Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Black Sabbath Vs. Ozzy Round 2 Mob Rules Vs. Diary of a Madman

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Or censoring opinion.....

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by mythology View Post
      Or censoring opinion.....
      Not at all my friend. You're welcome to have any opinion you'd like, and I certainly have no power, or inclination, to "censor" you. But, for example, when George Stephanopoulos offers his opinion on politics, I think people should know he was once a liberal policy advisor to a liberal president. Same thing here. You don't like Dio. You voted for Diary. I did too, incidentally, and I love Dio's work with Sabbath.
      "But I don't want to go among mad people."
      "Oh, you can't help that, we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
      "How do you know I'm mad?"
      "You must be or you wouldn't have come here."

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by The Rules Mob View Post
        But, for example, when George Stephanopoulos offers his opinion on politics, I think people should know he was once a liberal policy advisor to a liberal president.
        Well, what would you expect somebody like GS to do then, today----with an incumbent quasi-liberal president and administration? He certainly can't be expected to whip up the rogue, right-wing lunatic hysteria of somebody like Dick 'Darth Vader' Cheney, don't you think?

        Like the good folks at Fox News say, "Fair and balanced
        Something like this should actually be Jay Leno's opener on the Tonight Show, sometime.

        But, even if mythology has those particular prejudices regarding the Sabbath eras, I don't see the controversy about the way he voted on this thread. He might genuinely feel Mob Rules is 'shitty' (and the Dio-era, too, perhaps, I don't know). Unlike politicians and cable news channels that can seemingly lie 24/7, cause public harm....and get away with it, we music fans are far more innocuous and innocent with our 'biases'.
        Last edited by RLP4ever; 11-21-2009, 03:02 AM.
        "Actors really are the scum of the earth. Their behavior makes arrogant, overpaid rock stars appear positively noble' - Buzz Osborne

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by RLP4ever View Post
          But, even if mythology has those particular prejudices regarding the Sabbath eras, I don't see the controversy about the way he voted on this thread. He might genuinely feel Mob Rules is 'shitty' (and the Dio-era, too, perhaps, I don't know). Unlike politicians and cable news channels that can seemingly lie 24/7, cause public harm....and get away with it, we music fans are far more innocuous and innocent with our 'biases'.
          I'm not sure I would agree with characterizing my point as controversy. As I said, mythology is welcome to his opinions, and equally welcome to voice them. But when someone says they don't consider anything other than the Ozzy era Black Sabbath, and proudly proclaims not to post to the Dio era boards, then I think that person's statement that Mob Rules is shit has to be placed in context. I read with interest the exchanges in another thread about the merits of various types of extreme metal. Personally, I don't subscribe to the view that music can fairly be charged with responsibility for any of it's listener's actions. And I'm not in favor of music being compelled to censor itself (by government or artist) so that it's acceptable to every imaginable type of listener. On the other hand, as I've said before, I find that type of music personally unlistenable. And if I were to weigh in on the subject of, say, Slayer's new album by simply saying it stinks (I've never heard it), I think it's only fair that I disclose that the chances of me saying it's great are nil.

          Which brings me to my analogy. George is the host (not a panelist intended to obviously advocate a particular point of view) of a Sunday morning news program in the US. I think people should be aware of his background, and thus his biases, when they hear him discuss whether, for example, "Obama-care" would be a good thing.

          But I do agree with your point that the way MSNBC and the Clinton News Network distort facts with seeming impunity is so much more serious. That's who you meant, right?
          "But I don't want to go among mad people."
          "Oh, you can't help that, we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
          "How do you know I'm mad?"
          "You must be or you wouldn't have come here."

          Comment


          • #35
            IMO...
            Mob Rules is better than Heaven and Hell
            Blizzard of Ozz is better than Diary of a Madman
            and Mob Rules is better than Diary of a Madman.

            ...is there a Heaven and Hell vs. Blizzard of Ozz poll somewhere in here?

