[Dixielandjazz] Louis Armstrong

[Charlie Hooks]

on 9/29/02 8:19 AM, Kmstrmldr@aol.com at Kmstrmldr@aol.com wrote:

> He, more than many people want to admit, did his share of protesting and
> resisting.  Shouldn't he have been allowed to do this, publicly, on his own
> terms? 

Just got back in town and saw this.

Louis was not a "protester," no matter how much the politically correct
crowd would like him to have been.

"Shouldn't he have been allowed to do this publicly?" makes no sense.  Of
course he was "allowed" to do so--if he wanted to!  And certainly nobody in
present time is "allowing" him to do (or preventing him from doing) anything
at all.  I think you are allowing your desire to overshoot your logic.

cordially,
Charlie