Danged Quizzes!

Darn you, Patrick! Stop doing that! You know I can't stop at just one! Drat!


71%How Addicted to Blogging Are You?

Mingle² - Dating Site

Mingle² - Calgary Singles

Free Online Dating from Mingle²

I am 73% Addicted to Coffee

Mingle² - Free Online Dating

Free Online Dating

I Scored a 100%!

Mingle² - Free Online Dating

Patrick found the Quiz while at Educated Shoprat's blog.

Geographically Speaking: The Land Of Israel

In Ancient times nations' borders were tenuous things, often following meandering rivers, coastlines, landmarks. Specifics are often lacking, forcing historians and geographers to guess where borders ran, using fragile documents of crumbling papyrus, chiseled monuments, baked cuneiform tablets. The Kingdom of Israel is one such nation whose ancient borders depend on guesses and scriptural readings that are not always easy to follow.

When modern Israelis talk about the traditional borders of Israel encompassing Judea and Samaria, they cannot be completely accurate regarding exactly where those borders ran. The boundaries of a famous city such as Jerusalem cannot, today, be defined perfectly as it has existed for millennia and has grown beyond its earliest size. But despite the rantings of some supposed scholars, there is no factual case against the existence of Israel in Ancient times. The Kingdom existed, founded by David in around 1,000 BC.

Despite David's prowess as a warrior, Israel came into existence in a time of relative peace. Israel's neighbors were fairly weak during this period. Thus Israel was able to defeat her enemies, expand her territory, defend herself against any threats. Solomon succeeded his father, David, on the throne in around 967 BC. Following his death the Kingdom disintegrated and split in two. The northern Kingdom of Israel fell to the Assyrians in 722 BC, the southern Kingdom of Judah would last until conquered by the Babylonians in 586 BC.

I won't bore you with a recitation of the history of the land of Israel. You should know most of it, including the Greek occupations, the Maccabean Kingdom, the Romans, the Ottomans. Suffice it to say that Jews remained in the land despite most of their brethren being dispersed throughout the world (The Diaspora).

Following World War I, with the defeat of the Ottoman Turks, the entire Middle East fell to the powers of the West, including the French and the British. Britain took control of the lands of Israel and called them by the old Roman name: Palestine. This British Mandate was smaller than the Kingdom of Israel under David or Solomon. Established under the aegis of the League of Nations in 1922, the British would administer the land until 1948.

Across the Jordan River the British also controlled Transjordan.

From Wikipedia:

Initially, both the territory to the East and the West of the Jordan river were within the British Mandate for Palestine. "Transjordan" was a name coined as a reference to the part of Palestine "across the Jordan", i.e., on the far (eastern) side of the Jordan River. On the western side of the Jordan River was the remaining 21% of the Palestine Mandate, which contained many places of historical and religious significance to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

So, as you can see, all of modern Jordan and Israel were a part of the British Mandate of Palestine. All of it. With the War of Independence in 1948, the Jordanians (actually Palestinians, if that name has any real meaning) already controlled most of so-called Palestine.

In 1947, the British government, weary after the long war, and economically crumbling, decided to withdraw from the Mandate of Palestine, stating it was unable to arrive at a solution acceptable to both Arabs and Jews. The newly-created United Nations approved Resolution 181 (the Partition Plan) on November 29, 1947, allocating just over half the land for a Jewish state and most of the rest for an Arab country. Jerusalem was to be designated an international city administered by the UN to avoid conflict over its status. The Jewish community accepted the UN Partition Plan, but the Arab League and Arab Higher Committee rejected it.

They wanted all the land, and they didn't want any pesky Jews on it.

The British Mandate ended on May 13, 1948. The very next day, May 14, the Jewish state was proclaimed. And shortly after that the Arab world declared war and began the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The Jordanians captured what is called the West Bank and would hold it until the 1967 Six Day War. They captured the eastern part of Jerusalem, called the Old City, and would rule it with an iron fist until the Israeli Army took it in the 1967 Six-Day War. During the Jordanian "occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem,of course, no one demanded it be turned over to the UN or anyone else. Jordan captured the areas in War and held them until forced out.

