Awww. Thanks for finding that, Nancy.
Printable View
Awww. Thanks for finding that, Nancy.
I was looking through some Google alerts (which I sadly don't check as often as I should) and found this:
Don Henley Has No Patience For Your 'Gotcha' Questions, Lamestream Rock Critics
It's old news, and we discussed it when it first occurred, but the way Don pwned that interviewer still makes me laugh!
I totally understand why Mr. Henley loses his patience. Picture yourself sitting a hotel room on a press junket. In a five-hour period you are repeatedly asked inane, personal and annoying questions by dozens of "journalists".
Some have preconceived or negative ideas about you and your art. Some have their own agendas. Some have no clue. How many torturous hours and ridiculous questions would I get through before losing it? Not many. Is it part of the territory? I guess. Does it make it any easier to handle? Nope. I'm just glad that he manages to effectively skewer this "journalist" with a sharp tongue. Maybe it'll be incentive for future interviewers to keep their questions thoughtful and relevant rather than inane. JMHO.
I agree, HH. In this case, the interviewer was clearly trying to embarrass Don by calling him out about wine not being a spirit. "Do you regret that lyric?" the guy asked him. How is Don supposed to react to a question like that? "Gee whiz, I never thought of that! My bad! Thanks for pointing it out and giving me the opportunity to apologize for making this mortifying mistake." I guess he could've laughed it off, but he couldn't resist giving that smarta$$ a snarky set-down and I don't blame him. In fact, I find it highly amusing.
ETA: That article only contains an edited version of the quote. Here is Don's full response:Don: Thanks for the tutorial and, no, you're not the first to bring this to my attention -- and you're not the first to completely misinterpret the lyric and miss the metaphor. Believe me, I've consumed enough alcoholic beverages in my time to know how they are made and what the proper nomenclature is. But that line in the song has little or nothing to do with alcoholic beverages. It's a sociopolitical statement. My only regret would be having to explain it in detail to you, which would defeat the purpose of using literary devices in songwriting and lower the discussion to some silly and irrelevant argument about chemical processes.Don = 1; Lame Interviewer = 0
..haha...WELL DONE DON!:thumbsup:
Cute Don mention on former backup singer Jana Anderson's Facebook:
"In honor of Groundhog Day, I have a slightly funny Groundhog Day story. It was several years ago, I was on tour as a backup singer with Don Henley. We were all on the commerical flight, including Don. We pulled away from the New York airport gate. Because of weather, we were unable to take off...for FIVE AND A HALF HOURS!!! They couldn't take out the carts and serve us any food or drinks because we were in a line to take off...FOR FIVE AND A HALF HOURS!!! Guess what the free inflight movie was? Yep, GROUNDHOG DAY with Bill Murray. We watched Groundhog Day TWO TIMES IN A ROW BEFORE EVEN TAKING OFF. Then they played it a third time while we flew. Ironic enough? :) "
Too funny! :lol:
I'm sure that was pretty terrible, but being stuck on an airplane with Don wouldn't be so bad! :drool:
ETA: IF he was in a good mood! :wink:
How deliciously funny is playing that movie 3 times?
I have to admit, if I didn't have any water or food with me I would have been losing the plot after 5 hours... although it might be enough time to screw up my courage to say hello to Don... nah, I'd just think I was gonna annoy him and would sit back in the cheap sits dreaming and kicking myself.
I dunno - I've gotta think that if I were stuck on an airplane with Don for 5 hours, that would give me plenty time to muster up enough courage to speak to him! :thumbsup:
Don Henley to be 2012 MAC Gala Guest Speaker
http://meadeactivitycenter.org/2012/...re-don-henley/
Interesting! Thanks Koala!
I wonder why/how they got Don? I know they've all done a lot for various charities over the years (in addition to the ones they have established themselves e.g. Caddo Lake Inst/Walden Woods), but do the guys get approached for a lot of this sort of thing, how do they pick what they will support?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooke
Here's what MAC is, according to their website:Quote:
Originally Posted by EaglesKiwi
"The Meade Activity Center project was initiated by a group of local citizens with the goal of constructing a state-of-the-art fitness facility that will provide programming and activities to improve overall wellness in the area. With the recent national focus on rising health care costs and diseases caused by obesity and smoking, this volunteer-based organization is taking an innovative approach to improve the quality of life for a community that previously had limited access to fitness opportunities."I wonder if MAC is actually non-profit? Their "vision" and "fundraising" seems to imply that they are, as well as the statement that it is "volunteer-based." Everyone here has assumed they are - but where does it say that? If you look at their site, a membership to this "state of the art fitness facility" costs $40 a month and if you want to use the golf course, it costs $80 a month. Financial aid is available so presumably they give discounts to poor people, but overall MAC sure doesn't sound like a charity to me. Just to be sure, I asked them straight out. I'll let you know their reply.
At any rate, I doubt Don would accept money for himself, but it is probably known to many Directors of Fundraisers that the fastest way to Don's heart is through Walden Woods. Judging from some of his past activities, he's not too discriminating with regard to where the money for the donation comes from, so he is unlikely to turn you down if you can contribute a substantive amount. That makes him a prime candidate to approach for such things, be they non-profit or for-profit.
It would be interesting to see what Don's speech will cover - the importance of exercising?
I hope so, these guys have another 40 years to go.Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts
Here's hoping they're still performing for many more years (I'm not sure about 40 more years, though!).
Hmm, he could do a speech on people taking individual and collective responsibility for their local communities - environment, recreation and other facilities, wellbeing etc. He could tie it into what is being achieved by the Caddo Lake Institute...?
As of today, I have gotten no reply from MAC to my question about whether or not this is a non-profit (a question which I not only emailed them but asked them on their facebook - a facebook they've posted on since then). To me, that silence says it all.