            Ted

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by The Rules Mob View Post
              I'm not sure I would agree with characterizing my point as controversy. As I said, mythology is welcome to his opinions, and equally welcome to voice them. But when someone says they don't consider anything other than the Ozzy era Black Sabbath, and proudly proclaims not to post to the Dio era boards, then I think that person's statement that Mob Rules is shit has to be placed in context. I read with interest the exchanges in another thread about the merits of various types of extreme metal. Personally, I don't subscribe to the view that music can fairly be charged with responsibility for any of it's listener's actions. And I'm not in favor of music being compelled to censor itself (by government or artist) so that it's acceptable to every imaginable type of listener. On the other hand, as I've said before, I find that type of music personally unlistenable. And if I were to weigh in on the subject of, say, Slayer's new album by simply saying it stinks (I've never heard it), I think it's only fair that I disclose that the chances of me saying it's great are nil.
              Ok, if wasn't a 'controversy' per se, your back-handed original remark to mythology, earlier, sure seemed like a needless provocation to me. I recall how we had a bad-tempered run-in over something almost identical, in the past---i.e my elaborate critique of, and negative ratings for TDYK made you jump in and go on to repeatedly insist how my well-known lowly regard for Dio-Sabbath (except Mob Rules) made it almost a given that I'd say what I did about TDYK. And you even seemed to arrogantly argue that it was, consequently, so very unnecessary of me to even venture to comment on TDYK. I naturally couldn't let that particular nonsense pass---and I did not.

              You seemed to be starting something similar here, about mythology's opinionated remark regarding Diary vs Mob Rules. Regardless of how blatantly 'partisan' mythology may be about the eras--(and frankly, I wasn't really fully aware of his stance on the Sabbath eras)----I don't see what you get out of exposing his 'extreme bias' here. It's irrelevant---and gosh, he isn't alone in exhibiting 'extreme bias', from time to time, in the myriad sundry thread topics we have circulating in the forums. Strange how, on the one hand, you talk of 'welcoming any opinion' he wishes to have, but in the same breath, snidely cast aspersions on his 'objectivity' (when album preferences are mostly 'subjective' matters, anyway). The 'political' analogy you unveiled in your response, to characterise mythology's comments seemed patently inapt and unfair, that's all.

              I'm glad to know that you oppose the pleas for the sort of retarded 'censorship' decrees on 'extreme metal' that many of the genre's moronic 'moralist' critics have sometimes demanded. I didn't know that you were no fan of Slayer----but I still wouldn't begrudge your saying that their latest album sucked big-time. I think I give you a lot more credit, though, than to ever expect you to say something like that if you hadn't even heard the album. But I wouldn't wanna jump in and say 'Well, what else would you expect from a Slayer-hater?'... if you get what I mean.

              Which brings me to my analogy. George is the host (not a panelist intended to obviously advocate a particular point of view) of a Sunday morning news program in the US. I think people should be aware of his background, and thus his biases, when they hear him discuss whether, for example, "Obama-care" would be a good thing.

              But I do agree with your point that the way MSNBC and the Clinton News Network distort facts with seeming impunity is so much more serious. That's who you meant, right?
              George is hardly the first 'host' (and not a mere guest 'panelist') on a U.S cable tv news & analysis show, to identifiably belong to a certain political persuasion. When it comes to 'hosting' on TV, coupled with the host's personal political affiliations and 'agendas', however well-known or not, I gotta guess that examples abound of that...and singling out George Stephanopoulos is pretty lame. And how many people, do you seriously reckon, that actually watch his show, or pay attention to his views and comments don't already know of his background and 'biases'? You obviously have no such qualms and misgivings about the bare-knuckled, bellicose 'biases' of rabid rabble-rousers of the likes of a Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity.