From Wikipedia:

Contrary to the terms of the Armistice Agreement of 1949 between Jordan and Israel, Israelis were denied access to Jewish holy sites, many of which were desecrated, and only allowed extremely limited access to Christian holy sites.

In short they acted like an Occupying Army, and treated the inhabitants as any tyrannical government does.

Once freed of Arab control, the city of Jerusalem, indeed most of so-called "Palestine" prospered. Arab citizens are usually treated with kid gloves, granted rights that no Jew in an Arab country would ever have, and allowed economic and educational opportunities that do not exist in Arab nations. In short, Arabs in Israel are free.

From GlobalSecurity.org

In the aftermath of the 1967 war, the Israelis occupied the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the western portion of Syria's Al Qunaytirah Province (the Golan Heights), and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. The Israelis reaffirmed their control of these territories during the 1973 war. In late June 1967, Israel unilaterally incorporated some 67 square kilometers of West Bank land within the city bounds of Jerusalem and in 1980 proclaimed a united Jerusalem as its capital - a move that amounted to de facto annexation. In 1981 Israel also unilaterally annexed the Golan Heights. The international community has not recognized these declarations. Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt as part of the Camp David accords; and in September 1993, Israel and the PLO - after formal mutual recognition - signed a Declaration of Principles eventually extending limited self-rule to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Would any Muslim nation voluntarily return land to a conquered enemy, much less to a Jewish enemy? Should Israel cede any more land in a bid for Peace? Has this worked for Israel before? Would the next time be different?

After reading a post regarding the "Occupied Territories" and whether the Israelis should give them back, since the people of Israel are quite divided on the issue of "Land for Peace", I commented:

The UN-mandated borders, of Israel and Jordan (Palestine), were violated by acts of war committed by Israel's neighbors, including the state of Jordan. Those states forfeited any right to the land they lost in that and following wars due to their aggression. Though "Land for Peace" may play well in the Leftist media, it has not worked in reality. Loss of land following a war may not always be just, but in the case of Israel I think it is just and justified.

Under Israeli control, the places and people of the so-called "Occupied Territories" have been treated with a certain measure of respect, despite the ceaseless provocations of the losers in the various Arab-Israeli conflicts. This is something the Arabs could learn, but refuse to do. Arabs (including the Jordanians) have made a habit of desecrating tombs and Holy places of the Jews when they fall into their hands. Jews forced out of their homes and off their lands by the Arabs were absorbed into Israel, with nary a word about "repatriation". Arabs promised their brethren that after they crushed the Jewish state they would be given back their lands in Israel, lands the Arabs told them to leave to avoid the coming war. Their demands for "repatriation" of dispossessed Arabs (Palestinians) are silly on their face.

A nation of the size and power of the USA can certainly hand back control of conquered territories following a war. Our borders are not threatened by a rising, recently defeated Germany or Japan. But for Israel to do so would be suicidal.

When the Arab states declared war on Israel, and lost, they could not logically, or justly, demand a "do-over" and pay no price for their murderous folly. They paid for their war-making with land and blood. That is as it should be. They lost. Had the Arabs won, would you now, years later, be asking them to hand that land back to whatever Jews survived? I doubt it.

Let the Israelis hold on to the lands they won from the aggressors. Despite what the Left-leaning government of Israel avers, the people of Israel will only be safe by holding onto the lands that now serve them as a buffer from their enemies.

maps courtesy of GlobalSecurity.org "Evolution of Israel"

Let's Try And Keep This Quiet ...

While we shake our heads at yet another prominent Republican involved in a tawdry scandal - Idaho Senator Larry Craig - another oddity surfaced involving, no, not a Republican, but a Democrat. Michael Duga, erstwhile Chief of Staff to former Georgia Senator Max Cleland, was arrested following some rather bizarre behavior of his own. I'm sure the major media will keep us all abreast of developements on this story, being unbiased and all that, but just in case they slip up ...

Mr. Duga showed up at a John Edwards fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard - two Americas, eh, John? - identifying himself as an aide to Cleland to gain access, and then the fun began.

