-) No, you clearly never saw the early Yardbirds, before > Clapton left because they sold out to pop. If you want the blues, how > about Elmore James, King Oliver, Scrapper Blackwell, and Sonny > Terry/Brownie McGee? Beck was a sell-out, playing whatever he needed to > make money. I was once a big fan of the Yardbirds. Great band. Clapton was really never that good after that, IMHO. Beck was/is the best British guitarist, IMHO. I don't see how going into fusion is a sellout. You aren't going to make money playing fusion! The tour he did with SRV was probably one of the best tours there was, and it was because Beck could hold his own with SRV (unlike Clapton, who clearly can't play to that level...just listen to some SRV for a while and then listen to some Clapton). To claim originality to the British for the Blues or Rock and Roll is silly. Both forms originated in the US, and the fact is the British Invasion made rock and roll a lot "whiter" than it had been. Not that some great music didn't come from British bands, but nothing really innovative. Not an Eddie Taylor among them. They just copied the style of people like Eddie Taylor. Why so much Eddie Taylor? I, and many others, strongly believe that Mr. Taylor was the person who invented the style of guitar playing that characterized, among other things, the progressive rock bands of the 1960's and 1970's, bands like Led Zeppelin, The Yardbirds (Cream), Pink Floyd, Dire Straits...and the development of that style shows the British contribution, for sure, but they didn't invent it. If you like music, discovering the blues is one of the best things you can do for yourself! If you don't like the blues, I feel real sorry for you, for as they say, if you don't like the blues, you got a hole in your soul!             Date: 04 Oct 2006 06:52:12 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <45231D00.23A9D45C@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > No, in the early 1960s, most of the US blues-based R&B acts could only > > find good gigs in the UK, where they were very popular in the clubs, > > playing with and alongside the Liverpool and other groups later to > > spearhead the influx into the US. Many of them settled there for an > > extended period of time, until the British Invasion brought them back > > into the limelight. Jimi Hendrix, for example, was a fixture at the big > > London clubs, and them went back to the States on the back of his big > > hits like "Purple Haze". Now I suppose you are gong to claim that it was > > Britain in the 1960s that led to the demise of Muddy Waters. Well, if > > you have to, then have it your own way. > > This is really silly. When did Eddie Taylor or Albert Collins or Albert King > or Muddy Waters or Jimmy Rogers or John Lee Hooker or Junior Wells or Freddie > King or B.B. King or Little Walter or Luther Tucker any of the other great > American blues players of the era "settle" in England? I'm sure some of them > played there...maybe? They were popular in the NE US and in California, > especially San Franciso, and still are. Before the "British Invasion" people > like that were in fact more prominent than after. The 1960's were their > heydays. If the Eric Claptons and Paul Butterfields don't acknowledge the fact > that they got their basic bluesy style from Eddie Taylor, they are either > ignorant or lying. I saw all of the above regularly in the the London clubs, and I am not talking about some backstreet dive, these were the top line London clubs that had soon-to-be world famous bands as their regulars. They were looked up to by these bands, and were major influences on their music. Oh, well, maybe I dreamed all this up just to be difficult. > > There is a nice DVD of Muddy Waters. Starts off with Muddy at the Newport > (Rhode Island) jazz festival and then goes on to a couple of European venues. > The European concerts are almost antiseptic. The crowds look like they are > minutes from rigor mortis! Oh, gosh, we judge the entire British/European scene by the contents of one DVD? How very insularly American of you. > > > > > > > Well, aren't we superior? I suppose it's like Americans trying to speak > > English, eh? ;-) No, you clearly never saw the early Yardbirds, before > > Clapton left because they sold out to pop. If you want the blues, how > > about Elmore James, King Oliver, Scrapper Blackwell, and Sonny > > Terry/Brownie McGee? Beck was a sell-out, playing whatever he needed to > > make money. > > I was once a big fan of the Yardbirds. Great band. Clapton was really never > that good after that, IMHO. Beck was/is the best British guitarist, IMHO. I > don't see how going into fusion is a sellout. You aren't going to make money > playing fusion! The tour he did with SRV was probably one of the best tours > there was, and it was because Beck could hold his own with SRV (unlike > Clapton, who clearly can't play to that level...just listen to some SRV for a > while and then listen to some Clapton). > > To claim originality to the British for the Blues or Rock and Roll is silly. > Both forms originated in the US, and the fact is the British Invasion made > rock and roll a lot "whiter" than it had been. Not that some great music > didn't come from British bands, but nothing really innovative. Not an Eddie > Taylor among them. They just copied the style of people like Eddie Taylor. > Why so much Eddie Taylor? I, and many others, strongly believe that Mr. Taylor > was the person who invented the style of guitar playing that characterized, > among other things, the progressive rock bands of the 1960's and 1970's, bands > like Led Zeppelin, The Yardbirds (Cream), Pink Floyd, Dire Straits...and the > development of that style shows the British contribution, for sure, but they > didn't invent it. Who ever claimed that the British originated Rock and Roll? That is just ridiculous nonsense, and you need to read a bit more carefully before launching onto the keyboard. The entire discussion has been about US blues/R&B artists and their influence on the British pop music of the early 1960s, and you somehow interpret that as claiming the origins of R&R? Wow. Good to know, however, that the entire UK pop scene was based on Eddie Taylor - in spite of the fact that he was in turn influenced by the likes of Son House, Charlie Patton, and of course the great Robert Johnson. The blues has never been anything but derivative, as is any "folk" music passed down aurally, so this line of argument is just a reductio ad absurdem. > > If you like music, discovering the blues is one of the best things you can do > for yourself! If you don't like the blues, I feel real sorry for you, for as > they say, if you don't like the blues, you got a hole in your soul! Agreed. Some of us were blues addicts way before it was back in the mainstream. William Clark             Date: 03 Oct 2006 21:06:08 From: long&left Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Robert Hamilton wrote: (snip) > > If you like music, discovering the blues is one of the best things you can do > for yourself! If you don't like the blues, I feel real sorry for you, for as > they say, if you don't like the blues, you got a hole in your soul! > it's like arguing if sex is better in the US or the UK. Who cares. Blues music is good for the most part regardless of where it originated. If you enjoy music, and you enjoy the Blues...you have a complete soul :) Dave currently listening to Knock on Wood by Buddy Guy...   Date: 28 Sep 2006 10:33:45 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. Exactly where in the world are these undergarduates? Botswana? F     Date: 28 Sep 2006 15:01:58 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159464825.697945.155940@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. > Exactly where in the world are these undergarduates? Botswana? F Sorry, I don't know where that is. William Clark     Date: 28 Sep 2006 19:44:41 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159464825.697945.155940@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >, arminsson@yahoo.com says... > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. > Exactly where in the world are these undergarduates? Botswana? F > It is hard to believe isn't it :-) but it fits all previous surveys on the subject. I was in the USA about 7 years ago or so and went to dinner with some people in SF. Three of them thought Ireland was part of mainland Europe up beside Finland, and garet Thatcher was a republican senator...LOL -- Howard     Date: 28 Sep 2006 13:47:08 From: sfb Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup They were in spelling class. "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1159464825.697945.155940@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... > > William A. T. Clark wrote: >> > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 >> > junior >> undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map >> of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. > Exactly where in the world are these undergarduates? Botswana? F >   Date: 28 Sep 2006 01:52:34 From: Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Howard9 wrote: > In article <1159351410.475757.62010@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > babblebrook1@eircom.net says... > > Howard9 wrote: > > > In article <1159259591.114686.313850@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, > > > babblebrook1@eircom.net says... > > > > Although I enjoyed the tournament a lot this irrational desire of the > > > > media to equate the Ryder Cup with major sporting events like the > > > > (soccer) World Cup, Olympic games or Superbowl is just plain silly. > > > > It's just a golf tournament and not even close to being the most > > > > important one either. Sadly, the only thing truly 'epic' about Ryder > > > > Cup 2006 was that it was probably the biggest rip-off in the history of > > > > sporting events. So a bunch of people who were already very rich got a > > > > lot richer. And unfortunately this is hardly surprising to anyone that > > > > lives in modern post-Celtic Tiger rip-off-a-minute Ireland. Here's some > > > > recommended reading... > > > > http://www.ireland.com/sports/rydercup2006/features/sheridan.htm > > > > > > Written by one of the arch begrudging socialist commentators here. He > > > has an deep hatred of people who are successful and people who are rich. > > > He cannot stand successful businesses who make big profits from > > > successfully satisfying customer demand. He wants all sportsmen to be > > > pure and poor to satisfy his pitiful socialist world view. He cannot > > > stand 5 million being spent on an event that drew a billion viewers and > > > will bring hundreds of millions to Ireland in the next ten years. But > > > that would bring the dirty word of 'success'... how awful ! > > > > > > Thankfully his view is not shared by the vast majority of people here in > > > Ireland who are enjoying the energy and the wealth of modern Ireland > > > with satisfaction and joy - and not hankering back to this idiot's 'good > > > old days' when hundreds of thousands were on the streets and on the dole > > > and people had no money to spend on pleasures and luxuries but when his > > > socialist purity was satisfied. > > > > > Howard I am not a socialist but I see no harm in trying to see both > > sides of the argument. I enjoy living in Ireland and like many of us I > > benefit from having plenty of disposable income largely because of the > > impact of outstanding companies like Smurfit group and Ireland's > > success in attracting foreign investment. Of course I am all for > > investment that brings successful business to Ireland! But I do not > > like being ripped off and it does happen a lot here (at least if you > > live in Dublin ). I was able to take a ferry across to Scotland, turn > > up without a ticket at the turnstiles at St Andrews, pay a very > > reasonable admittance fee and stand on the 18th fairway and watch Jack > > Nicklaus complete his last round of golf in the Open. That was one of > > the great moments in golf history and I was a part of it. All I had to > > do was turn up! I can go any year to watch the Smurfit European Open at > > the K-Club and follow many of the same players as were there last week. > > But I could not go to the Ryder Cup when it was held literally on my > > doorstep. This makes me angry and I feel ripped off and am not ashamed > > to feel this way. > > That may all be true but is not really relevant to my comments which > were directly in response to the article quoted above which takes being > angry about a few rips offs to an irrational nth degree of political > dogma. > > > If the comment about the R.C. bringing 100s of > > millions of euro to Ireland is really true then I am all for it but I > > find that hard to swallow . Ireland is already recognized as one of the > > great golf destinations and I feel the impact of the Ryder Cup on > > future revenues there is exaggerated - do you immediately think of the > > Belfry or Brookline when you are wondering where to go for your next > > golf holiday? > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup is > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or the > club - it was a sponsor that is not so stupid that it throws money into > something unless it thinks it gets good value for it. > Saying that Ireland is already recognised as one of the great golf > destinations isn't worth a penny without constant reminders, promotion > and enhancement. Ask ANYone in advertising or the leisure industry. The > kind of exposure that Ireland and our golf got through the audience of > about 1 billion tv viewers could not be bought for any money. > > > And if you want to advertise Ireland as a golf mecca why > > showcase the least traditional and most American-style course in a > > country famous for its links courses? Watching them play at the K-club > > made me want to take a vacation in the USA where I might be able to > > afford to play on a course like that! > > Firstly I don't believe for one moment that viewers across the world > cared a whit about whether it was the K-club or any other club in > Ireland. It's much bigger an issue than that. It is about Ireland and > Irish Golf; Irish hospitality and the Irish people that is at issue > here. > > Also I play golf regularly here in Dublin and outside Dublin, and have > played at some of the best courses here in Ireland. I have played on a > lot nicer courses than the K club I can tell you. Do you think that just > because it costs a fortune to play there it must be better ? if so then > you don't play much golf. > > > If a lot of wealthy corporate > > executives enjoyed their trip and decide to build manufacturing plants > > here then that's great. But as a sporting event to be enjoyed by > > ordinary Irish tax payers, and a showcase for Irish golf I think the > > Ryder Cup fell far short of the k. > > I suggest your understanding and appreciation of the nature of the event > as a showcase for Ireland, our country, our people, our character, our > competence and professionalism, our facilities, our golf, what the > players and organisers thought about Ireland before and after the > competition and what the exposure meant to us as an economy and country > - is seriously incomplete. > > Howard (and William) you both make a lot of good points and I agree that the event did succeed in showcasing Ireland as destination for major events. The impressive security operation shows that the K Club would clearly be a great destination for a political summit, for example. I can't see a (soccer) World Cup or Olympics coming here - but surely a Rugby World Cup is a possibility? It also said a lot of great things about the Irish people and Ireland as a great place to do business. I agree totally with all this and