FlaSoxxJim

It was the ABC Prime Time interview from last Monday that I refer to when I say ha came off as sidestepping the issues. I don't know if the NBC material you are refering to was taped later but it sound like it may have been in which case he'd have been ready to come up with some better answers to the questions at hand. Again I did not see anything on NBC (and haven't seen any interview material since Prime Time), but I don't think he or his father was unfairly treated in that. He was given a chance to distance himself from radical views of his father which he may or may not share. He refused to do so on Prime Time bacause he did not want to speak poorly of his father, but if on NBC he conceded a Holocost in whicj 6+ million Jews were killed, he did exactly what he refused to do on Monday. Now how hard was that?

You're not allowed to cash in on the Cubs doing well, that woudl be BLOOD MONEY!

Terry was something - a personal favorite, as was the whole band through the first 10 albums even after Terry cashed it in. But the nod from Hendrix I believe is second- or third-hand embelishment. The up-and-coming guitarist Jimi did mention on several occasions as being the guy that blew him away ehen he saw him was actually Billy Gibbons. I think ZZ Top jumped the shark an album or two before Eliminator (And I absolutely thought Recycler sp? was an appropriately named album, as self-derivitive as it was), but Gibbon's guitar work on the early albums doed Texas guitarslingers proud. Was Billy even on the list? What about Alvin Lee? As to Stills Vs. Young, I would have put Neil higher on the list than Stephen. And not as a knock to Stills, who was technically the better player in his prime. Style and feel have to be part of the selection process though, and Neil's one-string (hell, sometimes one-note!) guitar solos are nothing but style and feel. He's important as a bridge between the old guard and new guard grungers too.

Nearly everything you are saying is reasonable, and I certainly believe the general rule that the son should not be punished for the sins of the father. But, Mel Gibson completely sidestepped the issues at hand during the Prime Time interview. When asked if he shared his fathers views he refused to answer either way, saying only 'I will not speak out against my father.' Is saying "Actually I'm not a carbon copy of my dad and although I love him we do disagree on certain things" speaking out against him? By NOT answering the question at all, I think he spoke volumes on the subject. By feigning shock and surprise/indignation when it was pointed out to him that the Emmerich visions are chock-full of anti-semitism, it demonstrates either that he has not studied the source material closely enough before making the film or that he is as blind to his prejudices as his father is to his. From all accounts, this is a very powerful film. But, the way Jewish community members (even film critics) have been systematically and intentionally excluded from pre-screenings only invites scrutiny. And making pre-viewers sign a release swearing they will not say anything negative about the film before the release - while at the same time encouraging positive commentary - is more than a little paranoid. There's so many wierd things about the film. Mel is still ascribing the "It is as it was" quote to the Pope, even though the Vatican has apparently now thought better of associating itself with a secular, commercial product. There was direct communication from Vatican officials to the film's promoters telling them to run with that quote, true, but they then backed away from it without much explanation. It was odd that the Papal seal of approval was so urgently sought and so rashly dispensed, given that Mel considers the Papacy a sham since V2.

Don't kill the messenger (computer), it can be very costly. The list is problematic, to say the least - but as long as you consider inclusion among the top 100 rather than rank order, I agree with a good deal of it. Exclusion of Charlie Christian (the FATHER of the friggin' electric guitar) is inexcusable, especially when other archetypal influences like Robert Johnson are included. Exclusion of Buddy Holly (Rock and Roll's first guitar hero) is also bad. For pure stunt guitar brilliance, leaving Vai, Satriani, or Eric Johnson off is odd. Even as overlooked as the Dixie Dreggs are, Steve Morse should have made the list, especially since Danny Gatton and Roy Buchannan did rightly make the cut. I like the White Stripes quite a bit, but didn't Jack White start playing guitar like, last Thursday?!? I have to admit there are a lot of players on here that this old man doesn't know, so I can't make an honest evaluation. Get me my walker, Sonny...

Buddy Guy is #30.

King Pin is really underrated.

Only as a point of clarification, Bob, as cw and a lot of news articles have pointed out, the primary source for a lot of Gibson's version that ended up on screen was NOT from the Gospels but from the visions of Anne Catherine Emmerich. These have been described as very unsettling, gruesome, and very anti-semitic. I don't kow if that was noted in this thread, as I have lost track of the multiple threads on the topic on this board and the Sox mlb board (Is it distressing that the underwhelming Sox off-season has led us all to armchair theology as a diversion?!)

Y'know, as critical as I am about most other instances where Biblical events are presented as fact (literal or abstracted), I usually give the Jesus miracle stories. For any sort of Christian (I disqualify myself), the "this is JESUS" argument has to hold water. We have heard all the Jesus miracles rationalized away, from water to wine, to walking on water and calming the sea, to feeding the masses with a half-order of fish & chips, curing the blind, raising the dead, etc. If you don't believe the Jesus miracle stories, then even if you believe there is a higher power your are not a Christian. Jews and Muslims both accept Jesus as an important prophet, but fall short of ascribing him divinity. Recovering Catholics like me may still think Jesus was most excellent and most loving but still human. For Christians, though, Jesus is at the heart of it all, and for me to have any kind of meaningful dialogue on matters of Christianity, I have to take those stories as read to approach any of it the right way. And even the Christians who's conception of Jesus is as a half man/half God haven't got where they're supposed to be. A central Mystery of the faith is that Jesus was ALL HUMAN and ALL DIVINE. You either never could wrap your brain around that one (like me), or you accepted it as an article of your faith belief even though it's not for man to ever fully understand. Christians who accept the collected Miracles of the Nazz are merely professing their faith. Love and compassion for your fellow man is the upthrust of Jesus' life anyway (unlike much of the bible). It's not that far away from my own more secular guide to muddling through it all: Love and do what you will. Now, anyone who wants to date the Earth, explain animal distributions, put any race over any other, or rationalize hate-mongering, intolerance, WAR, etc., with the rest of the stories between the covers of the Good Book -- those are the folks I tend to take to task.