Seems like they are actively trying to mislead people into thinking they are a charity - notice how they bold the words "non-profit" in the write up, even though that is describing Don's work, not theirs.
When I ask them point-blank if it is a non-profit... a simple yes or no question... they don't answer. Why not?
There's only one reason that I can see: an honest answer ("yes, we're for profit") will destroy the illusion they're trying to create with all their implications and noble-sounding statements about wanting to help the community. The lawyers tell them not to outright lie, so they just don't answer.
This is a business, and the community members must pay a pretty penny for their "access to fitness opportunities." The website vaguely mentions there is a possibility for "financial aid" but gives no specifics. Certainly that is not what their main purpose is. Their main purpose is to make money.
Now, there's nothing wrong with that. Who knows - perhaps a portion of their profits go back to the community in some way (although they never explicitly say so). I have no problem with a fitness center holding a gala to encourage investment in their enterprise. I do have a problem with the way they are trying to strongly imply they are a non-profit (without outright saying it) when they are actually a for-profit business.
Maybe Don should give a talk about corporate ethics.
However, EaglesKiwi, I think your guess is far more likely!
Technically, unless they have certain IRS-sanctioned distinctions, they are not allowed to bill themselves as non-profit, even if their goal isn't to make money. There's a fitness facility here in town that charges people money, depending on where they live (town, county, or out-of-county) and they also get money from the local governments. They are not non-profit, yet they operate in the red each year and in order not to take more money from local governments, they have fundraisers a few times a year. Not sure it's the same thing.
If that's the case, more power to them... but why not just say so when asked directly?
Maybe because it's harder to explain? (Although VA did a fantastic job!). And they wouldn't necessarily want to say that they operate in the red each year!Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts
Soda - I would almost be more surprised if Don didn't find a way to work "corporate ethics" into his speech, even if he goes with my themes!
Found this item online today:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1273143.html
It's a shame that such an institute feels obligated to give the money back, but I can see why they do. I promise, if I win Friday's Mega Millions lottery, I'll donate the money back.
Rothstein claims a friendship with Don, and Don did dedicate a song to him and his wife on their anniversary a while back. However, the Caddo Institute itself seems to not even be aware of him at all, according to that article - the Caddo Institute's president Lowerre says "We just thought he was an attorney." Rothstein probably exaggerated the personal connection.
While I understand that this money is "blood money" tainted by the fact that Rothstein ripped off so many people, I still wonder why it should be given back. Given back to whom - Rothstein - the guy who stole it?! I'd much rather this money, though gained wrongfully, could at least be used here in a positive way.
Now, if the money was being given back to the people Rothstein ripped off, that would be another matter. Perhaps that's what's going on?
If the article said that it was, I missed it. But his company is probably being sued, or something similar and needs to raise the funds and after the lawyers, I'd think it would go to those who were ripped off.Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts
Yes, that's right. I found another article that explains this a little better. This is my understanding of the situation: The Caddo Institute, along with several other charities that received donations from Rothstein, has had to come to an agreement with the firm's bankruptcy lawyers in order to return a portion of the funds, thus enabling the firm to pay debts including settlements to the victims.
In that case, it is more than appropriate than the funds be given back.
Here's another article about the doctorate degree the Eagles will be receiving;
Do we now have to call him Dr. Henley?
http://www.pollstar.com/news_article.aspx?ID=800886
yeah Dr.Henley...Dr.Schmit...Dr.Walsh...and Dr. Frey:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Topkat
In the words of Robert Palmer . . .
Doctor, Doctor, give me the news, I've got a bad case of loving you. http://freeemoticonsandsmileys.com/a...ve%20heart.gif
:hilarious:Quote:
Originally Posted by Henley Honey
So true!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Henley Honey
Agreed... so true! :heart:Quote:
Originally Posted by Henley Honey
I wonder, though, if it's an honorary title, if you should or shouldn't use the 'Dr.' when formally addressing someone with an honorary degree. I'll have to ask around...
Quote:
Originally Posted by VAisForEagleLovers
As far as I am aware the answer is no. Just as Bob Geldof should not be referred to as 'Sir Bob' because he is an Irish citizen. His knighthood is honorary. However, apparently some people do refer to themselves as 'Dr'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_degree (see 'Practical Use').
Hello, Dr. Schmit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
(Not that I think the honorary degree was a result of a premeditated "quid prop quo" - in fact, I think that's obviously not the case, considering the timing - but perhaps the university felt a "thank you" was in order for his generous endowment and continued support).
However, Joe's got them all beat. He got an honorary doctorate from Kent University ten years ago. This will be his second!
The funny thing is, had Timothy followed thru with his studies and become a Psychologist, we WOULD be calling him 'Dr."!Quote:
Originally Posted by Topkat
Right, Joe said he left Kent State after the shootings there. Funny, now he has a doctorate from there now!Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts
Joe's Doctorate is also honorary. And I seem to recall that he was far more into his music that his books when he was there. The James Gang play around the Kent/Akron/Cleveland area a LOT. Mom has told lots of great little stories about being something of a groupie when the Gang was getting their start. I suspect the shootings (May 1970) were just the 'push' he needed to leave school and puruse his true love!
I don't think this has been posted before:
Don Henley Says Eagles Breakup Saved Band
I guess I should be grateful for that 14-year vacation, but I'm just really not feeling it! :lol:
yeah we see it differently don't we?...but I guess maybe we wouldn't have them now if that hadn't happened...and baby I appreciate them a lot more now than I would have then...growing up I guess does that to a person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ive always been a dreamer
zelda
Well, I'm grateful since I missed them the first time around. I'm now old enough to go see them - and can finally afford to!