People objecting, vociferously in some cases, that a country singer has resurrected an old song originally written by a black woman, and had a lot of success with it which generated significant material benefit to the original writer, are indeed race baiting trolls. Would the same people have been similarly outraged when Ray Charles remade a hit with the totally non black Georgia on My Mind?
This is indeed nothing but double standard race baiting that amounts to a black privilege not available to white people. When an artist remakes an old song it is a tribute to the original artist as well as generating significant income for them. To make this into some sort of cultural appropriation is nothing more than inflammatory woke race baiting.
As I understand this controversy — and I’m not sure I do — it has to do with the assumption that Chapman’s success was limited by her race and sexuality and that explains why Combs’ version has been so huge. But in fact, the argument goes, Chapman’s version was a huge success in its day. I don’t know that anyone is outraged that Combs has covered the song. Chapman herself seems tickled
The whole argument is just non-sensical. It would have been one thing if an original song had hit only on a limited segment chart (say an R&B chart for a Black artist) with no award recognition and then hit it big on a more general chart (Hot 100, Pop) for a white artist. That could have supported an assertion that the Black artist could have had a bigger and awarded hit but for inherent racism. But the OPPOSITE occurred here. Chapman rose to the top 10 of the Top 100 charts (and earned awards).
Re: songs by black artists made into hits by white artists, several of Elvis's early hits were covers of black artists, including Hound Dog and That's All Right.
I loved the original 'Fast Car' and haven't heard it for a long time. I would never have heard the new version. I am happy for Chapman and Combs that the song has found a new audience. My guess is that it will also generate new sales of the original and her album. I will certainly add the original to my downloads.
It also occurred to me that the way music is "aired", shared, distributed, and sold has changed so significantly since 1988 that there is no way to make a meaningful comparison. Crossing markets and genres is an entirely different landscape today.
this law has nothing to do with making us safer, it's about criminals not being able to pay for bail. now they can commit more crimes just like the rich criminal can.
RE: Cash Bail. What? Expect legislators to pay attention to facts to inform how to adjust policy going forward? I imagine the next suggestion is that they should pay attention to scientists who apply analytical skills to evaluate the data and have their work peer reviewed.
Dream on. We don't need that. We have influencers on TikTok
I actually think that it will weaken him in the primaries, particularly if Christie and others lay into his many weaknesses. But due to the lack of ranked choice voting, he might still win. I hope not. The faster his indictments move to trial the better.
Okay, well, in January DeSantis was close to catching Trump. Since that time Trump was indicted and his poll numbers surged. Then he was found liable for sexual assault (which yesterday the judge called "rape as it is commonly defined") and his poll numbers surged again. Then he was indicted again and his poll numbers surged again.
Now DeSantis trails bigly in Iowa and he trails by 37 points in New Hampshire.
Another indictment will logically lead to another poll surge.
Saying it will weaken him (Trump) in the primaries sounds more like wish-casting to me.
I can't remember if I said this in this forum previously. If you you a high priority on keeping Trump out of the white house, and there is no real contest for the Democratic nomination then you should vote in the Republican primary even if you intend to vote for a Democrat in the general election. Vote for the candidate that you think has the highest likelihood of beating Trump in the primary. Maximize your voting against Trump.
Now if you are a Democrat can you bring yourself to vote for DeSantis in a primary? Can you live with yourself if he goes on to become President? I know it would be tough but it is better than having Trump.
Does any of this make a difference? I don't ever want to see Trump's greasy mug again, but is there a single Republican candidate who would be even a mediocre president? Maybe Tim Scott?
It provides time for the accused to wise up (if in fact the crimes are sufficiently violent and likely guilt is the judicial prerogative when releasing them or not) then the next time when committing the same or similar crimes the alleged offenders may do so without being caught – benefits the criminals because there is time for do-overs, but it also benefits the jails because there are more open cells for potential future criminals. According to common sense, is this the way to solve the significant overcrowding problem across Illinois and closer to home in the Cook County Jail?
Re: cereals. I recall that Jewel (or maybe Dominick's) once had something called "Ancient Grains" cereal, with millet and whatnot. And some sort of Aztec-influenced front cover.