That's not the God that crerated man, Wayne. That's the God that was created by man -- pettiness, capriciousness, indiscriminate cruelty and all. We have to justify those traits somehow, so let's ascribe them to the Divine Agent. And BJ, your distinction is absolutely critical. The distinnction between true predestination/predamnation and the concept that an omnicient God would know our fates ahead of time even though we do possess free will is what separates a religious viewpoint I can tolerate (All have a shot at salvation), and one that is absurd beyond the point of needing to address it (only a select few are born chosen and theres nothing you can do about it). The only Calvin that ever said anything I care about is the kid with the stuffed tiger.

LOL! Or as Christina Ricci asks as Wednesday Adams when the girl scout asks her to buy some, "Are they made from real girl scouts?"

It's like I tell my students... "There ARE no stupid questions... just STUPID, STUPID, PEOPLE."

Don't mean to be a stick in the mud, but I said nearly the same thing when I was 16 and the Sox had it within their grasp. I figured we'll be right back there the nest year and for several more to come. That was 1983 and I'm still waiting.

The drifters don't really count as Sox fans anyway. Being a Cub fan is skin deep, but being a Sox fan is down to the bone.

Maybe, but you still have Salerno Butter Cookies. They were like my kryptonite, and I could never resist them. Mmmmmm, butter cookies.

Which one puts out again? No, wait... that's the Hooper Triplets.

Yep, that's them. I just suppose if I tried to pound them, they'd all huddle in that big invisible box they always have with them and I'd get tired waiting for them to come out and just go home. Friggin' mimes.

I can't read the words 'lint', 'teacup', 'kneecap'.. hell just about any word without thinking that, but I think that's the case with all guys.

It's actually only getting up to the high 60s today -- I'll need to put my daughter in long sleeves for T-ball practice this evening. But I'll take 60s over 30s any day.

Stupid South Beach Diet be damned! I needed my thin mints!

Another nice sig, and most definitely a clam this time - most likely the northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenari. Mighty good eatin'. But for Pale Hose and you, I think they would immortalize the spirit of the thread better if the said "clam down." Whoever thought typos could be so entartaining? Baseball must not have started yet.

"Hey, Dad, Bob broke yer beer." "No way, eh? Doug broke yer beer."

Kudos, Baggio!

Brando paraphrased me fairly well on this. God was not made in the image of man, it's the other way around. To ascribe human foibles like close-mindedness, pettiness, jealousy and envy, etc., to an all=knowing, all-powerful, ALL-Loving (the big one mreally), is really selling the Big G short. A God that says, 'Offer up all of your works in My Name or else you're lost no matter how loving the acts' ?? Come on, Christians, you can do better. If you evver stumble upon Mark Twain's "Letters From the Earth," please pick it up and read it. It's a short, brilliant book and I guarantee you'll enjoy it. No fence painting or jumpig frogs in it, it's written as a series of lettters from Lucifer, who has been banished to Earth, back to the other Archangels (Basically why it was never published in his life, and only published after his daughter's death because she was afraid it would ruin the wholsome imae of Twain as Hannibal's Son and America's First Author...). It is a sympathetic portrayal of Ol' hornhead, and basically says that humans having wrong about the Devil is just the tiip of the iceberg as to how far off we arre on things spiritual. It includes many keen observations, such as the silliness of the traditional view of Heaven as choruses of angels on high playing harps and singing for all eternity - and notes that most people in life go out of their skulls after about 30 seconds of such fare, but somehow we pictture that in the afterlife it'll last forevver and we'll be in eternal bliss? I know most people's conception of the afterlife has evolved a lot and this is overstatement, but the point is that when we thrust out limited world view onto the image of the Divine realm we are going to fall woefully short by definition. Brando gave us a wonderful quote from Galbraith about Conservatives having the difficult task of trying to morally justify greed. We see precicely the same thing in Christian Conservatives who want to give all the worst human qualities to God (Hate, biggotry, intolerance, pettiness and close-mindedness), because if they're crafted in His image and they're a bunch of pricks, then God has to be made into the Divine Prick of Pricks. "God hates homosexual acts." "God on our side will allow us to beat, crush, and kill those damn religious fanatics in the Middle East" (isn't that an ironic one?). If there is a God, this brand of Christian certainly does not know Him.

Hit is right on the head! If all human life – even the unborn – are sacred and equal in the eyes of the Divinity, then capital punishent should be seen by the thumpers as murder and sin and in direct violation of the 10 Commandments. Let the Divinity judge what is His to judge and let the laws of man and the laws of God remain separate. If a secular lout like me can grasp it, why can't the conservative religiosos who want to beat me on the head with the bible they so often selectively quote get it?