congratulations to all concerned in bringing this off. My concern is that people may be given the message that Ireland's a great place to visit but just too expensive. We don't want visitors who came over here going back to the USA complaining about outrageous prices for hotel rooms and meals in restaurants. Maybe these claims have been exaggerated, and if that's not really the case then I can believe it will have a benefical impact on the hospitality industry, but I am concerned and irritated when I read reports about price gouging. The other thing I am reacting to is the claim that the Ryder Cup is this huge event watched by a billion people worldwide. This is just spin. It is not nearly that big. I have spent a fair amount of time in the USA and it's just not that big a thing there. Golf is a relatively elite sport enjoyed mostly by reasonably affluent people. The weekend of the 2006 Ryder Cup, in the world's biggest golfing nation - the USA - only about 2 million people tuned into the Ryder Cup. More than twice as many people watched College football. The ratings actually fell by around 20% compared to 2004. More people watched NASCAR racing for crying out loud! Here's a link that should help put things in perspective - http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2006-09-25-tv-ratings_x.htm. The R.C. is more popular on this side of the pond and perhaps more people watched the event it in Europe, but in the UK and Ireland it was only broadcast live on Sky sports, and only a minority of households get Sky sports. So this idea that a billion TV viewers were glued to the action this weekend is just baloney. As I said as Ryder Cups go, this was the best I have ever seen, and I think it was a great success - but as a golf fan I would rate the Masters and British Open way ahead of it as a golf tournament. And I suspect probably more people actually watch both of those tournaments. Anyhow, it's not really my nature to get involved in arguments so I hope you don't take what I said the wrong way and I think I have said enough on the subject. All the best Babbs > -- > Howard     Date: 28 Sep 2006 17:06:27 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159433554.882738.205640@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >, babblebrook1@eircom.net says... > I agree > that the event did succeed in showcasing Ireland as destination for > major events. The impressive security operation shows that the K Club > would clearly be a great destination for a political summit, for > example. I can't see a (soccer) World Cup or Olympics coming here - but > surely a Rugby World Cup is a possibility? I doubt it as we simply don;t have the stadia. > It also said a lot of great > things about the Irish people and Ireland as a great place to do > business. I agree totally with all this and congratulations to all > concerned in bringing this off. Very generous. > My concern is that people may be given > the message that Ireland's a great place to visit but just too > expensive. We don't want visitors who came over here going back to the > USA complaining about outrageous prices for hotel rooms and meals in > restaurants. Maybe these claims have been exaggerated, and if that's > not really the case then I can believe it will have a benefical impact > on the hospitality industry, but I am concerned and irritated when I > read reports about price gouging. Absolutely right. It's a ridiculous disease that has infected some of the small business and hotel community here in the last few years. They have adopted an incredibly short term view where they feel they should screw visitors in the short term and to hell with the long term. Mind you they are not the majority, but your point is fair. The truth however is that this has been going on for a while now and visitor numbers have remained buoyant. No one realises that we could have had much bigger numbers if it had not been for these ripoff merchants. Not that Ireland is alone in this.... > The other thing I am reacting to is the claim that the Ryder Cup is > this huge event watched by a billion people worldwide. This is just > spin. It is not nearly that big. I have spent a fair amount of time in > the USA and it's just not that big a thing there. You're entitled. That's not what my family and friends in the US tell me. > Golf is a relatively > elite sport enjoyed mostly by reasonably affluent people. having spent time in the US and played golf there I cannot accept the elite bit, though they are 'relatively' affluent... whatever that really means. But they are exactly the kinds of visitors Ireland wants :-) > The weekend > of the 2006 Ryder Cup, in the world's biggest golfing nation - the USA > - only about 2 million people tuned into the Ryder Cup. More than twice > as many people watched College football. The ratings actually fell by > around 20% compared to 2004. More people watched NASCAR racing for > crying out loud! Here's a link that should help put things in > perspective - > http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2006-09-25-tv-ratings_x.htm. The inability of the US team to compete is clearly hurting ratings but anyone in this country would settle for those ratings in the US which add up to a lot more that 2 million over the three days. > The R.C. > is more popular on this side of the pond and perhaps more people > watched the event it in Europe, but in the UK and Ireland it was only > broadcast live on Sky sports, and only a minority of households get Sky > sports. Your assumption that it is the US viewer that matters most is completely wrong. And the viewers in the UK are huge despite the SKY thing which complete ignores the coverage on terrestrial tv. The coverage in wider Europe was huge as well as Australia and South Africa and South America where the interest in golf is also big. Demonstrating the excellent value for money to this country. -- Howard     Date: 28 Sep 2006 11:54:46 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup My local pro spent the week in Ireland. This was excellent advertisement for Irish tourism.   Date: 27 Sep 2006 03:03:30 From: Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Howard9 wrote: > In article <1159259591.114686.313850@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, > babblebrook1@eircom.net says... > > Although I enjoyed the tournament a lot this irrational desire of the > > media to equate the Ryder Cup with major sporting events like the > > (soccer) World Cup, Olympic games or Superbowl is just plain silly. > > It's just a golf tournament and not even close to being the most > > important one either. Sadly, the only thing truly 'epic' about Ryder > > Cup 2006 was that it was probably the biggest rip-off in the history of > > sporting events. So a bunch of people who were already very rich got a > > lot richer. And unfortunately this is hardly surprising to anyone that > > lives in modern post-Celtic Tiger rip-off-a-minute Ireland. Here's some > > recommended reading... > > http://www.ireland.com/sports/rydercup2006/features/sheridan.htm > > Written by one of the arch begrudging socialist commentators here. He > has an deep hatred of people who are successful and people who are rich. > He cannot stand successful businesses who make big profits from > successfully satisfying customer demand. He wants all sportsmen to be > pure and poor to satisfy his pitiful socialist world view. He cannot > stand 5 million being spent on an event that drew a billion viewers and > will bring hundreds of millions to Ireland in the next ten years. But > that would bring the dirty word of 'success'... how awful ! > > Thankfully his view is not shared by the vast majority of people here in > Ireland who are enjoying the energy and the wealth of modern Ireland > with satisfaction and joy - and not hankering back to this idiot's 'good > old days' when hundreds of thousands were on the streets and on the dole > and people had no money to spend on pleasures and luxuries but when his > socialist purity was satisfied. > Howard I am not a socialist but I see no harm in trying to see both sides of the argument. I enjoy living in Ireland and like many of us I benefit from having plenty of disposable income largely because of the impact of outstanding companies like Smurfit group and Ireland's success in attracting foreign investment. Of course I am all for investment that brings successful business to Ireland! But I do not like being ripped off and it does happen a lot here (at least if you live in Dublin ). I was able to take a ferry across to Scotland, turn up without a ticket at the turnstiles at St Andrews, pay a very reasonable admittance fee and stand on the 18th fairway and watch Jack Nicklaus complete his last round of golf in the Open. That was one of the great moments in golf history and I was a part of it. All I had to do was turn up! I can go any year to watch the Smurfit European Open at the K-Club and follow many of the same players as were there last week. But I could not go to the Ryder Cup when it was held literally on my doorstep. This makes me angry and I feel ripped off and am not ashamed to feel this way. If the comment about the R.C. bringing 100s of millions of euro to Ireland is really true then I am all for it but I find that hard to swallow . Ireland is already recognized as one of the great golf destinations and I feel the impact of the Ryder Cup on future revenues there is exaggerated - do you immediately think of the Belfry or Brookline when you are wondering where to go for your next golf holiday? And if you want to advertise Ireland as a golf mecca why showcase the least traditional and most American-style course in a country famous for its links courses? Watching them play at the K-club made me want to take a vacation in the USA where I might be able to afford to play on a course like that! If a lot of wealthy corporate executives enjoyed their trip and decide to build manufacturing plants here then that's great. But as a sporting event to be enjoyed by ordinary Irish tax payers, and a showcase for Irish golf I think the Ryder Cup fell far short of the k. Best wishes Babbs     Date: 30 Sep 2006 11:34:10 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't and he= is > > simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case. > > No argument there. > With respect, William, Tony Blair has been outstanding and so has Bush. Only dreamers can expect peace in this world. We have enemies and we must fight them. Don=B4t believe all the lies. Be a man and stand up for Bush and Tony. F       Date: 04 Oct 2006 18:07:34 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Well, whatever. You are an entertaining writer, and that must count for something. F multi wrote: > On 4 Oct 2006 06:37:18 -0700, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > >multi wrote: > >> But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than > >> Palestine sure doesn't help your case. > >> > >Sir Multi, my case is a healthy one and fortunately doesn=B4t need help. > >If anyone thinks I=B4m an anti-semite or a racist, it only proves that > >he is a regular idiot. The concept itself, racist, is not unambiguous, > >I think. We all realize that the races are very different, but that > >hardly makes us racists - or what? I think Uganda would have been a > >better (or the lesser evil) choice. It is obvious to anyone that Africa > >would be draw many benefits from having a powerful, educated nation > >among them. > > Thanks for clearing up the ambiguity. You can remove the "maybe" from > my original statement. I think your racism is benign and unconscious, > but it's still racism. Your justification is no different in > principle than that of the conquistadors who thought that exposing > natives to Christianity more than made up for enslaving them. > > It's obvious to everyone that your city would draw many benefits from > bulldozing your block and having Tiger Woods build a new estate on the > site. It would look nicer, he would pay more taxes, and he would > employ more people to maintain his grounds. He might even pay to > upgrade the local airport. You can go live wherever you expected the > displaced Ugandans to live.       Date: 30 Sep 2006 19:57:39 From: Dave Baker Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1159641250.645004.270410@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't and he is > > simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case. > > No argument there. > With respect, William, Tony Blair has been outstanding He's been an absolute disaster. I ought to know as I live in the UK with steadily eroding personal freedoms and ever increasing threat of terrorism due to his policies. and so has Bush. Only dreamers can expect peace in this world. What dreamers expect and what wise men do to solve the world's problems are two separate issues. Invading every country you don't like isn't the way to solve them. Bush is a maniacal religious fanatic who has caused far more global problems than he's solved. We have enemies and we must fight them. The USA has created most of its enemies through its own actions. It's now living with the consequences. The lessons of Korea and Vietnam have been entirely lost on this administration as it sinks deeper and deeper into a quagmire of its own making in Iraq which 90% of the world predicted would happen before it all started. Even government intelligence reports are now saying that the situation is worse than it has been for three years and that attacks on coalition troops are at an all time high. Don´t believe all the lies. Be a man and stand up for Bush and Tony. F The only lies that have been spread have come from Bush and his government. Right thinking people have seen through them from the start. -- Dave Baker www.puacing.co.uk "Why," said Ford squatting down beside him and shivering, "are you lying face down in the dust?" "It's a very effective way of being wretched," said vin.       Date: 30 Sep 2006 14:43:35 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159641250.645004.270410@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't and he is > > > simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case. > > > > No argument there. > > > With respect, William, Tony Blair has been outstanding and so has Bush. > Only dreamers can expect peace in this world. We have enemies and we > must fight them. Don´t believe all the lies. Be a man and stand up for > Bush and Tony. F No, you be a man and stand up for the future for our children. At the moment we are creating enemies by the day that will haunt us for generations to come. Slavishly following simplistic nationalism is too easy and seductive. William     Date: 27 Sep 2006 13:17:56 From: Carbon Subject: Re: Exactly WHY are we in IRAQ? On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 07:35:49 -0400, A Brick in the Wall wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac@nospam.verizon.net> wrote in message > news:pan.2006.09.27.03.18.38.282083@nospam.verizon.net... >> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 00:43:37 +0000, Howard Brazee wrote: >>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 13:35:32 GMT, Carbon <nobrac@nospam.verizon.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>According to the National Intelligence Estimate, the failed oil war in >>>>Iraq has actually worsened the threat of terrorism. >>> >>> Talk about the obvious. >> >> Yes, blindingly obvious. And yet the true believers on the right will >> deny it to their last breath. > > Here is where you have it wrong --- they will deny it to someone else's > last breath. Very good point.       Date: 28 Sep 2006 02:00:05 From: JJK Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "Howard9" wrote: <snip > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup is > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or the <snip > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in the US don't know the location of Ireland?         