Intrigued, I bought it, and learned why those were ancient grains: they sucked. Blehhh.
I am fine with giving the elimination of cash bail a chance. It is unfair to hold people that are unable to post bail. But I am skeptical about how/if anyone will track and report on the effect. Will 'no shows' increase? People with access to bail now have nothing at risk after release. Will this add another benefit to defenders endlessly delaying trial? Will there be fewer plea deals? How will the court make up for the loss of bail revenue? The re-arrest for a new crime only counts the dumbest and least capable criminals, since we know the arrest rates for the original crime is so low.
There might be a benefit from increased electronic monitoring, if that technique is properly funded to allow proper monitoring. It isn't now, and one would think there would be more need without bail. And of course, speedier trials would help, which we know Cook County is doing nothing to achieve.
Regarding the elimination of cash bail: I have spent a lot of time in criminal courtrooms over the last 40 years. And I have seen multitudes of accused persons, who were unable to make bail, plead guilty, not because they were guilty, but because by pleading guilty, they could get out of jail. People who had been locked up for 30 days, 60 days, or longer because they couldn’t make bail, and who were told that, if they would just plead guilty, they would get probation plus time served, and could “get out of jail today.” It would take a strange person, indeed, to say, “Put me back in jail because I am not pleading guilty.” So many poor people have criminal records, not because they are criminals, but because they are poor. The cash bail system was used routinely to coerce guilty pleas from poor people who then had to live life with a criminal record.
On “gents” and “ladies,” and “larks” and “robins”: My former girlfriend and I used to go to the Chicago Summer Dance, a free city program where you could learn ballroom dancing. The city put a huge dance floor next to a stage between Balbo and Congress, and, if I remember correctly between Michigan and Columbus. We weren’t the only lesbian couple who used to go there. During the teaching phase of the evening, they would refer to “leaders” and “followers,” rather than “men” and “women” or “gentlemen” and “ladies.” We both liked the use of “leaders” and “followers.” We felt more welcomed and recognized, I guess. We felt less like outsiders.
The demise of Gents and Ladies suggests that the use of “Ladies and Gentlemen” as a dignified way to address or get the attention of a mixed group of people is likely to follow. Can someone suggest a similarly dignified address that passes current muster? “Guys!” doesn’t cut it.
Given that our justice system works under the premise of innocent until proven guilty with the underlying result that a guilty person may be released because the State cannot prove its case - no case bail seems to fit very nicely with that philosophy.
The Donald Trump plan:
1. Absorb as many indictments as possible and fund raise off them.
2. Try and make all cases Federal cases.
3. Delay, delay delay to the next presidential election.
4. Bully his way through the Republican primaries, no debating and in no way agreeing to support anyone else but himself.
5. Expecting and hoping to win the election and then wiping out all cases pending against him by hook or crook if he wins.
6. The VP slot will be filled by the biggest Trump butt kisser (per Trump) with little to no standing on his/her own. Tim Scott is an unlikely choice.
7. If things look bad for his election, Trump will leave the country - most likely Saudi. He will Never Ever go to jail.
8. Which leaves me hoping some judge pulls his passport as a definite flight risk.
I agree with the VP comment. I can't see how anyone that hopes for a political future would accept the Trump VP slot. Nothing worse than being number two on a losing ticket. Pence should be proof that winning would be even worse.
It’s not clear from your quotes who gave Jaron Lanier the title “Father of AI.” But anyone who quoted that without a LOL or eye roll is part of the problem. He is in no way the father of AI.
People objecting, vociferously in some cases, that a country singer has resurrected an old song originally written by a black woman, and had a lot of success with it which generated significant material benefit to the original writer, are indeed race baiting trolls. Would the same people have been similarly outraged when Ray Charles remade a hit with the totally non black Georgia on My Mind?
This is indeed nothing but double standard race baiting that amounts to a black privilege not available to white people. When an artist remakes an old song it is a tribute to the original artist as well as generating significant income for them. To make this into some sort of cultural appropriation is nothing more than inflammatory woke race baiting.
