Happy Face

Taylor's never been so popleeya

Still are.

I think thats a tad physco bollox tbf. The eighties was a very tuneful and lyrical period, very much more rhyming lyrics. It was also very uncomplicated and simple. It's been observed in neuro-science. People of all ages have had their brains scanned listening to different things to see the effect the music has physically. When you listen to music your brain releases endorphins at a moment that is pleasing to you. I'm not talking about one decade being more complex than any other musically, just how all our tastes mature. When you're 2 years old twinkle twinkle is a work of unparallelled genius. It is a tune that you, even at that age can follow, and if it stopped near the end you could probably resolve. This is the joy of having your expectations being confirmed...of being right and enjoying being in with everyone else that sees the fun of it. As you age, twinkle twinkle just doesn't pump those endorphins any more, you leave the 2 year olds to be impressed that they can finish a simple rhyme...safe in the knowledge they're mugs to fall for it. By then you know Barney's "I love you, you love me, we're a happy family" is the greatest thing you ever heard with it's increase in tempo making it doubly complex, the younger kids are such squares . It's hugely gratifying to be able to comprehend the pleasure of a change in pitch, key, timbre or tempo that your young ears have never comprehended before. The pattern continues year after year with simple tunes being enjoyed then discarded until you end up at crazy frog or some other crap that includes all the basics of a musical vocabulary and hammers them home without investigating the possibilities much further. The question is at which stage having your preconceptions challenged loses it's allure, when you can't see what other people are getting from a certain collection of noises, and which recognisable tropes keep pumping the endorphins for you personally more than anything else. This might never happen with some people, who will always get bored and persistently want to be challenged in order to pump the endorphins again. But the majority of us , at some stage, start going back for the memory of those early neurotransmitter affecting rushes that were most powerful, rather than keep looking for new ways to get the juices flowing, the opportunities for which get fewer and farther between. I read the book a while ago and will probably have misrepresented it, but it's well worth a read.

Hilarious speech. The funniest bit is the closing comments about what a good job the press do revealing the truth and how much he values it. That's why he supports torture for the sources of important stories.

Apparently your ears are in their peak condition then. You can hear your widest range of tones and everyone loses that range. You've also been exposed to less than you ever will again, so every surprising change of key, and every driving rhythm is as if it's never occurred to anyone before. Ten years later you'll hear Brahms did it, but the classical source means nowt to you by then.

"Your brain on music" is a great book about why the music from when you were 15-20 was indeed the best music ever. I was listening to music from the 60s to the 90s then, so love it all.

There's a new Jason Forrest album

The thinking wingnut's candidate

exactly, and its tedious and moronic if you don't agree but perfectly acceptable and OK if it suits your view. You realise that the opposite is true though, right? If someone agress with you, Leazes, they're spot on and sound and all that shit, if they disagree they're deluded and moronic etc. etc. etc. get some self-awareness for the love of God. If someone agress with you, Fish, they're spot on and sound and all that shit, if they disagree they're deluded and moronic etc. etc. etc. Unbelievable hypocrisy. I think you're sound leazes

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011...mp;type=article Good read from the lad who wrote the definitive book on al quaeda

The main points are highlighted here... http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2011/04/...e-big-bad-wolf/ and Rahm is basically Mr Israel in Washingtun. Cheyney spent enormous energy trying to get Washington to trade with Iraq/Iran without all the shite of the last few decades. He basically has American interests at heart and doesn't give a fuck how he satisfies those interests. Unfortunately this would have strengthened the arab world, so after failing to get through the Israel lobby in Washington he changed tack and went for the "bomb the shit out of them and take the oil" approach because it was easier that way. Rahm seemingly has Israeli interests at heart first and foremost and won't even fight for American interests in the first instance.

See I'd say aye great goal, but not as good as the Arsenal goal and no where near the to 20 goals I've seen in the flesh. It's like people have just started watching football, it was CRIMINALLY bad defending. George Best wouldn't have scored that goal because there's no that much skill involved not many dummies he just changes direction at pace which you could argue is a skill in itself, but Best wouldn't have scored that goal because in them days and even the 80's he would've been chopped down, four or five times, it was like they were frightened to put a tackle in. Even though you're basically give a year or two my age, I put you in the Y.A.I. brigade too mate. I've said Townsend talks shite, Messi did nowt until Real went down to 10 men and basically agreed it was a good goal but no more. Clearly I'm impressionable by you. I think you're going as overboard in the opposite direction as anyone is about it being the greatest goal ever though. Show me Mark Noble or Owen Hargreaves scoring a similar goal. Daft comparison imo.

If Tiote scored that goal Stevie would be spunking buckets.

Worse than ladies football.

Firstly - yeah, the article I quoted says as much..."the intelligence gathered on the men was not court-worthy evidence." Secondly - Nar, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9012103652.html Public opinion is split on many issues where the government is supposed to lead...Civil rights, abortion, state sponsored healthcare.

The term "also rans" was referring to ANY team that was in the Europa league as opposed to the champions league really. Their "also rans" have won 4 europa leagues in the noughties, and ours have won 1. We couldn't get a team into the quarter final, Liverpool or Man City. Oh dear. Fulham got to the final last year. What difference does it make?!?!? Liverpool chose to largely play a reserve team. Think your arguments through, it's not all about pie charts and venn diagrams in real life sonna. It's the only way of comapring like with like innit? The fact our teams throw in the towel rather than even try to compete is no defence. Fulham qualified for Europa in 7th and currently sit 9th...and got beat in the final off Athletico...who currently sit 7th...and last season finished 9th. Seem very comparable to me.

The term "also rans" was referring to ANY team that was in the Europa league as opposed to the champions league really. Their "also rans" have won 4 europa leagues in the noughties, and ours have won 1. We couldn't get a team into the quarter final, Liverpool or Man City.

That's karma baby...