Date: 30 Sep 2006 12:34:41 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: >> No, you be a man and stand up for the future for our children. At the > moment we are creating enemies by the day that will haunt us for > generations to come. Slavishly following simplistic nationalism is too > easy and seductive. > I=B4m not into anything simplistic, nationalism least of all. But your argument sounds a bit like "Peace in our time". Better to fight a war and get it over with. Americans sometimes talk about "making enemies" - not realizing that they HAVE enemies already. Half the world hates them. Sometimes you must choose between being popular and being respected. F           Date: 01 Oct 2006 00:31:25 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159644881.785785.248430@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > >> No, you be a man and stand up for the future for our children. At the > > moment we are creating enemies by the day that will haunt us for > > generations to come. Slavishly following simplistic nationalism is too > > easy and seductive. > > > I´m not into anything simplistic, nationalism least of all. But your > argument sounds a bit like "Peace in our time". Better to fight a war > and get it over with. Americans sometimes talk about "making enemies" - > not realizing that they HAVE enemies already. Half the world hates > them. Sometimes you must choose between being popular and being > respected. F Well, if you do want to fight a war, it's best to pick an enemy that almost no one likes. That way you don't create emnities that last for generations. And when you find yourself losing friends it is probably best to stand back and ask "why", rather than simply try to obliterate them, too. William Clark         Date: 30 Sep 2006 12:17:36 From: Big_Fan Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup > We have enemies and we > must fight them. > > The USA has created most of its enemies through its own actions. It's now > living with the consequences. The lessons of Korea and Vietnam have been > entirely lost on this administration as it sinks deeper and deeper into a > quagmire of its own making in Iraq which 90% of the world predicted would > happen before it all started. Even government intelligence reports are now > saying that the situation is worse than it has been for three years and that > attacks on coalition troops are at an all time high. I'm not sure that the attacks on coalition troops is a good measure of the world, just Iraq. On the other hand, I believe that there are millions, if not billions of people in the world who ten years thought we were the beacon of hope, but now consider us devils.         Date: 30 Sep 2006 12:13:28 From: Big_Fan Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > In article <1159641250.645004.270410@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, > "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > > It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't an= d he is > > > > simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case. > > > > > > No argument there. > > > > > With respect, William, Tony Blair has been outstanding and so has Bush. > > Only dreamers can expect peace in this world. We have enemies and we > > must fight them. Don=B4t believe all the lies. Be a man and stand up for > > Bush and Tony. F > > No, you be a man and stand up for the future for our children. At the > moment we are creating enemies by the day that will haunt us for > generations to come. Slavishly following simplistic nationalism is too > easy and seductive. > > William I hate to agree with WATC, but I have to. The damage that Bush has done won't be undone for decades to come, if ever. I voted for Bush the first time. It only took me a few months, after he'd pissed off every single government in the world, to wish I had that vote back.           Date: 01 Oct 2006 00:32:31 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159643608.539020.78420@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > In article <1159641250.645004.270410@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, > > "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > > > It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't and > > > > > > he is > > > > > simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case. > > > > > > > > No argument there. > > > > > > > With respect, William, Tony Blair has been outstanding and so has Bush. > > > Only dreamers can expect peace in this world. We have enemies and we > > > must fight them. Don´t believe all the lies. Be a man and stand up for > > > Bush and Tony. F > > > > No, you be a man and stand up for the future for our children. At the > > moment we are creating enemies by the day that will haunt us for > > generations to come. Slavishly following simplistic nationalism is too > > easy and seductive. > > > > William > > I hate to agree with WATC, but I have to. The damage that Bush has done > won't be undone for decades to come, if ever. > > I voted for Bush the first time. It only took me a few months, after > he'd pissed off every single government in the world, to wish I had > that vote back. I agree, it's hard, but we are in definite agreement on this one. Thank goodness there are elections (of a sort) in a month. William Clark         Date: 28 Sep 2006 11:53:24 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 02:00:05 GMT, "JJK" <surpher@verizon.net > wrote: >> You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely >> knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup is >> invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or the ><snip> > > >Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in the >US don't know the location of Ireland? There's a huge segment of the US population that is under 4 years old. That must be the population he's referring to.         Date: 28 Sep 2006 08:04:41 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <F0GSg.17469$8O1.7651@trnddc04 >, surpher@verizon.net says... > "Howard9" wrote: > <snip> > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup is > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or the > <snip> > > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in the > US don't know the location of Ireland? > > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. -- Howard           Date: 28 Sep 2006 11:43:01 From: JJK Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "Howard9" wrote: > > <snip> > > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup is > > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or the > > <snip> JJK wrote: > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in the > > US don't know the location of Ireland? "Howard9" wrote: > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. IOW, you don't really know. That's what I thought. LOL!!!             Date: 30 Sep 2006 12:48:29 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Big_Fan wrote: > I voted for Bush the first time. It only took me a few months, after > he'd pissed off every single government in the world, to wish I had > that vote back. I don=B4t know about all the governments in the world, but what I know is this: many European governments are terrified by the Islamic world and are widely suppressing media, so as not to insult the mighty muslims. The root of all this evil is of course the state of Israel - but it wasn=B4t the US who created Israel, rather England and France. George Bush is a worthy president of the USA and he has been a strong leader of his nation in difficult times. F               Date: 01 Oct 2006 00:34:26 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159645709.748116.9250@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > Big_Fan wrote: > > > > I voted for Bush the first time. It only took me a few months, after > > he'd pissed off every single government in the world, to wish I had > > that vote back. > I don´t know about all the governments in the world, but what I know > is this: many European governments are terrified by the Islamic world > and are widely suppressing media, so as not to insult the mighty > muslims. The root of all this evil is of course the state of Israel - > but it wasn´t the US who created Israel, rather England and France. > George Bush is a worthy president of the USA and he has been a strong > leader of his nation in difficult times. F Which Europeans countries do you have in mind, here? The ones that publish documents that the US government tries to suppress. And your nasty anti-semitism is a revealing, if unwelcome, development. William Clark             Date: 28 Sep 2006 08:14:34 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <9zOSg.13092$Vk4.3542@trnddc01 >, "JJK" <surpher@verizon.net> wrote: > "Howard9" wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > > > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup > is > > > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or > the > > > <snip> > > JJK wrote: > > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in > the > > > US don't know the location of Ireland? > > "Howard9" wrote: > > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. > > > IOW, you don't really know. That's what I thought. LOL!!! Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. William Clark               Date: 29 Sep 2006 02:50:45 From: JJK Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "Howard9" wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > > > > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup is > > > > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or > > > > > the > > > > <snip> JJK wrote: > > > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in > > > > the US don't know the location of Ireland? "Howard9" wrote: > > > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. JJK wrote: > > IOW, you don't really know. That's what I thought. LOL!!! "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. William, you're right, your example above is not scientific, and I'm not sure why your students really need to know the precise locations of Liverpool and Munster . In addition, the unscientific example of Jay Leno's sidewalk geography quizzes, mentioned by someone else in this thread, is obviously a sham. I guess that I'm fortunate, in part, because the people I associate with know a respectable amount of geography.                 Date: 29 Sep 2006 07:33:08 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <9S%Sg.13176$2G1.5434@trnddc07 >, surpher@verizon.net says... > "Howard9" wrote: > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population > barely > > > > > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder > Cup is > > > > > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov > or > > > > > > the > > > > > <snip> > > JJK wrote: > > > > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many > folks in > > > > > the US don't know the location of Ireland? > > "Howard9" wrote: > > > > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. > > JJK wrote: > > > IOW, you don't really know. That's what I thought. LOL!!! > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. > > > William, you're right, your example above is not scientific, and I'm not > sure why your students really need to know the precise locations of > Liverpool and Munster . In addition, the unscientific example of Jay Leno's > sidewalk geography quizzes, mentioned by someone else in this thread, is > obviously a sham. > > I guess that I'm fortunate, in part, because the people I associate with > know a respectable amount of geography. > A welcome and tiny minority .... LOL -- Howard               Date: 28 Sep 2006 10:10:21 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:14:34 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: >Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior >undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map >of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. My brother told me that he knew the locations of just about every Asian country with a population of greater than 5 million people. I checked it out and was amazed about my ignorance. I can pretty accurately draw maps of all of the continents with countries in the right places, US states, and Canadian provinces - but the only Asian cities I know are those which have had some type of historical impact on what I have read. An exception is I've got all the versions of "British Rails" except the lunar one, so my familiarity with Japanese and Indian cities has expanded to what products they produce in that game.                 Date: 28 Sep 2006 23:01:38 From: Colin Wilson Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Howard Brazee wrote: > I can pretty accurately draw maps of all of the continents with > countries in the right places. Test: put Australia in the right place on its continent. Look for the middle of Europe, somewhere near Germany. ;-) -- Cheers Colin Wilson ------------------------------------------------------------------ Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle ------------------------------------------------------------------               Date: 28 Sep 2006 09:38:42 From: Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <clark.31-81CF3A.08143428092006@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu >, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: > In article <9zOSg.13092$Vk4.3542@trnddc01>, "JJK" <surpher@verizon.net> > wrote: > > > "Howard9" wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population barely > > > > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder Cup > > is > > > > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov or > > the > > > > <snip> > > > > JJK wrote: > > > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks in > > the > > > > US don't know the location of Ireland? > > > > "Howard9" wrote: > > > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. > > > > > > IOW, you don't really know. That's what I thought. LOL!!! > > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. Exactly why would you expect these students to know these locations? Liverpool is important to contemporary world issues because? Would you expect them to find Munster, Indiana on a map? Can you? I understand the need to know more about the greater world, but knowledge of 2 specific places is not a valid demonstration of anything. B. tin                 Date: 01 Oct 2006 02:13:17 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > And your nasty anti-semitism is a revealing, if unwelcome, development. > You should not have said this. I=B4m not an anti-semitist and never have been. Actually I=B4ve always stood by the Jews - and, yes, Israel - but it=B4s a tragic fact that the establishment of the state of Israel has created a problem that neither diplomacy nor wars have not been able to solve. It can be argued that when Britain and France were about to establish Israel they should have chosen Uganda rather than Palestine - a current idea in those days. But anti-semitist, no. An educated man like yourself should be a bit careful with words. F                   Date: 06 Oct 2006 08:12:07 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup The_Professor wrote: > "Palestine" is a myth anyways, older than "Israel". The Arabs hadn't > held any sort of dominion over that area for over a millenium, so who > are they kidding? Maybe between the long period of waning of the > Eastern Roman Empire and the rise of the Ottomans, you had a few > independent city states and the odd megalomaniac and other sorts of war > mongers running around, but the idea that the area was ever ruled in > any sense by Islamic Arabs over any period of time is a lie. Even just > before the ottomans, there were all sorts of different religious groups > functioning in the area. During Ottoman rule, it was run by the Turks, > and after that, by the Brits. IMHO, the Brits dropped the ball by not > letting it go after WWI. They had to keep "control"! An interesting point of view. F                   Date: 06 Oct 2006 07:52:53 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Jack Hollis wrote: > On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 01:10:09 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote: > > >>Why should the US do that, most of the land was given up by treaty. > > > >"Luca Brasi held a gun to his head, and my father assured the > >bandleader, that either his signature or his brains would be on the > >contract." > > > >>The Indians still have land and are making billions in the gaming > >>industry. > > > >Brilliant! Give the Palestinians their land back, but let the > >Israelis run the casinos. > > > All this, "should Palestine have been partitioned" or "should we give > America back to the Indians" talk is interesting, but the reality is > that the Indians don't have the land and Israel exists. > > The Arabs tried a few times to destroy Israel and they ended up being > humiliated and losing even more land to the Jews. It's time to deal > with the realities of the day. "Palestine" is a myth anyways, older than "Israel". The Arabs hadn't held any sort of dominion over that area for over a millenium, so who are they kidding? Maybe between the long period of waning of the Eastern Roman Empire and the rise of the Ottomans, you had a few independent city states and the odd megalomaniac and other sorts of war mongers running around, but the idea that the area was ever ruled in any sense by Islamic Arabs over any period of time is a lie. Even just before the ottomans, there were all sorts of different religious groups functioning in the area. During Ottoman rule, it was run by the Turks, and after that, by the Brits. IMHO, the Brits dropped the ball by not letting it go after WWI. They had to keep "control"!                     