As I understand this controversy — and I’m not sure I do — it has to do with the assumption that Chapman’s success was limited by her race and sexuality and that explains why Combs’ version has been so huge. But in fact, the argument goes, Chapman’s version was a huge success in its day. I don’t know that anyone is outraged that Combs has covered the song. Chapman herself seems tickled
The whole argument is just non-sensical. It would have been one thing if an original song had hit only on a limited segment chart (say an R&B chart for a Black artist) with no award recognition and then hit it big on a more general chart (Hot 100, Pop) for a white artist. That could have supported an assertion that the Black artist could have had a bigger and awarded hit but for inherent racism. But the OPPOSITE occurred here. Chapman rose to the top 10 of the Top 100 charts (and earned awards).
Re: songs by black artists made into hits by white artists, several of Elvis's early hits were covers of black artists, including Hound Dog and That's All Right.
So, what’s your point?
I loved the original 'Fast Car' and haven't heard it for a long time. I would never have heard the new version. I am happy for Chapman and Combs that the song has found a new audience. My guess is that it will also generate new sales of the original and her album. I will certainly add the original to my downloads.
I just added it. The Luke Combs version is not bad, but it just doesn't have the je ne sais quois of the original.
It also occurred to me that the way music is "aired", shared, distributed, and sold has changed so significantly since 1988 that there is no way to make a meaningful comparison. Crossing markets and genres is an entirely different landscape today.
this law has nothing to do with making us safer, it's about criminals not being able to pay for bail. now they can commit more crimes just like the rich criminal can.
RE: Cash Bail. What? Expect legislators to pay attention to facts to inform how to adjust policy going forward? I imagine the next suggestion is that they should pay attention to scientists who apply analytical skills to evaluate the data and have their work peer reviewed.
Dream on. We don't need that. We have influencers on TikTok
"What doesn’t kill him [Trump] politically will, in fact, weaken him."
Not in the republican primary, it won't.
I actually think that it will weaken him in the primaries, particularly if Christie and others lay into his many weaknesses. But due to the lack of ranked choice voting, he might still win. I hope not. The faster his indictments move to trial the better.
Okay, well, in January DeSantis was close to catching Trump. Since that time Trump was indicted and his poll numbers surged. Then he was found liable for sexual assault (which yesterday the judge called "rape as it is commonly defined") and his poll numbers surged again. Then he was indicted again and his poll numbers surged again.
Now DeSantis trails bigly in Iowa and he trails by 37 points in New Hampshire.
Another indictment will logically lead to another poll surge.
Saying it will weaken him (Trump) in the primaries sounds more like wish-casting to me.
I can't remember if I said this in this forum previously. If you you a high priority on keeping Trump out of the white house, and there is no real contest for the Democratic nomination then you should vote in the Republican primary even if you intend to vote for a Democrat in the general election. Vote for the candidate that you think has the highest likelihood of beating Trump in the primary. Maximize your voting against Trump.
Now if you are a Democrat can you bring yourself to vote for DeSantis in a primary? Can you live with yourself if he goes on to become President? I know it would be tough but it is better than having Trump.
Does any of this make a difference? I don't ever want to see Trump's greasy mug again, but is there a single Republican candidate who would be even a mediocre president? Maybe Tim Scott?
Everyone should keep an open mind. --Zorn
It provides time for the accused to wise up (if in fact the crimes are sufficiently violent and likely guilt is the judicial prerogative when releasing them or not) then the next time when committing the same or similar crimes the alleged offenders may do so without being caught – benefits the criminals because there is time for do-overs, but it also benefits the jails because there are more open cells for potential future criminals. According to common sense, is this the way to solve the significant overcrowding problem across Illinois and closer to home in the Cook County Jail?
Larks/Ravens... too much like Sharks and Minnows as elementary reading groups. We know what those terms mean!
We had Bluebirds and Cardinals and Robins. Fun times.
Re: cereals. I recall that Jewel (or maybe Dominick's) once had something called "Ancient Grains" cereal, with millet and whatnot. And some sort of Aztec-influenced front cover.
Intrigued, I bought it, and learned why those were ancient grains: they sucked. Blehhh.
Quoth the square dancing Raven. “Nevermore.”
