· Naughties
· · 2005
· · · April
· · · · 23 (3 entries)

Sock Hop Arousal · In re­cent week­s, I’ve had some suc­cess­es at dis­cov­er­ing good new mu­sic on the ra­dio, which isn’t what it once was but is still not be­yond hope. Here’s one: the oth­er night, lis­ten­ing to CBC Ra­dio3 some­time past mid­night on CBC-FM, I re­al­ly liked a cut off Bonobo-a-Go-Go by Sock Hop Arousal (they have a way with words if noth­ing else), and then the guy came on the ra­dio and said “You can buy that at Bull­frog Mu­sic” and right then and there, sit­ting in my chair, I did, it was C$8.49 and with ship­ping was still on­ly $12 or so. The most ob­vi­ous in­flu­ence, like the Web site says, is Bris­tol trip hop, on­ly with gui­tars. The mu­sic, to my ear, has a heart, a cen­tre; a rare enough thing these days, or in any days. Money well spen­t.
Spam Storm · Is it just me, or is ev­ery­one get­ting a hun­dred or so emails per hour that are spam­bounces, i.e. spam with my email ad­dress on the “From:” line. I’m not sure I’ve seen a spam­storm quite as in­tense as this, ev­er. I ac­tu­al­ly looked in­side one and sure enough, there’s a re­al Web page sell­ing the usu­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal­s. Can no­body just go and take these guys down and keep them down?
Tet · Hey, you can call me a pedant and a pinko, and while I know that few to­day re­al­ly care much about what hap­pened in Viet­nam in 1968, I am con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly un­able to let huge fat stink­ing his­tor­i­cal lies in ma­jor pub­li­ca­tions go un­ad­dressed. In Ge­orge Will’s Wash­ing­ton Post col­umn this Sun­day, he says “When, af­ter the mis­re­port­ed Tet of­fen­sive of 1968 (a U.S. mil­i­tary vic­to­ry de­scribed as a crush­ing de­feat), Cronkite de­clared Viet­nam a ‘stalemate’...” I’m sor­ry, I was at one time a keen stu­dent of the his­to­ry of Viet­nam go­ing back cen­turies and up through the fall of Saigon, and Ge­orge Will is full of it. In 1968, at a time when the Amer­i­cans and South Viet­namese were busy as­sur­ing ev­ery­body that ev­ery­thing was just fine, the oth­er side sud­den­ly and with­out warn­ing launched syn­chro­nized up­ris­ings and at­tacks across the coun­try in­clud­ing right in Saigon. Yes, the Amer­i­cans won that bat­tle, quick­ly and de­ci­sive­ly; but the of­fen­sive made it clear that they’d been ly­ing about the re­al state of af­fairs. I was watch­ing those TV broad­casts my­self, and they made clear it clear that the Amer­i­cans were win­ning the skir­mish­es, but they al­so ex­posed the vis­cer­al hor­ror of both troops and civil­ians that the en­e­my they thought they were beat­ing could in­fil­trate at will and at­tack any time. It was at that pre­cise point that a lot of smart peo­ple de­cid­ed, and some of the me­dia start­ed ac­cu­rate­ly re­port­ing, that the U.S. wasn’t win­ning.
author · Dad · software · colophon · rights
Random image, linked to its containing fragment

By .

I am an employee
of Amazon.com, but
the opinions expressed here
are my own, and no other party
necessarily agrees with them.

A full disclosure of my
professional interests is
on the author page.