Date: 06 Oct 2006 13:28:22 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On 6 Oct 2006 07:52:53 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > IMHO, the Brits dropped the ball by not >letting it go after WWI. They had to keep "control"! Imperial powers always think about maintaining spheres of influence and Palestine was a friendly port of call on the way back and forth to India and SE Asia. Perhaps this was also behind the idea of a Jewish State. The Brits had to think that they had a better chance of maintain a good relationship with the Jews than the Arabs.                   Date: 04 Oct 2006 05:11:28 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On 1 Oct 2006 02:13:17 -0700, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: >It can be argued that when Britain and France were about to >establish Israel they should have chosen Uganda rather than Palestine - >a current idea in those days. But anti-semitist, no. But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than Palestine sure doesn't help your case. The ONLY fair solution has been advanced by the president of Iran --- if the world wants to assuage its guilt for what Germany did to the Jews, then give them a piece of Germany, preferably from the estates of those who were most responsible for the Holocaust.                     Date: 04 Oct 2006 19:01:00 From: Crispin Roche Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 05:11:28 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote: >On 1 Oct 2006 02:13:17 -0700, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: >>It can be argued that when Britain and France were about to >>establish Israel they should have chosen Uganda rather than Palestine - >>a current idea in those days. But anti-semitist, no. > >But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than >Palestine sure doesn't help your case. > >The ONLY fair solution has been advanced by the president of Iran --- >if the world wants to assuage its guilt for what Germany did to the >Jews, then give them a piece of Germany, preferably from the estates >of those who were most responsible for the Holocaust. Your history, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's, is way off. The Balfour Declaration which is the document which leads to the formation of a Jewish state in Palestine was written long before Nazi Germany even came into being let alone started the Holocaust. Also Britain and France did not establish Isreal together, France had little to do with it. In fact Britain did its best to not create a Jewish state in Palestine despite earlier declaring support for the Zionist cause. The Declaration was a political convenience to aid in the British control of Palestine and the Suez Canal and led directly to Britain winning the Palestine Mandate from the League of Nations in 1922. But as soon as the Jews/Zionists became a bigger problem than the Arabs the British Government of the day decided to rip the agreement up. Crispin Roche                       Date: 04 Oct 2006 16:47:56 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:01:00 GMT, Crispin Roche <crispin.roche@ntlworld.com > wrote: >On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 05:11:28 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote: > >>On 1 Oct 2006 02:13:17 -0700, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>It can be argued that when Britain and France were about to >>>establish Israel they should have chosen Uganda rather than Palestine - >>>a current idea in those days. But anti-semitist, no. >> >>But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than >>Palestine sure doesn't help your case. >> >>The ONLY fair solution has been advanced by the president of Iran --- >>if the world wants to assuage its guilt for what Germany did to the >>Jews, then give them a piece of Germany, preferably from the estates >>of those who were most responsible for the Holocaust. > >Your history, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's, is way off. The Balfour >Declaration which is the document which leads to the formation of a >Jewish state in Palestine was written long before Nazi Germany even >came into being let alone started the Holocaust. As you admit yourself, the Balfour Declaration was superseded by later documents, notably the MacDonald White Paper of 1939, and in any case it was only a statement of intention, not a founding document. The fact that few non-historians have heard of the McDonald paper, while everyone knows about Balfour, shows that whatever happened before WWII is simply retroactive justification of the effort by the world to wash its hands of the guilt of the Holocaust. The actual document that directly led to the formation of Israel was not Balfour, but UN GAR 181, passed in 1947. There is also no doubt in any objective person's mind (which leaves out all Jews, Christians, and Muslims), that the only reason for choosing Palestine as the victim of this rape was the ridiculous belief that God gave (through the mechanism of brutal conquest and genocide) Palestine to the Israelites 3,000 years ago. The Jews are not the first tribe to have a creation myth that designates them as Chosen People, but they are the first to have otherwise intelligent outsiders take it seriously. >Also Britain and France did not establish Isreal together, France had >little to do with it. That is Fairway's history, not mine. However, if you can go back to the Balfour Declaration, then I guess he can go back to the Sykes-Picot agreement.                         Date: 05 Oct 2006 17:30:30 From: Crispin Roche Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:47:56 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote: >On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:01:00 GMT, Crispin Roche ><crispin.roche@ntlworld.com> wrote: > >>On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 05:11:28 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote: >> >>>On 1 Oct 2006 02:13:17 -0700, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>It can be argued that when Britain and France were about to >>>>establish Israel they should have chosen Uganda rather than Palestine - >>>>a current idea in those days. But anti-semitist, no. >>> >>>But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than >>>Palestine sure doesn't help your case. >>> >>>The ONLY fair solution has been advanced by the president of Iran --- >>>if the world wants to assuage its guilt for what Germany did to the >>>Jews, then give them a piece of Germany, preferably from the estates >>>of those who were most responsible for the Holocaust. >> >>Your history, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's, is way off. The Balfour >>Declaration which is the document which leads to the formation of a >>Jewish state in Palestine was written long before Nazi Germany even >>came into being let alone started the Holocaust. > >As you admit yourself, the Balfour Declaration was superseded by later >documents, notably the MacDonald White Paper of 1939, and in any case >it was only a statement of intention, not a founding document. The >fact that few non-historians have heard of the McDonald paper, while >everyone knows about Balfour, shows that whatever happened before WWII >is simply retroactive justification of the effort by the world to wash >its hands of the guilt of the Holocaust. The actual document that >directly led to the formation of Israel was not Balfour, but UN GAR >181, passed in 1947. Strictly modern Israel came about because of the Arab/Israeli war of 1948. The land claimed by Israel in 1948 was much greater than the proposed UN partition and the UN Partition Commission never actually operated. But there would have been no need for the partition plan had the Balfour Declaration not encouraged Jewish emigration to Palestine and increased the Jewish population in the area from about 1% of the total to nearly 30% of the total. I'm sure guilt arising from the Holocaust contributed to the UN resolution but Jewish terrorism in Palestine and the general divesting itself of its colonies by the British Empire were also key factors. > >There is also no doubt in any objective person's mind (which leaves >out all Jews, Christians, and Muslims), that the only reason for >choosing Palestine as the victim of this rape was the ridiculous >belief that God gave (through the mechanism of brutal conquest and >genocide) Palestine to the Israelites 3,000 years ago. The only reason? I think many objective people would have felt that the creation of a modern Jewish state on the site of the original Jewish state had some sort of significance too. >The Jews are >not the first tribe to have a creation myth that designates them as >Chosen People, but they are the first to have otherwise intelligent >outsiders take it seriously. > >>Also Britain and France did not establish Isreal together, France had >>little to do with it. > >That is Fairway's history, not mine. However, if you can go back to >the Balfour Declaration, then I guess he can go back to the >Sykes-Picot agreement. Sykes-Picot was all about the Anglo-French carve up of the Ottoman Empire post WWI. Crispin Roche                   Date: 01 Oct 2006 10:41:47 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159693997.238955.199870@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > And your nasty anti-semitism is a revealing, if unwelcome, development. > > > You should not have said this. I´m not an anti-semitist and never have > been. Actually I´ve always stood by the Jews - and, yes, Israel - but > it´s a tragic fact that the establishment of the state of Israel has > created a problem that neither diplomacy nor wars have not been able > to solve. It can be argued that when Britain and France were about to > establish Israel they should have chosen Uganda rather than Palestine - > a current idea in those days. But anti-semitist, no. An educated man > like yourself should be a bit careful with words. F If you do not want to appear as an anti-semite, it is you that needs to be more careful with words, not me. You have not done a convincing job so far. William Clark                 Date: 28 Sep 2006 15:05:59 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <ti285-8F56ED.09384228092006@lenny.tc.umn.edu >, ti285@umn.edu wrote: > In article > <clark.31-81CF3A.08143428092006@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote: > > > In article <9zOSg.13092$Vk4.3542@trnddc01>, "JJK" <surpher@verizon.net> > > wrote: > > > > > "Howard9" wrote: > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > You may not realise it but a huge segment of the US population > > > > > > barely > > > > > > knows where Ireland is and exposure through coverage of the Ruder > > > > > > Cup > > > is > > > > > > invaluable. Remember who spent the 5 million. It was not the Gov > > > > > > or > > > the > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > JJK wrote: > > > > > Why don't you provide us with the actual statistics of how many folks > > > > > in > > > the > > > > > US don't know the location of Ireland? > > > > > > "Howard9" wrote: > > > > Do your own research. Google is your friend LOL. > > > > > > > > > IOW, you don't really know. That's what I thought. LOL!!! > > > > Well, as a completely unscientific example, I asked a class of 65 junior > > undergraduates to k the locations of Liverpool and Munster on a map > > of Europe. Five got Liverpool in the right place - only two got Munster. > > Exactly why would you expect these students to know these locations? > Liverpool is important to contemporary world issues because? I should then add that we had been talking about things Liverpudlian for most of the quarter, and then also about Munster. > > Would you expect them to find Munster, Indiana on a map? Can you? > > I understand the need to know more about the greater world, but > knowledge of 2 specific places is not a valid demonstration of anything. It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the world's most powerful nation. William Clark                   Date: 28 Sep 2006 21:33:22 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel > any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > world's most powerful nation. > There are lots of things other people think you "should be" or "should know". Are you planning to conform to those, and if not, why should your students conform to such issues? Whay not show them where these places are if you think they are so important?                     Date: 28 Sep 2006 18:27:27 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <451C3DDA.88E029EF@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel > > any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > > it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > > world's most powerful nation. > > > > There are lots of things other people think you "should be" or "should know". > Are > you planning to conform to those, and if not, why should your students > conform to > such issues? Whay not show them where these places are if you think they are > so > important? Like what, for example? And for your information, 65 more students now know where Liverpool and Munster are - can you k them without looking it up? I thought not. William Clark                       Date: 29 Sep 2006 03:03:13 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > In article <451C3DDA.88E029EF@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > wrote: > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > > > > It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel > > > any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > > > it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > > > world's most powerful nation. > > > > > > > There are lots of things other people think you "should be" or "should know". > > Are > > you planning to conform to those, and if not, why should your students > > conform to > > such issues? Whay not show them where these places are if you think they are > > so > > important? > > Like what, for example? And for your information, 65 more students now > know where Liverpool and Munster are - can you k them without looking > it up? > > I thought not. > > William Clark Can you tell an overcup oak from a post oak without looking them up? I thought not!                         