Once inside, he purported to be a top official for the Edwards campaign to some while representing himself as a paying guests to others. According to Mr. MacDonald, the host of the event, Mr. Duga was neither.

"Let me say that Mr. Duga is not - nor has he ever - been affiliated with the Edwards campaign . . . as far as I know he knew nobody at the event, and nobody there knew him," Mr. MacDonald said.

During the party, Mr. Duga slipped into a back room at the MacDonald home and stole a package of Edwards campaign material as well as a bundle of the former U.S. senator's personal stationery. According to one guest who asked not to be identified, Mr. Duga approached several people during the fundraiser and asked if they could help him arrange a private meeting with Mr. Edwards and his wife Elizabeth.

"He really seemed a bit off . . . at one point he pushed his way through the audience just to sit at a table next to Mr. Edwards," the guest said.
~ Martha's Vineyard Gazette

Now, if he was trying to embarrass the Edwards campaign, something Edwards himself is quite capable of, Duga was already in left field. But right now, I think, nobody is really sure what his purpose was.

Mr. Duga's appearance at the fundraiser was only part of his bizarre behavior over the weekend. Although police are not sure when Mr. Duga arrived on the Island, they believe he rented a room in a bed and breakfast in Aquinnah where he asked another guest if he could borrow their vehicle to find better cell phone service.

Mr. Duga then reportedly drove the vehicle, a Chevy Suburban, to the Edwards fundraiser where he worked most of the night at the front table where people purchased tickets. Toward the end of the fundraiser, Mr. Duga reportedly tried to stop a photographer from taking pictures of Mr. and Mrs. Edwards.

According to the police report, Mr. Duga got a ride to the airport with the Edwards party after the event, although he missed the flight to the next campaign stop.

Instead, Mr. Duga spent the night on the Island, and was next spotted Saturday around 8 a.m. when the Menemsha Coast Guard Station called Chilmark police to report a suspicious person on their property. Coast Guard officials later told police Mr. Duga was looking through paperwork and made some telephone calls from the Coast Guard boat house without permission.

When police arrived and questioned Mr. Duga, he said he was on official business and was currently volunteering for the Edwards campaign.

"Mr. Duga was asking many questions and was using military style jargon with lots of acronyms," the report said. "His eyes were glossy and red; his hair was messed up and he had a white substance that appeared to be toothpaste on his lips and chin . . . he appeared to be intoxicated."

A portable breathalyzer test on Mr. Duga, however, revealed that his blood alcohol content was zero.

[...]

When police asked Mr. Duga what he was doing on U.S. Coast Guard property, he said he was bringing provisions to the officers, and pointed to a paper bag containing a sandwich and a soda. He then said he wished to speak to the U.S. Coast Guard commander to notify him of the 27 security deficiencies he had observed.
~ Martha's Vineyard Gazette

What's the point, you ask? Well, some of you have an idea where I'm heading with this. This isn't simply the recitation of some unfortunate possibly-drug-addled fool crashing a political fundraiser. Duga may be just that. Where's the press coverage? Where are the blaring headlines? Had this clown been an aide to a former Republican Senator, do you think for a moment we would not be hearing this all over the airwaves? Wouldn't the press be trumpeting this to the heavens, with cogent analysis on what makes Right Wingers do these kinds of things? Hmmm?

Democrats, by the way, have been engaging in campaign shenanigans for a long time, beyond pulling down the signs of opponents. Showing up at an appearance of an opponent and trying to create an embarrassing media moment is the modus operandi of the Leftist fringe. All they hope for is massive coverage and to be attacked by an overzealous supporter so they can whine about suppression of their Free Speech rights (which they want to deny to those with whom they disagree). Duga's day at the beach sounds to me exactly like a page out of the Fringe Leftist Playbook. But somehow he screwed up.

Now, is this an indication that Max Cleland knew what was going on? No. That he approved of Duga's bizarre meanderings? No, not at all. But you do have to wonder about the judgement of a former US Senator in the hiring of his aides. Who vetted this whacko?

Seems Duga has a bit of a criminal history.