              As for the likes of MSNBC and CNN promiscuously "distorting facts", well I reckon that, the two of them, combined, couldn't even fantasise about remotely scaling the statospheric heights of deceit and dangerously demented demagoguery, long attained by the 'good folks' at Fox. 'Fair and balanced' eh? Or was it actually 'We Report. You Decide'? No, no..We Decide. You Destroy, LOL

              And oh, 'Obama-Care'...Mate, you'd be pretty lucky to get even a diluted, semi-decent final version of that good thing...eventually. Unless, of course, you are cheerful about the status quo and the wretched, unconscionable, indefensible mess your health care system's mired in, today.
              "Actors really are the scum of the earth. Their behavior makes arrogant, overpaid rock stars appear positively noble' - Buzz Osborne

              Comment


              • #37
                Let's steer this away from politics, guys.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Oh yes, TJ. I'm sorry for straying off-road here. I'll resist the temptation to go any further with this.
                  "Actors really are the scum of the earth. Their behavior makes arrogant, overpaid rock stars appear positively noble' - Buzz Osborne

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    My apologies TJ. My fault for using the analogy in the first place.

                    RLP, I'm guessing you don't see the irony in, on the one hand, lamenting a bad tempered run in, and, on the other, describing another poster's observations as "arrogant" "nonsense" "snide" and "lame." To provide you with some context, go back and read the thread I referenced in my first response to mythology from the time my name and his name first pop up. I think you'll see that, far from "starting something" and engaging in "needless provocation" I was merely referring back to our first exchange. In it, I referred to the Ozzy era of Black Sabbath as just that, and mythology pointed out that, in his view, that was unnecessary, since any other wasn't Black Sabbath. So, when he opined that Mob Rules is shit, I simply pointed out to him that, having indicated that the band fronted by Dio isn't worthy of the Black Sabbath name, it was little surprise he referred to Mob Rules that way. You're right it was similar, in a sense, to your review of TDYK, although I seem to recall your review had a lot more vitriol for Dio's talents in general. And, initially, I did the same thing with you. In neither case did I say "Well, what do you expect from a Dio hater." Your response in both instances has been, ironically enough again, eerily similar to certain US media personalities that are suggested as holding a bias. "What? How dare you? Outrageous!" they thunder. I don't see why you're so insulted by the observation, and regard it as "inapt and unfair." This is a forum. When people have suggested they hold extreme metal in less esteem than you do, I would suggest you're a whole lot more confrontational than I was with mythology or you, at least initially.

                    Two final points. I won't violate TJ's admonition, but remind me to tell you some time about the man from Perth (your neighborhood, no?) I met at Massachusetts General Hospital about a decade ago. He was my dad's roommate while they were both undergoing what was once a very dangerous and invasive procedure, but now could be done so that they both could leave the hospital after about 48 hours. It's a long way from Perth to Massachusetts for no reason other than medical care, isn't it?

                    If you're using "retarded" to mean delayed (although your context doesn't appear to be using it that way) kudos for the good vocabulary. If you're using it to imply a mental deficiency, please don't. As someone with a close family member who is mentally challenged, that type of thing pisses me the fuck off.
                    "But I don't want to go among mad people."
                    "Oh, you can't help that, we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
                    "How do you know I'm mad?"
                    "You must be or you wouldn't have come here."

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Tough choice!

                      For me, Diary gets the nod, by a hair.

                      It was sometime in early '82, I was riding around with a couple friends of mine in the proverbial "party van", reveling in a chemically enhanced state of mind and listening to both Diary of a Madman and Mob Rules back-to-back. Anyway, it was the first time I'd heard either album all the way through, and they both knocked my ass off.
                      gadji beri bimba glandridi laula lonni cadori - Ball

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by The Rules Mob View Post
                        My apologies TJ. My fault for using the analogy in the first place.