Date: 29 Sep 2006 07:00:30 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <451C8B27.32EB6AD4@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > In article <451C3DDA.88E029EF@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > > wrote: > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to > > > > feel > > > > any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > > > > it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > > > > world's most powerful nation. > > > > > > > > > > There are lots of things other people think you "should be" or "should > > > know". > > > Are > > > you planning to conform to those, and if not, why should your students > > > conform to > > > such issues? Whay not show them where these places are if you think they > > > are > > > so > > > important? > > > > Like what, for example? And for your information, 65 more students now > > know where Liverpool and Munster are - can you k them without looking > > it up? > > > > I thought not. > > > > William Clark > > Can you tell an overcup oak from a post oak without looking them up? > > I thought not! You mean a swamp oak from an iron oak? Yes, I can, as it happens, but that is far less significant than knowing where population centers of the world are. Especially if your government seems hell bent on invading most of them. William Clark                   Date: 28 Sep 2006 13:56:52 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:05:59 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: >It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel >any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about >it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the >world's most powerful nation. I'm curious - what percentage of Chinese cities of population greater than 5 million people are Europeans familiar with? Are they significantly more educated than us in this example?                     Date: 01 Oct 2006 13:34:00 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > If you do not want to appear as an anti-semite, it is you that needs to > be more careful with words, not me. You have not done a convincing job > so far. Geez, you are thick. You don=B4t discern between Jews and Israel. You are a hopeless case. End of story. F                       Date: 01 Oct 2006 20:42:28 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159734840.271389.277510@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > If you do not want to appear as an anti-semite, it is you that needs to > > be more careful with words, not me. You have not done a convincing job > > so far. > Geez, you are thick. You don´t discern between Jews and Israel. You > are a hopeless case. End of story. F I see, there is a difference between blaming the Jews and blaming Israel? OK, just like not holding Americans responsible for the actions of the US, right? William Clark                         Date: 04 Oct 2006 05:30:06 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 20:42:28 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >In article <1159734840.271389.277510@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, > "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> William A. T. Clark wrote: >> > > If you do not want to appear as an anti-semite, it is you that needs to >> > be more careful with words, not me. You have not done a convincing job >> > so far. >> Geez, you are thick. You don´t discern between Jews and Israel. You >> are a hopeless case. End of story. F > >I see, there is a difference between blaming the Jews and blaming >Israel? OK, just like not holding Americans responsible for the actions >of the US, right? No, it's more like not holding Englanders responsible for the actions of the US. They share a lot of genes and speak the same language (more or less) as Americans, but they have not made the choice to live here, and they do not have any control over what we do. There are many, many Jews who think that some of Israel's policies and actions are despicable. Some of them live there. Read Haaretz.com. However, that's not how I read Fairway's post. He only said that Israel is the root of the problem, and it's very hard to dispute that. Not just its policies or actions, but its very existence, and our support for it, infuriate many Arabs. Whether it's reasonable for Arabs to be infuriated at the existence of Israel is a separate question, but I suspect the red-staters in this group who think Arabs are just crazy would not be too happy if the UN voted to give their state back to the Indians (which is about 1000 times easier to justify than giving half of Palestine to the Jews). Some of them might even offer armed resistance, and keep a low-intensity guerilla war simmering for decades.                     Date: 28 Sep 2006 17:01:12 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <l3aoh2lucad1505339bq37kbqq6shtt4op@4ax.com >, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net > wrote: > On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:05:59 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote: > > >It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel > >any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > >it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > >world's most powerful nation. > > I'm curious - what percentage of Chinese cities of population greater > than 5 million people are Europeans familiar with? Are they > significantly more educated than us in this example? Well, I don't know about China, but they will have a better knowledge of Europe, and the US, too. My real point is the lack of interest in things beyond their immediate sphere - I think US students are just more isolated than their European counterparts. William Clark                       Date: 29 Sep 2006 01:11:32 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:01:12 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote: >Well, I don't know about China, but they will have a better knowledge of >Europe, and the US, too. My real point is the lack of interest in things >beyond their immediate sphere - I think US students are just more >isolated than their European counterparts. Europe and the U.S. are about the same size. An Irishman knowing about Kiev is like a Californian knowing about Charlotte. When I drive all day, I am in New Mexico. When a German drives all day, he's in Greece.                       Date: 28 Sep 2006 21:36:09 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > Well, I don't know about China, but they will have a better knowledge of > Europe, and the US, too. My real point is the lack of interest in things > beyond their immediate sphere - I think US students are just more > isolated than their European counterparts. > > The US spends billions for the defense of Europe. I personally beleive the US should withdraw those forces and put Europe in the position of a) paying for it's own defense, or B) having none. Of course I beleive in American isolation. Frenchmen won't die for us, and too many of us have died for France, for example.                         Date: 29 Sep 2006 07:30:58 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <451C3E80.7F2191DA@att.net >, DBID@att.net says... > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > Well, I don't know about China, but they will have a better knowledge of > > Europe, and the US, too. My real point is the lack of interest in things > > beyond their immediate sphere - I think US students are just more > > isolated than their European counterparts. > > > > > > The US spends billions for the defense of Europe. I personally beleive the US > should withdraw those forces and put Europe in the position of a) paying for > it's own defense, or B) having none. Of course I beleive in American isolation. > Frenchmen won't die for us, and too many of us have died for France, for > example. > LOL......... hilarious bullshit. > -- Howard                         Date: 28 Sep 2006 18:25:51 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <451C3E80.7F2191DA@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > > > Well, I don't know about China, but they will have a better knowledge of > > Europe, and the US, too. My real point is the lack of interest in things > > beyond their immediate sphere - I think US students are just more > > isolated than their European counterparts. > > > > > > The US spends billions for the defense of Europe. I personally beleive the US > should withdraw those forces and put Europe in the position of a) paying for > it's own defense, or B) having none. Of course I beleive in American > isolation. > Frenchmen won't die for us, and too many of us have died for France, for > example. Oh, the old "we're paying to keep you safe" crap. Well, for your information, Europe is now a lot LESS safe, thanks to that moron of a President we have, and his insistence on attacking everyone in the world. And who is it who has to articulate Dubya's flimsy case for him, because he's too dumb to do it himself? Tony Blair, of course. I think the US should go ahead and withdraw from Europe - they'll be safer if we do. And isolation has nothing to do with ignorance. Something about knowing your enemy comes to mind, in which case the US is sunk. William Clark                     Date: 28 Sep 2006 21:55:21 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <l3aoh2lucad1505339bq37kbqq6shtt4op@4ax.com >, howard@brazee.net says... > On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:05:59 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote: > > >It is more of a valid demonstration that US students do not seem to feel > >any curiosity about the outside world and, given their ignorance about > >it in the first place, this leaves them not well-placed to inherit the > >world's most powerful nation. > > I'm curious - what percentage of Chinese cities of population greater > than 5 million people are Europeans familiar with? Are they > significantly more educated than us in this example? > Oh yeah... we ALL care about Chinese cities >5 million people ... LOL -- Howard                       Date: From: Subject:                 Date: 28 Sep 2006 17:09:18 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <ti285-8F56ED.09384228092006@lenny.tc.umn.edu >, ti285 @umn.edu says... > Exactly why would you expect these students to know these locations? > Liverpool is important to contemporary world issues because? > > Would you expect them to find Munster, Indiana on a map? Can you? > > I understand the need to know more about the greater world, but > knowledge of 2 specific places is not a valid demonstration of anything. > There have been dozens of surveys in the US of world geographic knowledge and they have all been consistently astonishing. Huge proportions of the US population can barely find countries like Italy, Ukraine, Denk on a map. And even more haven't a clue about the major cities in Europe. For the average punter who watches Leno on CNBC he regularly stops people ion the streets and asks them questions like this. The level of ignorance is mind numbingly stupefying. -- Howard                   Date: 28 Sep 2006 11:27:45 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:09:18 +0100, Howard9 <fictional@email.com > wrote: >For the average punter who watches Leno on CNBC he >regularly stops people ion the streets and asks them questions like >this. The level of ignorance is mind numbingly stupefying. Leno has no interest in broadcasting people who don't give stupid answers. I bet he gets some stupid answers from people who either answer a stupid question with a stupid answer, or who want to be on TV. The people who answer correctly are never seen - they're not funny.                   Date: 28 Sep 2006 18:13:20 From: Dave Baker Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "Howard9" <fictional@email.com > wrote in message news:MPG.1f860406577c77be989f09@news.iol.ie... > In article <ti285-8F56ED.09384228092006@lenny.tc.umn.edu>, ti285 > @umn.edu says... > > Exactly why would you expect these students to know these locations? > > Liverpool is important to contemporary world issues because? > > > > Would you expect them to find Munster, Indiana on a map? Can you? > > > > I understand the need to know more about the greater world, but > > knowledge of 2 specific places is not a valid demonstration of anything. > > > There have been dozens of surveys in the US of world geographic > knowledge and they have all been consistently astonishing. Huge > proportions of the US population can barely find countries like Italy, > Ukraine, Denk on a map. And even more haven't a clue about the major > cities in Europe. For the average punter who watches Leno on CNBC he > regularly stops people ion the streets and asks them questions like > this. The level of ignorance is mind numbingly stupefying. I recall Carl Sagan discussing this in one of his books. Broca's Brain I think. This is going back a couple of decades but supposedly many American high school kids couldn't even find the USA on a globe. They tended to pick Russia/Asia because it was bigger and they figured America was, to them anyway, the most important place on earth so it must also be the biggest. It does beggar belief somewhat but it was apparently true. I often wonder how much difference the internet has made to people's appreciation of other parts of the world now that it is so easy to chat online with furriners. -- Dave Baker www.puacing.co.uk "Why," said Ford squatting down beside him and shivering, "are you lying face down in the dust?" "It's a very effective way of being wretched," said vin.     