Oak Bluffs police had run Mr. Duga's information the previous evening. They also learned he had an extensive criminal background in Florida, where he had been charged with possession and sale of narcotics as well as carjacking.
~ Martha's Vineyard Gazette

In 2002, he pleaded no contest to charges of distributing Xanax, a drug used to treat anxiety, according to Florida Department of Law Enforcement records. And in 2003, he pleaded no contest to grand theft and marijuana charges. He was sentenced to one year of probation.
~ Miami Herald

Now we all know this is the type of person the fringe Dems like to use to go house-to-house, drumming up phony voter registrations. But he's not the type for most to choose as an aide. Yet, Max Cleland saw something in him.

Duga grew up in Coral Springs, his mother a doctor, his father a businessman. He graduated from Taravella in 1994 and went on to study political science at Ohio State, according to acquaintances and his former girlfriend, Melissa Sullivan.

Although Duga later graduated from Georgetown University's School of Law, he never went on to practice law, Sullivan said. Instead, he criss-crossed the country on various political campaigns. And he later worked as a political consultant.

Most recently, Duga served as top aide to Max Cleland, a former U.S. senator from Georgia and one-time chief of the U.S. Veterans Administration. A decorated veteran who suffered devastating wounds in Vietnam, Cleland lost his seat in a brutally contentious 2002 campaign.

[...]

''He's a very charming person,'' said Sullivan of Duga. ``He knows how to play the game of politics.''
~ Miami Herald

Yes, indeed! Very charming! Perhaps that's why this isn't being played for all its worth by the MSM. Of course some twits on the Left claims he's a Right Winger.

By Charles

August 29, 2007 7:40 AM | Link to this

Duga is just another Right wing nutcase on the loose. Here’s better details on this whacko’s behavior that the AJC won’t elaborate on:
~ From the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation

And he links to the Martha's Vineyard Gazette story. Riiiiight.

Cleland has suspended his aide. The Media will tiptoe lightly around this until the next Republican foul-up. And American voters will remain in the dark as to standard operating procedures for reportage by the American Press.

And ain't that a shame?

The Hypocrisy Continues: MSM Dhimmitude

Last week's Sunday Opus comic, by Berkely Breathed, took a swipe at the Late Jerry Falwell. Not a terribly laughable comic, it was humorous. A snipe at Christians in a small way, as Breathed has done from time to time. It elicited no howls of outrage, no threats of violence, no enraged Christian Right Lawyers threatening suits and demanding boycotts and apologies. In other words, a typical response to a comic strip that took a shot at Christians.

The Washington Post syndicates Breathed's strip, and obviously felt no compunctions against publishing an Opus comic taking a shot at the late Evangelist. Me, I kinda liked the strip, and as I said, it was humorous.

But that was last week.

This past Sunday's Opus strip was another ball of wax, entirely. The target? Muslim Radical Fundamentalism. The Washington Post's reaction? They decided to pass it around so that their Muslim employees could pass judgement on it. Finding their employees uncomfortable with the subject matter, the Washington Post refused to publish the comic strip.

The difference? Christian feelings are unimportant; Muslim feelings are important.
A popular comic strip that poked fun at the Rev. Jerry Falwell without incident one week ago was deemed too controversial to run over the weekend because this time it took a humorous swipe at Muslim fundamentalists.

Washington Post, Other Newspapers Won't Run 'Opus' Cartoon Mocking Radical Islam:

The Washington Post and several other newspapers around the country did not run Sunday's installment of Berkeley Breathed's "Opus," in which the spiritual fad-seeking character Lola Granola appears in a headscarf and explains to her boyfriend, Steve, why she wants to become a radical Islamist.

The installment did not appear in the Post's print version, but it ran on WashingtonPost.com and Salon.com. The same will hold true for the upcoming Sept. 2 strip, which is a continuation of the plotline.

Seems Muslims have no sense of humor, unless an infidel is being beheaded on film, or an apostate is being publicly hanged. How offensive was that comic strip? See for yourself:








Knee-slapping funny? No, but humorous, just the same. Offensive? Well, I can't see it, but perhaps a Muslim would find it so. But who cares, aside from the Dhimmists of the American MSM? This was so bad that the mighty Washington Post could not publish it? But the Opus strip from the previous week was not?

