1988: When the Rap sections at all the record stores consisted of three columns of cassette tapes.

I remember when the "NFL Today" used this as background music for a segment on the Minnesota Vikings after they lost their fourth Super Bowl to the Raiders.

I've always liked this Beck song.

He's enough of a musician to be an anti-musician. Almost anyone with any sense of rhythm and no guitar experience could play "I Get Lonesome" with a few minutes practice; it's an extremely simple song. But simple can be very difficult.

Great post on Beck. He got a bad deal last night with the negative reaction he received after winning his Grammy, but if those who were critical would do a little research they would find that Beck is a master musician, called by many a genius. He's mastered playing over a dozen instruments, including the very…

Poor Beck.

An inability to empathize is a terrible thing. Joe South said it well.

"Drama" by Ice-T. An over-the-top and exaggerated gangsta tale from 1988. The beat and instrumentation is awesome and to my knowlege is completely original and not sampled...

QUEEFCORE!

Neil Young with his reflective classic, "Old Man".

How cool was it to see 72-year old Paul McCartney dancing like a carefree school boy while watching Jeff Lynne perform?

To reply to my first part: even if she were to write out a statement, by hand, which was absolutely verified to be done by her, there are still some that would claim she had been manipulated. The fact is, what's being asked of her is to prove a negative, which is basically impossible.

And in what way would we know that this written statement was actually generated by her, or accurately conveys her genuine wishes? Handwriting and signatures can be forged you know. And once again, unless someone other than her lawyer was the one to collect and deliver this message, I doubt anyone would accept it as…

All I can say is, apparently be very very careful what you say in public, and for the love of god, don't ever repeat the same opinion on something more than once. Because if you do, I'm guessing its the law that to publicly state something multiple times means you can't ever go back on it, ever. Say that you don't…

Plus, I love how people keep putting in that little aside about how the lawyer is apparently going to make a killing off of the publication of this book. Seriously, if you're in the know, then tell me: what's the lawyer's cut? How much will she make off of the publication of this book? What proof do you have that…

It just means a statement from Lee, in her own words, communicated by her lawyer.

So far her lawyer, who is now speaking for her at all times and is the ONLY person speaking to HarperCollins, has said absolutely nothing that suggests Lee has changed her position on this.

What if she changed her mind? People are allowed to do that, you know.

I did just run across this letter that Harper wrote to a Richmond area school board when she heard they were going to ban her book:

I gotta admit, true or not, that does scream don't look at the man behind the curtain.