Date: 27 Sep 2006 08:13:04 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159351410.475757.62010@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, babblebrook1@eircom.net wrote: > Howard9 wrote: > > In article <1159259591.114686.313850@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, > > babblebrook1@eircom.net says... > > > Although I enjoyed the tournament a lot this irrational desire of the > > > media to equate the Ryder Cup with major sporting events like the > > > (soccer) World Cup, Olympic games or Superbowl is just plain silly. > > > It's just a golf tournament and not even close to being the most > > > important one either. Sadly, the only thing truly 'epic' about Ryder > > > Cup 2006 was that it was probably the biggest rip-off in the history of > > > sporting events. So a bunch of people who were already very rich got a > > > lot richer. And unfortunately this is hardly surprising to anyone that > > > lives in modern post-Celtic Tiger rip-off-a-minute Ireland. Here's some > > > recommended reading... > > > http://www.ireland.com/sports/rydercup2006/features/sheridan.htm > > > > Written by one of the arch begrudging socialist commentators here. He > > has an deep hatred of people who are successful and people who are rich. > > He cannot stand successful businesses who make big profits from > > successfully satisfying customer demand. He wants all sportsmen to be > > pure and poor to satisfy his pitiful socialist world view. He cannot > > stand 5 million being spent on an event that drew a billion viewers and > > will bring hundreds of millions to Ireland in the next ten years. But > > that would bring the dirty word of 'success'... how awful ! > > > > Thankfully his view is not shared by the vast majority of people here in > > Ireland who are enjoying the energy and the wealth of modern Ireland > > with satisfaction and joy - and not hankering back to this idiot's 'good > > old days' when hundreds of thousands were on the streets and on the dole > > and people had no money to spend on pleasures and luxuries but when his > > socialist purity was satisfied. > > > Howard I am not a socialist but I see no harm in trying to see both > sides of the argument. I enjoy living in Ireland and like many of us I > benefit from having plenty of disposable income largely because of the > impact of outstanding companies like Smurfit group and Ireland's > success in attracting foreign investment. Of course I am all for > investment that brings successful business to Ireland! But I do not > like being ripped off and it does happen a lot here (at least if you > live in Dublin ). I was able to take a ferry across to Scotland, turn > up without a ticket at the turnstiles at St Andrews, pay a very > reasonable admittance fee and stand on the 18th fairway and watch Jack > Nicklaus complete his last round of golf in the Open. That was one of > the great moments in golf history and I was a part of it. All I had to > do was turn up! I can go any year to watch the Smurfit European Open at > the K-Club and follow many of the same players as were there last week. > But I could not go to the Ryder Cup when it was held literally on my > doorstep. This makes me angry and I feel ripped off and am not ashamed > to feel this way. If the comment about the R.C. bringing 100s of > millions of euro to Ireland is really true then I am all for it but I > find that hard to swallow . Ireland is already recognized as one of the > great golf destinations and I feel the impact of the Ryder Cup on > future revenues there is exaggerated - do you immediately think of the > Belfry or Brookline when you are wondering where to go for your next > golf holiday? And if you want to advertise Ireland as a golf mecca why > showcase the least traditional and most American-style course in a > country famous for its links courses? Watching them play at the K-club > made me want to take a vacation in the USA where I might be able to > afford to play on a course like that! If a lot of wealthy corporate > executives enjoyed their trip and decide to build manufacturing plants > here then that's great. But as a sporting event to be enjoyed by > ordinary Irish tax payers, and a showcase for Irish golf I think the > Ryder Cup fell far short of the k. > Best wishes > Babbs I think it needs to be remembered that galleries for the Ryder Cup have to be much smaller than for the Open, or any other championship, because play is taking place on at most 12 holes (singles), and for two days on only four holes, compared to the 18 in a tournament. Having said that, however, I do share your point about the RC tickets being inflated out of all reason in the past 20 years. I was fortunate enough to have a pass for the 1987 RC at Muirfield Village, for something like $45. The atmosphere was incredible, but since that match, in particular, the RC has become an expensive, sold out, event. I also agree wth you about the choice of course. RCs are being sent to venues that bid the most for them, not necessarily to classic courses. Hence the K-Club, not Portnock, in 2008 Celtic Manor, not Royal Porthcawl, and of course all those years at the Belfry. Why not Royal Birkdale, or Royal St. George's? Still, in the end the golf shone through. It was truly compelling watching, and the Irish crowds were spectacular - even the US TV commentators said so. Noisy, but fair. I heard no cheering over missed putts, or any of the ugliness that s too many of these events lately. William Clark       Date: 27 Sep 2006 14:35:37 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <clark.31-7CF83F.08130427092006@charm.magnus.acs.ohio- state.edu >, clark.31@nospamosu.edu says... > I think it needs to be remembered that galleries for the Ryder Cup have > to be much smaller than for the Open, or any other championship, because > play is taking place on at most 12 holes (singles), and for two days on > only four holes, compared to the 18 in a tournament. Having said that, > however, I do share your point about the RC tickets being inflated out > of all reason in the past 20 years. I was fortunate enough to have a > pass for the 1987 RC at Muirfield Village, for something like $45. The > atmosphere was incredible, but since that match, in particular, the RC > has become an expensive, sold out, event. First of all the Ryder Cup is way bigger than any British Open or any other major tournament. What on earth do you expect when the demand for tickets is astronomical and people are willing to pay ? if they can get people to pay then good luck to them. > > I also agree wth you about the choice of course. RCs are being sent to > venues that bid the most for them, not necessarily to classic courses. > Hence the K-Club, not Portnock, in 2008 Celtic Manor, not Royal > Porthcawl, and of course all those years at the Belfry. Why not Royal > Birkdale, or Royal St. George's? That's a very different argument and I agree about the quality of the course. But there are far bigger and more important issues at stake than how good the course is as a golf course when it comes to holing a world class event like this. My point above was that viewers around the world were far more interested in the course as a symbol of Irish golf... not the specific course itself. > > Still, in the end the golf shone through. It was truly compelling > watching, and the Irish crowds were spectacular - even the US TV > commentators said so. Noisy, but fair. I heard no cheering over missed > putts, or any of the ugliness that s too many of these events lately. Thankfully you are right. But that is just the Irish character for you. I wish I could say that I expect the same to be the case in Kentucky. -- Howard         Date: 30 Sep 2006 14:48:49 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <MPG.1f848e871ecefc66989f02@news.iol.ie >, Howard9 <fictional@email.com > wrote: > In article <clark.31-7CF83F.08130427092006@charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > state.edu>, clark.31@nospamosu.edu says... > > I think it needs to be remembered that galleries for the Ryder Cup have > > to be much smaller than for the Open, or any other championship, because > > play is taking place on at most 12 holes (singles), and for two days on > > only four holes, compared to the 18 in a tournament. Having said that, > > however, I do share your point about the RC tickets being inflated out > > of all reason in the past 20 years. I was fortunate enough to have a > > pass for the 1987 RC at Muirfield Village, for something like $45. The > > atmosphere was incredible, but since that match, in particular, the RC > > has become an expensive, sold out, event. > > First of all the Ryder Cup is way bigger than any British Open or any > other major tournament. What on earth do you expect when the demand for > tickets is astronomical and people are willing to pay ? if they can get > people to pay then good luck to them. Oh, I agree about the demand for tickets, but my point was that it is necessary to limit the number available because all those spectators have to be accommodated on at most 2/3 of the number of holes in a regular tour tournament. For the RC, there simply will not (cannot) be the same number of tickets as for a stroke play tournament on the same course. > > > > I also agree wth you about the choice of course. RCs are being sent to > > venues that bid the most for them, not necessarily to classic courses. > > Hence the K-Club, not Portnock, in 2008 Celtic Manor, not Royal > > Porthcawl, and of course all those years at the Belfry. Why not Royal > > Birkdale, or Royal St. George's? > > That's a very different argument and I agree about the quality of the > course. But there are far bigger and more important issues at stake than > how good the course is as a golf course when it comes to holing a world > class event like this. My point above was that viewers around the world > were far more interested in the course as a symbol of Irish golf... not > the specific course itself. It is true, as well that there are the issues of access and accommodation against some older venues. I understand this is true of Portnock, out on the Howth Peninsula, and so served by only one minor road, and Royal Portrush, for example. Still, it would be far better to see those used. I do agree that Ireland and the Irish came off very well as hosts on US tv. > > > > Still, in the end the golf shone through. It was truly compelling > > watching, and the Irish crowds were spectacular - even the US TV > > commentators said so. Noisy, but fair. I heard no cheering over missed > > putts, or any of the ugliness that s too many of these events lately. > > Thankfully you are right. But that is just the Irish character for you. > I wish I could say that I expect the same to be the case in Kentucky. Yes, we call all hope for that. William Clark   Date: 26 Sep 2006 17:45:05 From: Frank Cassidy Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 13:41:27 +0100, "Dave Baker" <null@null.com > wrote: >It's hard to imagine we'll ever see another quite like it. Clearly the >emotion of Clarke coming through the torment of personal grief and playing >in front of his home crowd at his home club was always going to be the >centrepiece of what would turn out to be one of the most dramatic sporting >events in history. > >[snip] You may want to think again.According to the papers at the pre-match gathering dinner,all the players,from both teams,were mingling and enjoying themselves. Tiger strongly protested and sat alone for dinner in a separate alcove surrounded by "numerous men in black!" to watch over him. Now I like Tiger but it does seem that he does not like to mix with others not in his circle. He was really gracious in defeat and very sympathetic to Darren. It was a wonderful match but maybe his thoughts were elsewhere or he is not a social animal. Still the best in the world though.     Date: 27 Sep 2006 00:29:01 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 17:45:05 GMT, Frank Cassidy@tiscali.co.uk (Frank Cassidy) wrote: >It was a wonderful match but maybe his thoughts were elsewhere or he >is not a social animal. He's a private individual. He has close friends with whom practical jokes are expected, but had a hard time getting himself ask women out, including Erin.     Date: 26 Sep 2006 16:08:21 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <4519670a.640906@news.tiscali.co.uk >, Frank Cassidy@tiscali.co.uk (Frank Cassidy) wrote: > On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 13:41:27 +0100, "Dave Baker" <null@null.com> > wrote: > > >It's hard to imagine we'll ever see another quite like it. Clearly the > >emotion of Clarke coming through the torment of personal grief and playing > >in front of his home crowd at his home club was always going to be the > >centrepiece of what would turn out to be one of the most dramatic sporting > >events in history. > > > >[snip] > You may want to think again.According to the papers at the pre-match > gathering dinner,all the players,from both teams,were mingling and > enjoying themselves. > Tiger strongly protested and sat alone for dinner in a separate alcove > surrounded by "numerous men in black!" to watch over him. > Now I like Tiger but it does seem that he does not like to mix with > others not in his circle. > He was really gracious in defeat and very sympathetic to Darren. > It was a wonderful match but maybe his thoughts were elsewhere or he > is not a social animal. > Still the best in the world though. It was also the case that the US team partied with the Europeans on Sunday night (for the first time). I doubt that TW was among them, but it is a promising development. William Clark   Date: 26 Sep 2006 08:45:54 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Howard9 wrote: >> Written by one of the arch begrudging socialist commentators here. He > has an deep hatred of people who are successful and people who are rich. > He cannot stand successful businesses who make big profits from > successfully satisfying customer demand. He wants all sportsmen to be > pure and poor to satisfy his pitiful socialist world view. He cannot > stand 5 million being spent on an event that drew a billion viewers and > will bring hundreds of millions to Ireland in the next ten years. But > that would bring the dirty word of 'success'... how awful ! Well said. Why don=B4t you put the stinking commie out of his misery? F   Date: 26 Sep 2006 01:33:11 From: Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Cal Golfer wrote: > C'mon, I know we are all golfers here, but let's get a little more > perspective. One of the most dramatic sporting events in history.? > Please. That is like the recent campaigning that TIger should be > considered one of the greatest athletes of all time. > > He isn't even the best golfer yet, and some clowns want to rank him > next to Rafer Johnson, Jim Brown, Jim Thorpe, Willie Mays, Michael > Jordan, Muhammed Ali, Roberto Duran, etc...He is a great athlete among > white toast, semi-flab, preppy dudes, which makes him look like > Superman by comparison. > > The Ryder Cup is a 3-day per every-other-year team event that doesn't > draw much attention outside the golf world. Even most of the golfers I > know here in USA don't watch it -- even if the USA team was good! Although I enjoyed the tournament a lot this irrational desire of the media to equate the Ryder Cup with major sporting events like the (soccer) World Cup, Olympic games or Superbowl is just plain silly. It's just a golf tournament and not even close to being the most important one either. Sadly, the only thing truly 'epic' about Ryder Cup 2006 was that it was probably the biggest rip-off in the history of sporting events. So a bunch of people who were already very rich got a lot richer. And unfortunately this is hardly surprising to anyone that lives in modern post-Celtic Tiger rip-off-a-minute Ireland. Here's some recommended reading... http://www.ireland.com/sports/rydercup2006/features/sheridan.htm But as Ryder Cups go - this was a very good one, no doubt about that. Rgds Babbs     Date: 30 Sep 2006 14:04:49 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup The_Professor wrote: > So in the end you seem to be saying you want the US to provide military > protection for Europe, but be at Europes beck and call. I think they > should be at China and Iraq's beck and call. Screw Europe! They have > absolutely nothing to offer! China has a huge consumer ket and Iraq > has natural resources! > You have obviously put on your childish cap tonight. Europe doesn=B4t need military protection from anyone. But Europe needs allies and so does the USA. After all it was the USA who pressed for the invasion into Iraq - the Brits followed suit. Europe would have been better off if we had let the USA fight alone. > Why should Americans put their lives on the line for Europe when > Europeans won't, or at best do so grudgingly. There should not be a > single US troop in ex Yugoslavia, for example. I agree. There should be no foreign troops in ex Yugoslavia. Now stop drinking and go to sleep. A round of golf is waiting for you tomorrow, right? F     Date: 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup snippet...there ya go, I'll snippitall soasnotooffendyourdelicateconstitution! So in the end you seem to be saying you want the US to provide military protection for Europe, but be at Europes beck and call. I think they should be at China and Iraq's beck and call. Screw Europe! They have absolutely nothing to offer! China has a huge consumer ket and Iraq has natural resources! Why should Americans put their lives on the line for Europe when Europeans won't, or at best do so grudgingly. There should not be a single US troop in ex Yugoslavia, for example. It is actually in Europe. Europeans are rich. Why can't they handle that. Euros whine that they want the US to "do something" about the Sudan. Why don't Euros "do something about Sudan"? The Brits created the problem with another one of their many, many silly political boundaries that reflected nothing but some ginal European national interest. Europe, having no resources, *HAS* to exploit other nations to run it's economy. Say what you will abou the US, but it doesn't change a thing about Europe. They want the US to provide a military fleet for secure transport of goods from Africa, Asia and South America to Europe. Why should the US do this? IF you want to be internationaist, fine I'm with you. EQUAL sharing of obligations and responsibilites. Not US spends tens of billions on ex Yugoslavia and Europe spends nearly nothing. I lover the European whining about 25,000 imllegal immigrants per year coming across the mediterranean into Europe, and needing to "do something about it" (in the end they will want the US to do something, k my words!), and then calling Americans barbaric for wanting to stem the flow of immigrants across the Mexican border. The Europeans are the #1 barbarians in the world, both as a fact of history, in every sense, and in action. Hitler, Napolean, heck even Atilla the Hun, were all Europeans. I can't think of a single American who is anywhere near as nasty as any of those 3...except maybe Truman. The Europeans don't like US policy in the mideast. So what's theier solution. What's your solution? Make deal with Al Queda? Make a deal with Iran? What deal can you make? Are you going to be responsible for the consequences when they don't honor the deal? Bottom line is that all these other nations whine about American intervention in worlt d affairs, but not only want such intervention, but need it. The US doesn't need it though. Send the UN to Venezuela where it belongs and you can all get together and talk amongst yourselves about how nasty the US is!       