Again, the difference is the target of the humor. Muslims are not to be offended in any way, lest they erupt in violence. Christians, on the other hand, are always proper targets of the MSM. Always.

The Washington Post Writers Group syndicates "Opus," and the Post is the cartoon's home newspaper. The syndicate sent out an alert about the two strips in question, according to Writers Group comics editor Amy Lago.

Again, from the FOXNews article:

Sources told FOXNews.com that the strips were shown to Muslim staffers at The Washington Post to gauge their reaction, and they responded "emotionally" to the depiction of a woman dressed in traditional Muslim garb and espousing conservative Islamic views.

There was also considerable alarm over the strip at the highest echelons of The Washington Post Co., according to the sources.

[Writers Group comics editor Amy] Lago said she flagged some of the syndicate's newspaper clients for two reasons: because of the possibility that the jokes about Islam would be misconstrued and because of the sexual innuendo in the punchline.

"The strip came in and I knew we would have to send out an alert to all the newspapers," Lago said. "I do that fairly regularly with materials that might pose issues for local areas. ... We knew that because it was a sex joke, it could raise issues. And there is another client that has issues with any Muslim depiction whatsoever."


Lago said she didn't flag newspapers about that strip because she didn't think readers would misunderstand the humor.

"They're not going to take it seriously," she said.

But she did alert newspapers about the Muslim-themed cartoon because there was a question about whether Muslim readers would be offended.

"I don't necessarily think it's poking fun [at Islam]," Lago said. "But the question with Muslims is, are they taking it seriously?"

Why do they care if Muslims take the strip seriously? If Muslims take a comic strip seriously, shouldn't that be their problem? Shouldn't they be asked to grow up?


Is the Washington Post biased? You betcha! Against Christians, against Jews, against traditional American values themselves. The Leftist media at its finest, Folks!

Can't wait for next Sunday's Opus installment!

Sister Toldjah blogs on this, and Patrick did, too! Take a look. Neal Boortz noticed, too.

Good For What Ails Ya

Here's Johnny Cash performing a Kris Kristofferson song. From 1986, it's "Here Comes That Rainbow Again". Made me feel good, how 'bout you?



"Here Comes That Rainbow Again"
~ by Kris Kristofferson

The scene was a small roadside cafe,
The waitress was sweeping the floor.
Two truck drivers drinking their coffee.
And two Okie kids by the door.
"How much are them candies?" they asked her.
"How much have you got?" she replied.
"We've only a penny between us."
"Them's two for a penny," she lied.

And the daylight grew heavy with thunder,
With the smell of the rain on the wind.
Ain't it just like a human.
Here comes that rainbow again.

One truck driver called to the waitress,
After the kids went outside.
"Them candies ain't two for a penny."
"So what's it to you?" she replied.
In silence they finished their coffee,
And got up and nodded goodbye.
She called: "Hey, you left too much money!"
"So what's it to you?" they replied.

And the daylight was heavy with thunder,
With the smell of the rain on the wind.
Ain't it just like a human.
Here comes that rainbow again.

I Remember The Music Of My Youth ...

I used to have an LP by Chet Atkins. My father got it as part of one of those record club agreements. It was titled, "Chet Atkins Picks On The Beatles". I don't know if Dad liked it or not, though I expect he sort of did. Dad, though decrying Rock 'N Roll, seemed to find most music enjoyable. After all, he and Mom bought me my first Johnny Cash album, introduced me to my love of Classical music, and reared me on a steady diet of Big Band recordings, Frank Sinatra, and Dean Martin.

I think Dad tried to be the arch-conservative, and yet enjoyed so many things in the world of music. Anyway, when I discovered this album I was already a Beatles fan, though it was a kind of secret thing - we don't discuss Rock music around here! Shhh! - and I discovered that Chet Atkins intuitively felt the beauty of early Beatles songs and played better "cover" versions than so many other recording artists of the day. But I never followed Chet Atkins or his career, and the only lingering taste I had was that old, hissing album, now long lost.

Here's one of the world's finest guitar pickers, some years later, on his own television show, playing a medley of Beatles tunes, only one of which he'd played on that old album.