                        RLP, I'm guessing you don't see the irony in, on the one hand, lamenting a bad tempered run in, and, on the other, describing another poster's observations as "arrogant" "nonsense" "snide" and "lame." To provide you with some context, go back and read the thread I referenced in my first response to mythology from the time my name and his name first pop up. I think you'll see that, far from "starting something" and engaging in "needless provocation" I was merely referring back to our first exchange. In it, I referred to the Ozzy era of Black Sabbath as just that, and mythology pointed out that, in his view, that was unnecessary, since any other wasn't Black Sabbath. So, when he opined that Mob Rules is shit, I simply pointed out to him that, having indicated that the band fronted by Dio isn't worthy of the Black Sabbath name, it was little surprise he referred to Mob Rules that way. You're right it was similar, in a sense, to your review of TDYK, although I seem to recall your review had a lot more vitriol for Dio's talents in general. And, initially, I did the same thing with you. In neither case did I say "Well, what do you expect from a Dio hater." Your response in both instances has been, ironically enough again, eerily similar to certain US media personalities that are suggested as holding a bias. "What? How dare you? Outrageous!" they thunder. I don't see why you're so insulted by the observation, and regard it as "inapt and unfair." This is a forum. When people have suggested they hold extreme metal in less esteem than you do, I would suggest you're a whole lot more confrontational than I was with mythology or you, at least initially.

                        Two final points. I won't violate TJ's admonition, but remind me to tell you some time about the man from Perth (your neighborhood, no?) I met at Massachusetts General Hospital about a decade ago. He was my dad's roommate while they were both undergoing what was once a very dangerous and invasive procedure, but now could be done so that they both could leave the hospital after about 48 hours. It's a long way from Perth to Massachusetts for no reason other than medical care, isn't it?

                        If you're using "retarded" to mean delayed (although your context doesn't appear to be using it that way) kudos for the good vocabulary. If you're using it to imply a mental deficiency, please don't. As someone with a close family member who is mentally challenged, that type of thing pisses me the fuck off.
                        I sure don't see any 'irony' or a contradiction there. I neither initiated nor particularly enjoyed our rows of the past. But I did find your stance and specific comments (then, as now) quite befitting *all of the adjectives* I have used, and you cite here. This isn't some irony, but a statement of my dissent with your attitude without necessarily spoiling for a fight or 'win' an argument.

                        Now, I recognise that mythology was maybe throwing a deliberate sideways jab, in the other thread, with his specific comments there, revealing his particularly partisan point-of-view regarding the Ozzy/Other era Sabbath debates----ones that have for long proven so divisive, sometimes in these forums, and certainly outside it, as well. So, I reckon you had the irresistible urge to point out his brazenly biased outlook on the issue when you saw his contemptuous comment about Mob Rules, eh?

                        But you're completely off-base to imply that my 'review' (and it was indeed a review of sorts) of TDYK, was similar to mythology's one-word put-down of Mob Rules. I actually made a somewhat elaborate critique of TDYK (not shooing it away as simply "shit") and the reasons why the album, and the entire band's performance, left me feeling largely underwhelmed and unimpressed. I didn't exactly pour "vitriol" on Dio's 'talents' then, though I can understand how some of my more seemingly rude barbs will appear jarring to the eyes of committed, greater fans of Dio-Sabbath (such as yourself) than I've ever been. If anything, what is actually "similar" in both instances, is YOUR own reaction and your curious need to point out how mine and mythology's remarks should be treated with caution and the knowledge that we both are, 'biased' commentators here. You sure did, intentionally or not, seem to imply (in both his case and mine) that somehow our opinions in both instances, were exceptionally biased and predictable-----and as if it was your duty to point that out to others on the board. It isn't me who is showing the splenetic reactions (of your favourite tv pundits and ideological kindred) but your own strange and unnecessary insistence on trying to, for the second time, make the sort of exaggerated point you did, re: mythology and myself. In that sense, alone, you definitely come across as making a nudge n' wink a la 'What do you expect a Dio-(Sabbath) hater to say'? And your ostensibly deliberate injection of a political analogy, to boot. So, of course, I found your latest foray unambiguously 'unfair and inapt'. Not in the morally indignant 'What! How dare you? Outrageous!' caricature of yours, but yes, annoyed and amused at the fecklessness of it all.