Date: 30 Sep 2006 20:56:44 From: Crispin Roche Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > [rant snipped] Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you have some idea what you are talking about. Crispin Roche         Date: 01 Oct 2006 14:22:04 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Crispin Roche wrote: > On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > [rant snipped] > > Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you > have some idea what you are talking about. > > Crispin Roche I have a pretty clear idea! Sounds like you have no idea about the level of resentment in the US for the UN. I seriously doubt many Americans look at France, Germany or Russia as allies.           Date: 01 Oct 2006 15:34:40 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <451FCD3F.506F2046@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > Crispin Roche wrote: > > > On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > [rant snipped] > > > > Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you > > have some idea what you are talking about. > > > > Crispin Roche > > I have a pretty clear idea! Sounds like you have no idea about the level > of resentment in the US for the UN. I seriously doubt many Americans > look at France, Germany or Russia as allies. Well, the US "resents" the UN (at least the Bush administration does, since the UN keeps rapping their knuckles on human rights). Now add up all those countries that are at odds with the US. A rather uneven balance, I think, but then you could care less what any of them say. Sounds a bit like the schoolyard bully that can't figure out why he has no friends. William Clark             Date: 02 Oct 2006 02:15:54 From: Robert Hamilton Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > In article <451FCD3F.506F2046@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > wrote: > > > Crispin Roche wrote: > > > > > On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > [rant snipped] > > > > > > Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you > > > have some idea what you are talking about. > > > > > > Crispin Roche > > > > I have a pretty clear idea! Sounds like you have no idea about the level > > of resentment in the US for the UN. I seriously doubt many Americans > > look at France, Germany or Russia as allies. > > Well, the US "resents" the UN (at least the Bush administration does, > since the UN keeps rapping their knuckles on human rights). Now add up > all those countries that are at odds with the US. A rather uneven > balance, I think, but then you could care less what any of them say. > > Sounds a bit like the schoolyard bully that can't figure out why he has > no friends. > > I have observed strong US resentment in the US from the time I came down here, in Ohio from 1986 and here in Mississippi. Put it to a vote, and the US would be out of the UN, as true today as it was in 1986. I cannot believe that it is not obvious to to that the American people don't care at all for the UN. IMHO, it's a total lost cause. The people of the US will never accept the UN.               Date: 01 Oct 2006 22:32:30 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <4520748C.B8FD186C@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" wrote: > > > In article <451FCD3F.506F2046@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > > wrote: > > > > > Crispin Roche wrote: > > > > > > > On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > [rant snipped] > > > > > > > > Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you > > > > have some idea what you are talking about. > > > > > > > > Crispin Roche > > > > > > I have a pretty clear idea! Sounds like you have no idea about the level > > > of resentment in the US for the UN. I seriously doubt many Americans > > > look at France, Germany or Russia as allies. > > > > Well, the US "resents" the UN (at least the Bush administration does, > > since the UN keeps rapping their knuckles on human rights). Now add up > > all those countries that are at odds with the US. A rather uneven > > balance, I think, but then you could care less what any of them say. > > > > Sounds a bit like the schoolyard bully that can't figure out why he has > > no friends. > > > > > > I have observed strong US resentment in the US from the time I came down here, > in Ohio from 1986 and here in Mississippi. Put it to a vote, and the US would > be out of the UN, as true today as it was in 1986. I cannot believe that it is > not obvious to to that the American people don't care at all for the UN. IMHO, > it's a total lost cause. The people of the US will never accept the UN. Just like the schoolboy report that reads "does not play well with others". William Clark             Date: 01 Oct 2006 20:38:13 From: Crispin Roche Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 15:34:40 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote: >In article <451FCD3F.506F2046@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> >wrote: > >> Crispin Roche wrote: >> >> > On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: >> > >> > > [rant snipped] >> > >> > Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you >> > have some idea what you are talking about. >> > >> > Crispin Roche >> >> I have a pretty clear idea! Sounds like you have no idea about the level >> of resentment in the US for the UN. I seriously doubt many Americans >> look at France, Germany or Russia as allies. > >Well, the US "resents" the UN (at least the Bush administration does, >since the UN keeps rapping their knuckles on human rights). Now add up >all those countries that are at odds with the US. A rather uneven >balance, I think, but then you could care less what any of them say. > >Sounds a bit like the schoolyard bully that can't figure out why he has >no friends. > I think what he meant about resentment of the UN was the fervent beleif amongst a large number of Americans that the UN was a tool of the antichrist (if not his/its actual abode.)(;-) Crispin Roche               Date: 01 Oct 2006 20:41:18 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <ah90i218egthdopk1gsuf5ep7gl1ebfi86@4ax.com >, Crispin Roche <crispin.roche@ntlworld.com > wrote: > On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 15:34:40 -0400, "William A. T. Clark" > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote: > > >In article <451FCD3F.506F2046@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net> > >wrote: > > > >> Crispin Roche wrote: > >> > >> > On 30 Sep 2006 13:19:39 -0700, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net> wrote: > >> > > >> > > [rant snipped] > >> > > >> > Dear Professor stick to golf, at least when you talk about golf you > >> > have some idea what you are talking about. > >> > > >> > Crispin Roche > >> > >> I have a pretty clear idea! Sounds like you have no idea about the level > >> of resentment in the US for the UN. I seriously doubt many Americans > >> look at France, Germany or Russia as allies. > > > >Well, the US "resents" the UN (at least the Bush administration does, > >since the UN keeps rapping their knuckles on human rights). Now add up > >all those countries that are at odds with the US. A rather uneven > >balance, I think, but then you could care less what any of them say. > > > >Sounds a bit like the schoolyard bully that can't figure out why he has > >no friends. > > > > I think what he meant about resentment of the UN was the fervent > beleif amongst a large number of Americans that the UN was a tool of > the antichrist (if not his/its actual abode.)(;-) > > Crispin Roche Yes, we tend to hold to simplistic ideas like that over here. It's less taxing than real thought. William Clark     Date: 29 Sep 2006 08:56:29 From: The_Professor Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup William A. T. Clark wrote: > > Frenchmen won't die for us, and too many of us have died for France, for > > example. > Just prior to making that post, I was at a talk where the fact that ijn April of 1915, the Germans first started using chemical weapons, chlorine gas, in Belgium (defending France though). The gassed the French and Algerian troops, who ran away. A couple of days later, they gassed positions held by Canadian troops and "others". The others ran away. The Canadians held their lines. 89% casualties. Over 6000 Canadians dead in 2 days. Why? What difference would it make to Canadians if Germans and Austrians maintained domination over central Europe at the time? Canadian troops had no business bieng there in the first place. Germans were not going to attack Canada. Why would Canadiahold the lines when their European "allies" ran away from defending their own interests. Hence the comment about Frenchmen. IMHO, the "defense of Europe" is of no value at all to the peoples of the Americas. Let the "old world" kill itself off. We have no business in the ex Yugoslavia, for example, and no business maintaining military bases in any part of Europe. My ancestors came here to get away from that crap. If they try to stir up anything with us, we can blow them back to the dark ages one way or another. You know those turkeys gave Fritz Haber, the guy who came up with the idea of chemical weapons, and developed them, the Nobel Prize in 1918! You want the ultranationalistic Euro-centric world view...go to Europe. We all came here to get away from that crap. IMHO, they are still the same as they always were.       Date: 29 Sep 2006 14:23:09 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159545389.033319.311380@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, "The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote: > William A. T. Clark wrote: > > > > Frenchmen won't die for us, and too many of us have died for France, for > > > example. > > Excuse me, but I did not write the above - you did under the name of Robert Hamilton. Please don't try to make it look as though others are responsible for your febrile posts. > > Just prior to making that post, I was at a talk where the fact that ijn > April of 1915, the Germans first started using chemical weapons, > chlorine gas, in Belgium (defending France though). The gassed the > French and Algerian troops, who ran away. A couple of days later, they > gassed positions held by Canadian troops and "others". The others ran > away. The Canadians held their lines. 89% casualties. Over 6000 > Canadians dead in 2 days. > > Why? What difference would it make to Canadians if Germans and > Austrians maintained domination over central Europe at the time? > Canadian troops had no business bieng there in the first place. Germans > were not going to attack Canada. Why would Canadiahold the lines when > their European "allies" ran away from defending their own interests. > Hence the comment about Frenchmen. > > IMHO, the "defense of Europe" is of no value at all to the peoples of > the Americas. Let the "old world" kill itself off. We have no business > in the ex Yugoslavia, for example, and no business maintaining military > bases in any part of Europe. My ancestors came here to get away from > that crap. If they try to stir up anything with us, we can blow them > back to the dark ages one way or another. Agreed, much better if the UK didn't chase and arrest terrorists intent on bombing the US. Let the Americans take the consequences of their moronic Middle East policy flush on the chin. The US economy is a drain on Europe's anyway - the Celtic Tiger can eat it for lunch > > You know those turkeys gave Fritz Haber, the guy who came up with the > idea of chemical weapons, and developed them, the Nobel Prize in 1918! > > You want the ultranationalistic Euro-centric world view...go to Europe. > We all came here to get away from that crap. IMHO, they are still the > same as they always were. Actually, we prefer the commonsense, international view, that takes the head OUT of the sand. William Clark         Date: 29 Sep 2006 23:43:44 From: The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote in message news:clark.31-182D0B.14230929092006@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... >> >> IMHO, the "defense of Europe" is of no value at all to the peoples of >> the Americas. Let the "old world" kill itself off. We have no business >> in the ex Yugoslavia, for example, and no business maintaining military >> bases in any part of Europe. My ancestors came here to get away from >> that crap. If they try to stir up anything with us, we can blow them >> back to the dark ages one way or another. > > Agreed, much better if the UK didn't chase and arrest terrorists intent > on bombing the US. Let the Americans take the consequences of their > moronic Middle East policy flush on the chin. It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't and he is simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case.           