[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by Kevin Andrew Murphy:
I hadn't heard about the Girl Scouts, but honestly, with the Republicans, you would have thought they'd have figured it out back during the Reagan era with Bruce Springsteen. Obviously not.

That's the thing - I think they HAVE figured it out. They just don't care. They're used to riding roughshot over people - doing whatever the hell they want and damn the consequences. They take what they want, where they want it and whenever they want it - with little or no regard for who they take it from.

Past practice says they can get away with it for the short run and they aren't worried about the long run. The end justifies the means and that's all there is to it.

As for using "Born in the USA" and not realizing it was an anti-war song - has anyone checked out the actual lyrics to "Barracuda?"

You lying so low in the weeds
I bet you gonna ambush me
You’d have me down down down down on my knees
Now wouldn’t you, barracuda?

Back over time we were all
Trying for free
You met the porpoise and me
No right no wrong, selling a song-
A name, whisper game.

If the real thing don’t do the trick
You better make up something quick
You gonna burn burn burn burn it to the wick
Ooooooh, barracuda?

It's about a woman - not a good woman - and it's not complimentary. Hardly something a good wife and mother, a proud Christian or an intelligent, successful business woman would want to be known as.

As for the fish, Barracuda, it's dangerous when provoked, it's a predator, a scavenger, a formidable hunter, and perfectly capable of defending itself against humans that harass them. Weirdly enough, wearing jewelry and other shiny objects is discouraged when they're around as barracudas tend to be attracted to things that glint and shine.

Again, a strange thing to want to be compared to, dontcha think?

Not a bad thing for a basketball player perhaps, not so good for a woman who was voted "Miss Congeniality" in a beauty pageant, and terrible for a vice president of The United States.




[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited September 06, 2008).]

[Shaun J. Russell]

Well it DOES have the word "right" in it...

[Jerry Glenn Hartwig]

Thank you Jody. You expressed it far better than I.

[Roger Slater]

Jerry, Jody expressed something that you, in your remarks, were not even trying to express, a different idea entirely, so it's not a question of Jody expressing it "better." But if you see my response to Jody, you will note that there is more to consider here than what Jody mentioned. And nothing that Jody said would suggest that the RNC could legally use the song after an objection was made by the copyright holder.

[Jerry Glenn Hartwig]

God, we're civil this morning, aren't we? LOL

Guess we're all feeling a little under the weather *grin*.

Anyway, Jody covered the details I was talking about this morning and he did a finer job of it.

I don't think any of them are scary people. I think they are people essentially trying to do the same job - albeit with somewhat different agendas and constituents.

I doubt any of them particularly want to be in a war. I doubt there will be much differemce in withdrawel timetables whoever is elected - the situatio is no longer in the control of any one country and especially not any one person. Despite who we may blame for starting it, it's a global conflict and the global parties will determine the agenda.

I like Obama and his wife. I think he's as honest and sincere as any politician can be and still get elected and I think he believes what he says. I give McCain the same benefit of the doubt.

Were I still in the military, though, I'd rather have McCain as the Commander-in-Chief. I think he has the POV of the grunt in the field and knows how they feel. Obama hasn't been in that situation.

Economically, every person's going to vote for the person they think will best help their personal situation. There's no one solution that's best for everyone. If there were, we wouldn't need parties. Political ones *grin*. Historically, my investments have done best in a Republican controlled government. That edges me towards their party in an election. (BTW, I've never been a member of either party).

I'm not a pro-lifer, yet I also don't believe a fetus should be aborted just for the convenience of two people who either accidently or irresponsibly created a child. there are times, however, when an abortion may be necessary. Nothing should fall under black and white rules.

I'm not keen on the NRA and it's objectives, although I've always owned a handgun since age 21 for target shooting. I instinctively don't trust people who - in an average enviroment - think they need to have a gun in their possession for self protection. Most of them that I've spoken to don't understand why they can't just blow someone away for breaking into their car.

Anyway, the point is I'm not completely happy with the goals of either party. I'm not happy with Bush's 'accomplishments', but we can't change the past and whining about it isn't conducive to solving the problem. I tend to feel the whiners are hypocrites, anyway, at least the portion who initially supported the assault.

I wanted to have confidence in Obama when he began campaigning, but he hasn't succeeded in earning it, yet. No one here can predict what either McCain or Obama will actually do (neither can McCain or Obama, with any honesty), but I feel McCain is more capable - my opinion. Obama may sway me over, but he hasn't yet.

[Jerry Glenn Hartwig]

OK - so Palin didn't burn any books. She allegedly pressured a librarian (to the point of firing her) to remove book{s) from the shelf,, From the sources I've researched, there isn't even a definitive list of what book(s) she wanted removed from the library. The titles people are passing aroung have reportedly come from a different list - critics appear to be pulling names off that list.

Personally, I'm against such censorship. I have no problem with someone attmpting to pull books off the shelf via legal avenues - it's why we have legal procedures - but I would prefer parents supervise their children in the library. Or the video/game store.

So I'm not going to think Palin's perfect either. Oh well. I doubt anyone is.

[Roger Slater]

I just learned online that the McCain campaign did in fact pay the licensing fee, in advance, for Barracuda, so there was clearly no copyright violation in this instance as I had previously thought. The copyright holders have said, however, that they will donate the fee to the DNC, so it's quite nice of McCain to support Obama in this fashion.



[This message has been edited by Roger Slater (edited September 06, 2008).]

[Jerry Glenn Hartwig]

Edited because I had cross posted with Roger and had not read his tacit admission the RNC was unjustly accused and slandered.

Or is it libel on a discussion forum?




[This message has been edited by Jerry Glenn Hartwig (edited September 06, 2008).]

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by Roger Slater:
I just learned online that the McCain campaign did in fact pay the licensing fee, in advance, for Barracuda, so there was clearly no copyright violation in this instance as I had previously thought. The copyright holders have said, however, that they will donate the fee to the DNC, so it's quite nice of McCain to support Obama in this fashion.

Roger, have you got a link, please? I've not read that yet and I'm interested to see how the Heart Sisters could have written a cease and desist order and then made such a fuss over the "using without permission" thing. Are they not the copyright holders? Does the company who produced the record hold the copyright? Seems like Heart would owe the McCain campaign an apology if the campaign had paid a licensing fee beforehand.

Seems like they'd also owe us (the public) one, too, in a way, just for leading us to believe something that wasn't true.

Gawd, ya can't trust anyone anymore, can ya? Not even an aging rock goddess.

[Kevin Andrew Murphy]

Here's the Heart sisters words at EW.com:
http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2008/...-responds.html

It's pretty clear that the sisters asked the RNC to knock it off, and more than once.

More than that, from the look of things, it appears that the only permission the RNC obtained was paying the ASCAP fees to play the song at the convention, but there's a pretty obvious difference between a license designed for restaurants playing music at as background, for example, and the producer of a nationally televised event selecting a song to be the leitmotif of a new star.

The RNC didn't obtain real permission so much as just get enough of a legal dodge set up to weasel out of any consequences for themselves.

And as the Wilson sisters pointed out, it was a pretty ironic choice of song anyway.