                        Yea, 'This is a forum'. I reckon that dictum oughta apply even more to your own reactions to comments by mythology and myself.

                        As for my "confrontations" with some people on this board, over 'extreme metal', I maintain that no matter how you choose to portray the case, it's always been reasoned, well-argued, passionate and polemical debates----although it almost always began with somebody's peurile and crass provocations, out of the blue----- that could have simply turned into abusive shout-fests had I not been the guy to at least attempt to steer it toward an educated, reasonable debate, regardless of frayed tempers. I don't think Sith would argue otherwise, about the extensive exchanges that we both just got done with, just a few days ago. I admit this was one of the 'better' ones.

                        I'm constrained by forum rules--as you must be---to take our disagreements into full-fledged debates on the 'political' issues---the 'health-care' debate, in this case. You can happily and futilely cite random Australians---not just your dad's room-mate in a surgical scenario----who have travelled to the U.S, or even Canada or Europe and elsewhere for specific medical procedures, that they might have chosen to pursue there, for a variety of reasons and personal circumstances. My own dad has been a practising surgeon, and while the health care system, in Australia, despite some of its inevitable shortcomings, is overall still truly first-rate on multiple levels, with far less or none of some of the well-documented woes that have perennially plagued your system in the U.S, of course, it's within the realms of reason that many Australians might travel abroad, even as afar as the United States, to avail of something specific, in a particular time and situation. Your example illustrates next to nothing about conditions in Australia vis a vis the United States. I can easily counter your example by pointing out to you that there's been a visible, widely-reported exodus of American patients suffering from various ailments, trekking to Cuba, Canada, the East European nations, even to distant Middle East, Turkey, India, Thailand, Korea, and yes, even Australia, desperate for some quality, reliable, affordable options in curative, surgical care etc etc, The sort of crucial health care they have despaired of perhaps ever getting in their own country owing to the massive inefficiencies, incompetence, and persistent inequities, in access, coverage and costs. I don't know how much you really know about the subject---but it's a pity we can't take it further.

                        *Perth is not in my 'neighbourhood' no..that's like saying to a Texan that Washington D.C must be his 'backyard' Seriously, Perth is on our west coast, and my home city of Adelaide is deep down south, in well....South Australia. But yea, Perth is in Awesome Australia, my own country, that's right. LOL

                        Lastly, no I wasn't actually using 'retarded' as in 'delayed' nor was I trotting it out in the standard derogatory manner that would rightly offend somebody like you. I'm bemused as to how you can actually suspect that I was demeaning 'mentally challenged' people in any way with a casual insensitive jibe. That's so not the case. But yes, I absolutely meant "retarded censorship decrees" as in asshat arguments and demands occasionally heard from extreme metal's most vocal critics. If that implies some 'mental deficiency' of these folks, in a sense, then yea, damn right, I won't apologise for feeling that way about some of the misguided, astoundingly intolerant and ignorant jibes that some of extreme metal's detractors choose to publicly or privately peddle.
                        Last edited by RLP4ever; 11-23-2009, 04:41 AM.
                        "Actors really are the scum of the earth. Their behavior makes arrogant, overpaid rock stars appear positively noble' - Buzz Osborne

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          The Mob Rules hands down...not a single bad track on the album...

                          Diary is a good album too but it has two really bad tracks on it Tonight and You Can't Kill Rock and Roll...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by The Rules Mob View Post
                            As someone with a close family member who is mentally challenged, that type of thing pisses me the fuck off.


                            I love a bit of swearing but I can't handle the bad grammar. I'm not really sure how to correct that either. If you don't mind, some suggestions:


                            ".....that type of thing fucking pisses me off".

                            ".....that type of thing pisses me, so fuck off".

                            ".....that type of thing pisses me off like a fucking dumb shit".

                            ".....that type of thing pisses me fucking right off".

                            ".....that type of thing pisses me off like a fucking bad ass mother fucker".

                            ".....that type of thing really irks me.......So FUCK off you little piss".