Can you figure out what the songs are?

PS: I now have the CD of that old album! It's still fantastic!



The Beatles songs Chet played were "If I Fell", "For No One", "Something", and "Lady Madonna".

The only cover version of a Beatles tune that I really enoyed was this version by the Mamas And Papas. It's the second cut in this medley.

Jackie Mason On Karl Rove ...

I found this at Ric's Blog, whilst surfing along, and decided to listen to what Mr. Mason had to say. Frankly I expected to hear a celebration of Karl Rove's resignation. But I didn't. Give it a listen. By the way, when you get down to about 50 seconds remaining, Jackie gives a cogent analysis on the Democratic Party's stand on the political process. I do believe he has it nailed!

And another Thing ..

Find out your Harry Potter personality at LiquidGeneration!

Hey, I could've done worse, right? Might've been tabbed as Draco Malfoy! Yeesh! So I'm Harry Potter, but I do have magical powers, don'cha know? I can get M&Ms anytime I want them. Heheheeee!

Of course one quiz is not enough, so ...


Find out your Spider-Man personality at LiquidGeneration!

And now you know! So watch your step, Evil Doers!



And, in closing ...

August 16, 1962

"Ringo's a damn good drummer. He was always a good drummer. He's not technically good, but I think Ringo's drumming is underrated the same way Paul's base-playing is underrated. Paul and Ringo stand up anywhere with any of the rock musicians." John Lennon ~ from a Playboy magazine interview (1980)

Forty-five years ago one of the most important moments in the history of Rock 'N Roll music took place. A Liverpool, England band, fresh from signing their first recording contract, decided to fire their drummer and replace him with the drummer from one of the rival bands in the area. Pete Best, drummer from 1960, was sacked, and Richard Starkey, the popular drummer from Rory Storm and the Hurricanes, was hired to replace him. We know Mr. Starkey as Ringo Starr. The band? The Beatles.

"First and foremost I am a drummer. After that, I'm other things. ...But I didn't play drums to make money. I played drums because I loved them. ...My soul is that of a drummer....It came to where I had to make a decision -- I was going to be a drummer. Everything else goes now. I play drums. It was a conscious moment in my life when I said the rest of things were getting in the way. I didn't do it to be come rich and famous, I did it because it was the love of my life." Ringo Starr ~ quoted in The Big Beat by Max Weinberg(1984)

Less than a year before Ringo had played with the Beatles at the Cavern Club, replacing an ailing Pete Best. He already knew the Beatles well, having played on some of the same bills in Hamburg, Germany, while a member of the Hurricanes. But the Hurricanes were going nowhere, having pretty much reached the peak of their popularity and creativity. So Ringo was looking for something better.

Pete Best, though, had something of a rabid following among Beatles fans. A rather vocal following. Playing their first show at the Cavern Club following the firing of Pete Best, his fans in the audience took up chanting, "Pete Best Forever, Ringo Never!" And they weren't only vocal. Lead guitarist George Harrison received a black eye that night from an angry Pete Best fan.

Pete Best still thinks he got a raw deal and Ringo Starr merely stepped into a sweet deal. As a drummer ... I think Mr. Best was a good baker's assistant.

Although several odd theories have surfaced over the years about the "real" reason for Best's ouster (Paul was jealous of Best's James Dean looks, John and Paul thought he was too popular, and so on), some seem to make the most sense and are accepted by Beatles fans as official. The Beatles' famous mop-top hair style was created in Hamburg, Germany, and was a bit of a hit. But Best refused to cut his hair that way. He continued to wear his hair in a pompadour and DA. Poorest styling decision in recording history, I think.

Also, the producer assigned to the Beatles, by EMI - George Martin - didn't think Pete Best was much of a drummer. In fact, as he has said often, and the Beatles themselves repeated, Martin told manager Brian Epstein that they could keep Best for public appearances, but he would not play on any recordings. Yes, Best was that bad. A pedestrian drummer at "best"!