What the “guys” poll and the current leading tweet (Grocery Store) appear to indicate is that PS has very few readers under 45.
How about Lakes and Rivers. Lugs and wRenches. Loops and Ribbons. Lefts and Righties.
I am fine with giving the elimination of cash bail a chance. It is unfair to hold people that are unable to post bail. But I am skeptical about how/if anyone will track and report on the effect. Will 'no shows' increase? People with access to bail now have nothing at risk after release. Will this add another benefit to defenders endlessly delaying trial? Will there be fewer plea deals? How will the court make up for the loss of bail revenue? The re-arrest for a new crime only counts the dumbest and least capable criminals, since we know the arrest rates for the original crime is so low.
There might be a benefit from increased electronic monitoring, if that technique is properly funded to allow proper monitoring. It isn't now, and one would think there would be more need without bail. And of course, speedier trials would help, which we know Cook County is doing nothing to achieve.
Regarding the elimination of cash bail: I have spent a lot of time in criminal courtrooms over the last 40 years. And I have seen multitudes of accused persons, who were unable to make bail, plead guilty, not because they were guilty, but because by pleading guilty, they could get out of jail. People who had been locked up for 30 days, 60 days, or longer because they couldn’t make bail, and who were told that, if they would just plead guilty, they would get probation plus time served, and could “get out of jail today.” It would take a strange person, indeed, to say, “Put me back in jail because I am not pleading guilty.” So many poor people have criminal records, not because they are criminals, but because they are poor. The cash bail system was used routinely to coerce guilty pleas from poor people who then had to live life with a criminal record.
On “gents” and “ladies,” and “larks” and “robins”: My former girlfriend and I used to go to the Chicago Summer Dance, a free city program where you could learn ballroom dancing. The city put a huge dance floor next to a stage between Balbo and Congress, and, if I remember correctly between Michigan and Columbus. We weren’t the only lesbian couple who used to go there. During the teaching phase of the evening, they would refer to “leaders” and “followers,” rather than “men” and “women” or “gentlemen” and “ladies.” We both liked the use of “leaders” and “followers.” We felt more welcomed and recognized, I guess. We felt less like outsiders.
The demise of Gents and Ladies suggests that the use of “Ladies and Gentlemen” as a dignified way to address or get the attention of a mixed group of people is likely to follow. Can someone suggest a similarly dignified address that passes current muster? “Guys!” doesn’t cut it.
Nor does Gentlefolk (too informal) or Gentles (too Elizabethan).
Comrades? People? Everyone? Honorable Attendees?
Hello Everyone! - Welcome Everyone! - Good Evening Everyone!
Simple & inclusive & it doesn't require learning new words.
Given that our justice system works under the premise of innocent until proven guilty with the underlying result that a guilty person may be released because the State cannot prove its case - no case bail seems to fit very nicely with that philosophy.
The Donald Trump plan:
1. Absorb as many indictments as possible and fund raise off them.
2. Try and make all cases Federal cases.
3. Delay, delay delay to the next presidential election.
4. Bully his way through the Republican primaries, no debating and in no way agreeing to support anyone else but himself.
5. Expecting and hoping to win the election and then wiping out all cases pending against him by hook or crook if he wins.
6. The VP slot will be filled by the biggest Trump butt kisser (per Trump) with little to no standing on his/her own. Tim Scott is an unlikely choice.
7. If things look bad for his election, Trump will leave the country - most likely Saudi. He will Never Ever go to jail.
8. Which leaves me hoping some judge pulls his passport as a definite flight risk.
Re #8, I’m sure he’s got several spares.
And since he'd be flying in his own private jet, who's going to stop him from leaving the country?
Oops…that would be no cash bail not no case bail.
I agree with the VP comment. I can't see how anyone that hopes for a political future would accept the Trump VP slot. Nothing worse than being number two on a losing ticket. Pence should be proof that winning would be even worse.
In my view ALL women are ladies (until I find out differently)
It’s not clear from your quotes who gave Jaron Lanier the title “Father of AI.” But anyone who quoted that without a LOL or eye roll is part of the problem. He is in no way the father of AI.