                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Wheels, thanks for the advice. I'll try to do better next time.

                              RLP, my sense is we're going to have to agree to disagree here. To begin with, since this particular "row" was really between mythology and me, whether you were "spoiling for a fight" is something only you'll know for sure. I just don't see pointing out someone's bias during a discussion comparing items in a forum using the term "vs." as being on par with using adjectives like "arrogant" or "prick" (I seem to recall you using that one last time out). If we were discussing the merits of oranges vs. carrots, and you had previously said you didn't like fruit, I think it's fair to point out when you explain in detail why carrots are superior that you're already on record as not liking fruit. Simple as that. If you think that's provocative, that's certainly your prerogative.

                              It's true that your explanation of why you didn't like TDYK was certainly more verbose than mythology's observation of Mob Rules, and more detailed. But in neither case was I commenting on the style of the posts. I love Mob Rules and like TDYK. And in defending them (like you defended mythology) I simply pointed out the reviewers' bias. Again, that's something that clearly bothers you that I just don't see as being a big deal. Mythology, as you'll note from the other thread, tried to point out what he thought was my bias in favor of Dio. My response was simply to indicate why I thought I wasn't biased. Which is why I don't think my point that these are forums is "dictum." If the board wasn't meant to have a little back and forth, presumably they wouldn't have a quote feature, and I suspect they'd be pretty boring to boot.

                              We are constrained by forum rules on politics. That's a pity sometimes. If we weren't, I might indicate that other than from dishonest lunatics like Michael Moore, there really aren't any documented cases of Americans of means leaving the US for medical treatment for reasons of quality of care. And I might also say something like, if you can show me a single complex or sophisticated product on Earth (like health care, as distinguished from say, wheat) whose quality improves across the board when you make it available to everyone in the same amount for the same price, I'll eat my copy of Dehumanizer, jewel case and all. Until health care falls under that rubric, I'm happy to be able to call my children's pediatrician and get to see him that day. Maybe sometime we can debate these, and the other great issues of the day, but just not here.

                              You were correct to observe at the end that my reference to your neighborhood meant your country, not literally the people whose property abuts your own. I don't agree, though, that using the term retarded in the context you did, describing people who avail themselves of arguments you don't like about extreme metal, can be seen as anything but unnecessarily provocative, at least to some people.

                              I'm sure TJ and/or Damian are tired of hearing at least me drone on about this, so I promise to move along.
                              "But I don't want to go among mad people."
                              "Oh, you can't help that, we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
                              "How do you know I'm mad?"
                              "You must be or you wouldn't have come here."

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                TRM, you just have to take my word for it that I wasn't at all itching for an argument with you over your remarks aimed at mythology. But since 'This is a forum' after all, I figured I could legitimately intervene and speak my mind the way I saw that particular episode, albeit something initially only between the two fo you. As for my use of words like 'arrogant' (this time) and 'prick' (last time), please cut me some slack for not holding back during some varyingly testy exchanges between the two of us-----during which you didn't exactly cover yourself in glory nor can claim some moral high ground of civility with some of the stuff you sent my way (specifically in our previous debate). Fair enough as it went, and that's behind us now.

                                I quite like your carrots/oranges example; heaven knows the Sabbath eras can apparently be likened to just that: apples, oranges and carrots or what have you, besides. I've actually always loved apples best, though I quite like oranges and carrots--which is obviously a lot more than I can say about post-Ozzy 'Other-eras' Sabbath. Look, I realize I could have honestly maybe completely let pass your mere pointing out mythology's comment and what you say your motives were regarding that. However, it was your deliberate, needless (to my eyes) and rather churlish choice of that particular political analogy that I found unfair and objectionable. I don't need reminding how it is my "prerogative" to see and say things the way I do. But it's highly fatuous to feign ignorance about how your extended, politically pointed analogy directed at mythology was also not patently "provocative"----especially in a forum that frowns upon political and religious chatter. Sure, I plead mea culpa as well, in choosing to respond in kind, and take the political sever n' volley further than necessary.