"Ringo always got and still gets a unique sound out of his drums, as sound as distinctive as his voice. ... Ringo gets a looser deeper sound out of his drums that is unique. ...This detailed attention to the tone of his drums is one of the reasons for Ringo's brilliance. Another is that although Ringo does not keep time with a metronome accuracy, he has unrivaled feel for a song. If his timing fluctuates, it invariably does so in the right place at the right time, keep the right atmosphere going on the track and give it a rock solid foundation. This held true for every single Beatles number Richie played ... Ringo also was a great tom tom player." ~ George Martin, 1994

Ringo Starr became the "nice" Beatle, the "fun" Beatle, the least dangerous Beatle. He also became a drumming icon for many young rockers. He was self-taught at the drums, so never learned the traditional way of holding drum sticks. He held them the same in both hands, which he found added drive to the rock beat. He wasn't the first, probably, to do that, but he was the first real Rock 'N Roll drummer. Everybody else followed him. Rather than play the upbeat as so many drummers did at the time, Ringo played the downbeat - a back beat - that was easier for the others to hear and follow. Some critics complained that he didn't keep metronomic time, but he started and finished where he was supposed to,a nd was inventive in his play while never trying to overshadow his band-mates. The ego the other Beatles had in spades, Ringo never really had.

"I consider him one of the greatest innovators of rock drumming and believe that he has been one of the greatest influences on rock drumming today... Ringo has influenced drummers more than they will ever realize or admit. Ringo laid down the fundamental rock beat that drummers are playing today and they probably don't even realize it. (Modern Drummer,Oct. 1987) . . Ringo always approached the song more like a songwriter than a drummer. He always served the music." (Modern Drummer, Dec. 1987) ~ Kenny Arnoff

According to Phil Collins, Ringo is "vastly underrated. The drum fills on "A Day In The Life" are very complex things. You could take a great drummer today and say, 'I want it like that.' They wouldn't know what to do."

Spending most of his childhood moving in and out of hospitals, where he learned to play the drums, Starr's health slowly improved, and as a teenager he played the English holiday camps known as Butlins. Here, he developed the eclectic skills and diverse musical knowledge that would serve him well in years to come. Playing in various "beat" groups of late-'50s Liverpool, Starkey, using the show name Ringo Starr (due to his penchant for gaudy rings) became a local favorite with the band, Rory Storm & the Hurricanes.

“Ultimately what’s most impressive about Ringo Starr isn’t what he’s been, but rather who he is,” wrote Rolling Stone rock critic David Wild. “The man’s great heart and soul, his wit and wisdom.”

"When we first started, they basically went John and Paul's way because they were the writers and they would say, "This is the song," and I would play as creatively as I could. Sometimes I would have three people telling me how to do it. They were saying playing this like on that track. I'm saying, "For Christ's sake, there are two drummers there." They could never hear that, you know. You'd have to have four arms to do half the stuff they wanted me to do." Ringo Starr ~ from an interview in Viva magazine (1978)

A Big Deal Indeed

Bill O'reilly apparently did a segment on his TV show, recently, where he discussed "hateful" bloggers. I don't watch O'Reilly. I don't have cable TV, so it's not an option. Besides, when I did have the option his was one of the shows I quickly dropped from my viewing schedule. I thought he tried too hard to be "balanced"and ended up taking unfair shots at Conservatives just so he could point to his utter "fairness".

One thing he does do, though, is read his mail. On the air. Pro or con, he will air the missives of his viewers and will comment on them. Gayle (Dragon Lady) at My Republican Blog emailed O'Reilly concerning that particular "hateful blogger" segment, and was excited that he picked it as one of the ones to read on-air. She emailed me, as I know she did others of her blogging friends, to let me know. I asked if she was going to post the video of it on her blog. She replied,

"Wordsmith video taped it. It's on his blog and on Little Miss Chatterbox's blog.

It's really no big deal. I had about 4 or 5 seconds of fame. LOL! I'm actually surprised he read even part of my e-mail. But thank you!"

No big deal. HAH! When somebody in the 'family' is being mentioned on the air, or is interviewed on radio or in the local newspaper, it most certainly is a big deal! And O'Reilly is a big enough name to make this tiny mention a very big deal indeed. So watch this very short video, why don'cha?