Date: 04 Oct 2006 06:37:18 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup multi wrote: > But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than > Palestine sure doesn't help your case. > Sir Multi, my case is a healthy one and fortunately doesn=B4t need help. If anyone thinks I=B4m an anti-semite or a racist, it only proves that he is a regular idiot. The concept itself, racist, is not unambiguous, I think. We all realize that the races are very different, but that hardly makes us racists - or what? I think Uganda would have been a better (or the lesser evil) choice. It is obvious to anyone that Africa would be draw many benefits from having a powerful, educated nation among them. I imagine (but I may be wrong) that antipathy against a jewish state would not be so relentless there, or at least not quite as potentially dangerous. As the situation is now I can=B4t see the USA doing anything at all that would appease the Arabs. The USA are the main champions of Israel and they will be hated more than anything else on earth, with the exception of Israel itself. There will not be "peace in our time" with the state of Israel situated where it is now. F             Date: 05 Oct 2006 00:21:20 From: Colin Wilson Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Fairway wrote: > I think Uganda would have been a > better (or the lesser evil) choice. And exactly what are the biblical and spiritual connections between the Jews and Uganda? (Trying hard to work out how this thread got from "final thoughts on the Ryder Cup" to here.) -- Cheers Colin Wilson ------------------------------------------------------------------ Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle ------------------------------------------------------------------               Date: 04 Oct 2006 17:33:30 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:21:20 GMT, Colin Wilson <nowhere@nospam.com > wrote: >Fairway wrote: > >> I think Uganda would have been a >> better (or the lesser evil) choice. > >And exactly what are the biblical and spiritual connections between the >Jews and Uganda? I love it. It would be WRONG to steal a country, unless of course you believe God told you to take it. We have cars and TVs, so we must be ster than people were 3,000 years ago, but I'm damned if I can find any evidence for it.                 Date: 05 Oct 2006 00:09:48 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 17:33:30 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote: >I love it. It would be WRONG to steal a country, unless of course you >believe God told you to take it. > >We have cars and TVs, so we must be ster than people were 3,000 >years ago, but I'm damned if I can find any evidence for it. It was only 60 years ago that the human race killed upwards of 60 million people in one war and many of them were civilians. That's a hard act to follow. I'm not sure that there was anything 3000 years ago that could compete with it either. I'm not sure that you could exactly call the partition of Palestine stealing anything. Prior to 1947, the Turks had ruled Palestine for over 400 years and then the British took control. Both the Arabs and Jews had lived in Palestine for thousands of years. What makes the Arab claim more valid than the Jewish claim? Perhaps partition was the fair thing to do by giving both groups a homeland. It was the British who came up with the idea of a Jewish State in Palestine. Of course the Zionists had been wanting that for a long time, but that was just a pipe dream until the British got on board. I certainly don't blame the Jews for taking what they got. I suppose you could argue the point from both sides till the cows come home, but that fact is that Israel exists. They're the strongest military power in the Middle East and I don't see anything in the near future that will change that. The radical Arabs, who will not recognize Israel's right to exist, cannot win a military victory and they cause a lot more death and destruction to their own people than they do to Israel. The Arabs can continue to cause trouble indefinately, but they're not going to get anywhere.                   Date: 05 Oct 2006 10:39:02 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:09:48 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote: >What makes the >Arab claim more valid than the Jewish claim? Not much, except the Arabs had lived there for the past 2,000 years, and almost all of the Jews immigrated there in the 20th century. > Perhaps partition was >the fair thing to do by giving both groups a homeland. Yes, I can see that. Forget what I said about giving America back to the Indians. We'll just partition it, say at the Mississippi River, and give the Indians the western half. Then everyone will be happy. PS: In case any crazy radical Americans living west of the Mississippi can't see how Fair and Balanced it is to give up their homes, farms, or businesses, I'm sure I can find an Indian legend that says the Great Spirit gave the land to the Indians. So that makes a big difference, right?                     Date: 05 Oct 2006 18:37:28 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:39:02 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote: >> Perhaps partition was >>the fair thing to do by giving both groups a homeland. > >Yes, I can see that. Forget what I said about giving America back to >the Indians. We'll just partition it, say at the Mississippi River, >and give the Indians the western half. Then everyone will be happy. Why should the US do that, most of the land was given up by treaty. The Indians still have land and are making billions in the gaming industry.                       Date: 06 Oct 2006 01:10:09 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:37:28 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote: >On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:39:02 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org> wrote: > >>> Perhaps partition was >>>the fair thing to do by giving both groups a homeland. >> >>Yes, I can see that. Forget what I said about giving America back to >>the Indians. We'll just partition it, say at the Mississippi River, >>and give the Indians the western half. Then everyone will be happy. > >Why should the US do that, most of the land was given up by treaty. "Luca Brasi held a gun to his head, and my father assured the bandleader, that either his signature or his brains would be on the contract." >The Indians still have land and are making billions in the gaming >industry. Brilliant! Give the Palestinians their land back, but let the Israelis run the casinos.                         Date: 06 Oct 2006 10:45:22 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 01:10:09 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote: >>Why should the US do that, most of the land was given up by treaty. > >"Luca Brasi held a gun to his head, and my father assured the >bandleader, that either his signature or his brains would be on the >contract." > >>The Indians still have land and are making billions in the gaming >>industry. > >Brilliant! Give the Palestinians their land back, but let the >Israelis run the casinos. All this, "should Palestine have been partitioned" or "should we give America back to the Indians" talk is interesting, but the reality is that the Indians don't have the land and Israel exists. The Arabs tried a few times to destroy Israel and they ended up being humiliated and losing even more land to the Jews. It's time to deal with the realities of the day.                     Date: 05 Oct 2006 18:33:57 From: Jack Hollis Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:39:02 -0700, multi <multi@asm.org > wrote: >>What makes the >>Arab claim more valid than the Jewish claim? > >Not much, except the Arabs had lived there for the past 2,000 years, >and almost all of the Jews immigrated there in the 20th century. Almost all? I don't hink so. At the time of the British takeover before WW1, the Jews were around 10% of the population.             Date: 04 Oct 2006 17:04:14 From: multi Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On 4 Oct 2006 06:37:18 -0700, "Fairway" <arminsson@yahoo.com > wrote: > >multi wrote: >> But racist, maybe. Saying Uganda would be a better choice than >> Palestine sure doesn't help your case. >> >Sir Multi, my case is a healthy one and fortunately doesn´t need help. >If anyone thinks I´m an anti-semite or a racist, it only proves that >he is a regular idiot. The concept itself, racist, is not unambiguous, >I think. We all realize that the races are very different, but that >hardly makes us racists - or what? I think Uganda would have been a >better (or the lesser evil) choice. It is obvious to anyone that Africa >would be draw many benefits from having a powerful, educated nation >among them. Thanks for clearing up the ambiguity. You can remove the "maybe" from my original statement. I think your racism is benign and unconscious, but it's still racism. Your justification is no different in principle than that of the conquistadors who thought that exposing natives to Christianity more than made up for enslaving them. It's obvious to everyone that your city would draw many benefits from bulldozing your block and having Tiger Woods build a new estate on the site. It would look nicer, he would pay more taxes, and he would employ more people to maintain his grounds. He might even pay to upgrade the local airport. You can go live wherever you expected the displaced Ugandans to live.           Date: 30 Sep 2006 11:51:11 From: William A. T. Clark Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <QciTg.840$5o5.519@tornado.texas.rr.com >, "The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan" <nospam@nospam.net > wrote: > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message > news:clark.31-182D0B.14230929092006@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > >> > >> IMHO, the "defense of Europe" is of no value at all to the peoples of > >> the Americas. Let the "old world" kill itself off. We have no business > >> in the ex Yugoslavia, for example, and no business maintaining military > >> bases in any part of Europe. My ancestors came here to get away from > >> that crap. If they try to stir up anything with us, we can blow them > >> back to the dark ages one way or another. > > > > Agreed, much better if the UK didn't chase and arrest terrorists intent > > on bombing the US. Let the Americans take the consequences of their > > moronic Middle East policy flush on the chin. > > It's Tony Blair's moronic policy as well. Or perhaps it isn't and he is > simply GWB's lapdog. Sad in either case. No argument there. William Clark     Date: 26 Sep 2006 14:34:34 From: Howard9 Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup In article <1159259591.114686.313850@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >, babblebrook1@eircom.net says... > Although I enjoyed the tournament a lot this irrational desire of the > media to equate the Ryder Cup with major sporting events like the > (soccer) World Cup, Olympic games or Superbowl is just plain silly. > It's just a golf tournament and not even close to being the most > important one either. Sadly, the only thing truly 'epic' about Ryder > Cup 2006 was that it was probably the biggest rip-off in the history of > sporting events. So a bunch of people who were already very rich got a > lot richer. And unfortunately this is hardly surprising to anyone that > lives in modern post-Celtic Tiger rip-off-a-minute Ireland. Here's some > recommended reading... > http://www.ireland.com/sports/rydercup2006/features/sheridan.htm Written by one of the arch begrudging socialist commentators here. He has an deep hatred of people who are successful and people who are rich. He cannot stand successful businesses who make big profits from successfully satisfying customer demand. He wants all sportsmen to be pure and poor to satisfy his pitiful socialist world view. He cannot stand 5 million being spent on an event that drew a billion viewers and will bring hundreds of millions to Ireland in the next ten years. But that would bring the dirty word of 'success'... how awful ! Thankfully his view is not shared by the vast majority of people here in Ireland who are enjoying the energy and the wealth of modern Ireland with satisfaction and joy - and not hankering back to this idiot's 'good old days' when hundreds of thousands were on the streets and on the dole and people had no money to spend on pleasures and luxuries but when his socialist purity was satisfied. -- Howard   Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:53:48 From: Cal Golfer Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup C'mon, I know we are all golfers here, but let's get a little more perspective. One of the most dramatic sporting events in history.? Please. That is like the recent campaigning that TIger should be considered one of the greatest athletes of all time. He isn't even the best golfer yet, and some clowns want to rank him next to Rafer Johnson, Jim Brown, Jim Thorpe, Willie Mays, Michael Jordan, Muhammed Ali, Roberto Duran, etc...He is a great athlete among white toast, semi-flab, preppy dudes, which makes him look like Superman by comparison. The Ryder Cup is a 3-day per every-other-year team event that doesn't draw much attention outside the golf world. Even most of the golfers I know here in USA don't watch it -- even if the USA team was good! Dave Baker wrote: >.....of what would turn out to be one of the most dramatic sporting events in history.     Date: 25 Sep 2006 22:00:38 From: Bert Robbins Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Cal Golfer wrote: > C'mon, I know we are all golfers here, but let's get a little more > perspective. One of the most dramatic sporting events in history.? > Please. That is like the recent campaigning that TIger should be > considered one of the greatest athletes of all time. > > He isn't even the best golfer yet, and some clowns want to rank him > next to Rafer Johnson, Jim Brown, Jim Thorpe, Willie Mays, Michael > Jordan, Muhammed Ali, Roberto Duran, etc...He is a great athlete among > white toast, semi-flab, preppy dudes, which makes him look like > Superman by comparison. I'm closer to a bubba than a preppy dude.     Date: 26 Sep 2006 01:37:57 From: Howard Brazee Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup On 25 Sep 2006 14:53:48 -0700, "Cal Golfer" <Bill_VP@yahoo.com > wrote: >He isn't even the best golfer yet, and some clowns want to rank him >next to Rafer Johnson, Jim Brown, Jim Thorpe, Willie Mays, Michael >Jordan, Muhammed Ali, Roberto Duran, etc...He is a great athlete among >white toast, semi-flab, preppy dudes, which makes him look like >Superman by comparison. So why not rank them together? We really can't compare Willie Mays with Roberto Duran except by seeing how they stand among their peers within their respective sports. Which we can do with Tiger as well.     Date: 26 Sep 2006 00:01:39 From: JJK Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup "Cal Golfer" wrote: > C'mon, I know we are all golfers here, but let's get a little more > perspective. One of the most dramatic sporting events in history.? > Please. That is like the recent campaigning that TIger should be > considered one of the greatest athletes of all time. > > He isn't even the best golfer yet, and some clowns want to rank him > next to Rafer Johnson, Jim Brown, Jim Thorpe, Willie Mays, Michael > Jordan, Muhammed Ali, Roberto Duran, etc...He is a great athlete among > white toast, semi-flab, preppy dudes, which makes him look like > Superman by comparison. <snip > When you can play 1/100th as well as Tiger does, please let us know. The level he plays at requires athleticism.   Date: 25 Sep 2006 08:09:52 From: Fairway Subject: Re: Final thoughts on the Ryder Cup Dave Baker wrote: > I'd also like to commend Tom Lehman and the entire American team for the > class and sportsmanship they displayed throughout the event. Smiles were not > much in evidence but their honest and heartfelt support and admiration for > Clarke was. Lehman's closing speech was statesmanlike and much appreciated. > Things have not always been like this. You only have to think back to > Brookline, but on this weekend the event came back to its roots. Two teams > competing to win as hard as they could but also in the spirit of the game > and with respect for their opponents. Truer words were never spoken! Tom Lehman is pure class. The US team were a disappointment on the course but their behavior was exemplary. Hail to them. F