Self, :} I'm not much on fusion... McLaughlin's alright. Most of it just strikes me as too dense, overly complex ...somewhat masturbatory on the part of the artist. It's not always bad... some folk do it well. To tell you the truth... I've not actually heard Spocks Beard. Sometimes I think the way folk today constantly reference {borrow from} the past is a bit detrimental. ...Keeps them stuck in the past. I always figured the past was something to be learned from and left behind. I wonder why folk want to live within labels. Labels are so you can organize you cd collection. Not that I've not adopted a few myself. It's just that... take country, for instance... why do artists tend to drag that whole thing out rather than taking it upon themselves to deviate from it as much as the folk who made "country" {the core folk} managed to deviate from what was around at the time? Why are they content with simply mimicking the earlier or defining aspects of whatever movement? Do they actually think that country or metal or punk or whatever else came about that way? Back to your point... I like lots of different movements... I may borrow from lots of different movements... no way in hell I'd ever create within or for a specific movement. Why do people do this? Your point of view could have used a bit of clarification. Technophiles and disco kiddies... :} they're all around us. Not exactly. I don't really have a problem with Bush... He's not done all that badly given what he's had to deal with. I think he's gotten a bit hawkish of late. I wouldn't rule out voting for him.