Thanks to Wordsmith for creating and posting the video!


Okay, we're not taking Gayle out for pizza afterward in celebration, but it's fun anyway, and yes, a little exciting, just the same.

"My sister is in a play, we're all going to watch her!"
"My brother is reciting some of his poetry at the coffee-house. Let's go listen!"
"My cousin just got published! We're buying copies for the whole family!"

It's that sort of thing. The small bloggers of my acquaintance get little enough recognition of their endeavors. We read each other and wonder if anybody of note will pay attention to our thoughts, while we continue on, writing about those things that we think are damned important. And when sister gets in the cast of her local play, or brother's poetry is chosen for a public reading, then we're actually thrilled, and we want to see/hear it and applaud.

Because that's what families do, isn't it? And we are, in fact, a kind of family here in the blogosphere.

Way to go, Gayle! Cool Beans, sister! That's neat!

I'm A Sandwich?

In case you think The Anchoress is only about deep thoughts and Opera, I found this quiz on her blog and took a shot. Yes, you knew I would. LOL

You Are a Ham Sandwich

You are quiet, understated, and a great comfort to all of your friends. Over time, you have proven yourself as loyal and steadfast. And you are by no means boring. You do well in any situation - from fancy to laid back. Your best friend: The Turkey Sandwich Your mortal enemy: The Grilled Cheese Sandwich

What Kind of Sandwich Are You?

Not In My Backyard - Rich Leftists Defend Thier Riches

Lovey Howell: You know, I really wouldn't mind being poor, if it weren't for one thing.
Thurston Howell III: What is that, my dear?
Lovey Howell: Poverty.

The Anchoress had this on her blog, which she found at WattHead. It's funny, and it certainly shows the double standards of the Leftists who have more money than they know what to do with. They personify the NIMBY cadre of do-gooders, those who always know what's best for you and will gladly order you to do it. But .... not in my backyard!

As she says:

"I have nothing against rich people. I’m not one, myself, but sometimes I think I wouldn’t mind being a rich person. Not “super-rich,” you understand, but comfortable enough to not be sweating student loans and having two kids in college…

I wouldn’t need a house on Nantucket, say, and I’ve never wanted a BMW or a Coach handbag (ugh)…but I think (and I believe most people probably would agree) that a little bit of wealth is not necessarily a bad thing. The world needs her St. Francis’ but it also needs her Joseph of Arimethea’s too."

So why is it that once these folks attain their own massive wealth, whether through hard work or inheritance, they feel it's so important to tell everybody else what they should do with their money? All the while separating themselves from the great 'unwashed' of the average American? What gives them the special privilege of trying to ban gas-guzzlers from the hands of ordinary Americans while they acquire their own fleet of Humvee Limousines?

Renewable energy is a fine idea. And in some places it makes good sense to use what nature provides, such as fast-flowing water, high winds, or endless sunlight to create power. How is it that the Leftist Rich feel they are immune from the sight of refineries, power lines, or Wind Farms?

Yeahhhh, they're special!

This is from the Daily Show. It's funny. And it's dead on!



~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Continuing on ... Sister Toldjah has a very interesting post regarding abusive Feminists, which you ought to read. And she added this quiz, too. Of course, I had to give it a whirl!

You Are 72% Feminist

You are certainly a feminist - whether you know it or not. You believe in gender equality, at least most of the time. You also believe there are a few exceptions.

Are You a Feminist?

And Patrick has his own Another Silly Quiz. I took that one, too.

You Are a Learning Cook

You've got the makings of an excellent cook, and the desire to be one. But right now, you're just lacking the experience. You couldn't be a top chef yet, but you could be an apprentice.

Are You A Good Cook?

And of course, while there, I had to find one I hadn't seen. And here it is:

You Are a Pundit Blogger!

Your blog is smart, insightful, and always a quality read. Truly appreciated by many, surpassed by only a few

What Kind of Blogger Are You?

And I found one for Patrick, who likes Redneck, but cannot seem to settle on what else!

You Are 5% Redneck

I'll slap you so hard, your clothes will be outta style. You ain't no redneck - you're all Yankee!

How Redneck Are You?