                                It's faintly sad that merely 'verbose' is all that you can muster to describe my past critique of TDYK. I concede my comments were pretty opinionated, 'biased' yes, no-holds-barred in some ways, elaborate, and inevitably grating to some Dio-Sabbath-loving ears and eyes. But I actually thought that I had made, what was after all, only a personal but thoroughly lucid appraisal of the album. Of course, others' responses sometimes take the back n' forths in directions not always intended, initially. And gosh, do you really think I'm somebody that doesn't fully recognise the importance and appeal of 'back n' forths' between us, in the forums? An opinionated jabber-mouth like me is always welcoming of, and a full participant in these free-weeling conversations among us all. Your earlier remark of 'This is a Forum' just made it sound like you were giving me a hectoring reminder of this being 'a forum'. No sweat. I understand.

                                Originally posted by The Rules Mob
                                We are constrained by forum rules on politics. That's a pity sometimes. If we weren't, I might indicate that other than from dishonest lunatics like Michael Moore, there really aren't any documented cases of Americans of means leaving the US for medical treatment for reasons of quality of care. And I might also say something like, if you can show me a single complex or sophisticated product on Earth (like health care, as distinguished from say, wheat) whose quality improves across the board when you make it available to everyone in the same amount for the same price, I'll eat my copy of Dehumanizer, jewel case and all. Until health care falls under that rubric, I'm happy to be able to call my children's pediatrician and get to see him that day. Maybe sometime we can debate these, and the other great issues of the day, but just not here.

                                This kind of glib, over-simplistic depiction of the real issues and debates surrounding something as inherently imperative as comprehensive 'health care' coverage for the public (especially and glaringly in the United States) is literally screaming for a response from me. The musings of Michael Moores of this world aside, there are tons of 'documented', 'anecdotal' and blindingly obvious 'visible' cases of Americans travelling overseas to diverse destinations, for a range of medical treatments they can't safely, affordably, if at all, avail at home. I reckon I could make you eat and shit your copy of Dehumanizer in its entirety, and then 'repeat' the procedure several times over if I could properly discuss and debate these issues. In the meantime, I can only marvel at your seemingly mis-informed, misguided mindset about the authentic nature of, and realities involved in this crucial public concern of the times-----most markedly in your country.

                                Also, I did ultimately grant you the benefit of a free pass in that lazy phrasing regarding 'a distant west-coast city being my 'neighbourhood' down south haha..Of course, you meant the 'country'. And hey, we both belong to XXL-sized nations, mate. LOL, but I can understand references to 'non-literal' 'neighbourhoods' and 'backyards', alright. lol .....Lastly, I can justify my arguably somewhat impudent use of 'retarded' in that, it's kind of hard to describe in any other way the sorts of pious, moral absolutists and otherwise rather hypocritical folks, in the music-loving community and society at large, that find extreme metal, easy, convenient game for venting their reserves of ridicule and opprobrium. When they simply cannot, and will not ever "get it", I reckon 'retarded' just got an alternate meaning and usage for itself, and actually aptly describes some of the things these critics think and say, and do regarding the music genre they love to hate.

                                Darn, TRM..I'm thinking of deleting this whole thing. LOL...Besides, you laid out the truth earlier, anyway----'agree to disagree' it must be, yet again, huh? And ok, let's move along, even if we can never 'get along' on some of these things. Haha...A raincheck on it, then, eh?

                                Alas, this thread pits what I regard as the best OZZY disc vs the best (read 'the ONLY good one' ) of Dio-Sabbath. Of all the threads of these album face-offs, I considered this to be perhaps the closest and toughest of 'em all. Yet, MR is handily ahead in the votes. I didn't hesitate too much, though, in voting for Diary.
                                Last edited by RLP4ever; 11-25-2009, 03:55 AM.
                                "Actors really are the scum of the earth. Their behavior makes arrogant, overpaid rock stars appear positively noble' - Buzz Osborne

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X