Atticus

I just wanted to thank everyone who has jumped on and laid out some of your favorites. I started the thread because I had had a bad day at work, was in the car, being negative and a bit impatient, etc., when "Tombstone Blues" came on the mp3 and then "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues" and then others. And suddenly my piss-poor mood was gone, I was smiling, traffic was no longer an annoyance, and I went home and had a relaxing evening. It's been so great reading all these posts and having a flood of memories come up. Made me revisit a lot of the music.

Torrents from 2006 so far: Austin 2006.03.15 Chicago (short) 2006.08.22 2006.08.15 Hollywood

no kidding... I guess the fact that all that stuff is crap--and poorly made crap at that--is what makes the $$ sting even more. Last time we went we were guests (free tix), but I bought the whole group (4) two rounds of beers--that was a quick $60...

I'm embarassed to admit that I had to look Here to figure out your post...

well with all the crack that she's "allegedly" been ingesting of late, maybe now would be a good time for him to make his move? I'm sure that with little more than a toothpick, some thumbtacks and a curling iron, MacGyver could swoop in and grab her for ole Osama...

I have been to a few Astros games of late, and continue to be amazed at the prices of the concessions. I may be off on a couple of figures, but here's what I remembered from the last trip: Soft Drink: $5 (small)/$5.75 for cup with astros' stuff on it Hot Dog: $4 (smallest)/ $6 regular (chili and cheese will run you an extra grand) Cup of Fries: $4.50 Beer: $7 "Nachos" (stale chips and some velveeta): $7 Now, I realize that this is a sporting event, etc., and God knows the prices at movie theatres are outrageous, but it just kind of struck me, as I was watching joe schmoe families wit

My reason for voting for Glenn is that while he does get praise as an accomplished drummer, I'm not sure he gets enough credit for his role in the songs and as a soundboard for Jeff. After reading that Kot "book," and finally watching and listening to several "solo" Jeff performances (joined by Glenn for last set), and then going back and listening to the pre-Kotche album and live tracks--and the attendant differences in nuance and dynamic versatility--I have to think that Jeff wouldn't be in the happy place he seems to be in, musically, if not for Glenn. This is not a Coomer-bashing post, b

***sends vibes***

I appreciate the clarifying email--I took nothing but a smile from Bjorn's post. My earlier comment was directed at others. Thanks for your post though, it was very kind.

my vote's for Glenn...

I'm done with all this.

I apologize for the remark. As angry as the post made me, I shouldn't have gone there. Cryptique and others have really gotten under my skin, and I've not been too wise with some of my subsequent posts. I have had some really bad and stressful family news, but that shouldn't enter into or affect my etiquette. Again, I apologize. Neil

You don't know the first thing about me, and don't have the slightest interest in doing so. And you obviously don't know when to stop.

I think those are all points worth discussion, I was just wondering whether what you're talking about is more geared towards impeachment than treason.

that whole song is just a run-on of amazing lines, don't you think?

Maybe so, but I think we're closer to agreement then either of us may think at present. I think interpretation is necessary, but I also think that the legislature should work out grey areas more often than the courts, since we have some redress with the members of Congress. Regardless, I'd like to thank you for the civilized discourse on the subject, which is more than I can say right now about a few other threads...

then I suggest you find a mirror, and quick. and as to quotes bordering on treason, I've already explained ad nauseum my poor choice of words, and if you think I'm about to give you more fodder to rip me a new one, then I implore you to hold your breath. You're the most discourteous and smug poster I've ever encountered on this board, and I'd appreciate it if you would refrain from addressing me in the future, unless it consists of an apology.

Would gladly do it again in light of the content and spirit behind the prompting post. where is there a blanket "violating the constitution" provision in the Consitution's definition of treason? and thanks for the link to the article. I find the underlying story appalling. Makes me feel a little better about my own word-choice blunder. Thank God Cryptique was there to let me know that I don't fit his mold of permitted thought/existence.

I'm just saying clarify/extend the law! Let's have a clear law--not an "interpretation" of the bill of rights--that (pick your example) prohibits schools from displaying religious messages, if that's what the people want. Or a more blanket law that prohibits institutions (and their employees, agents, etc.) which receive federal funding from promoting religion. Those are just two examples off the top of my head--I just think taking an amendment that specifically refers to acts of Congress and stretching it to cover any entanglement of church and state makes less sense than having the legisla

Really? Oh, my bad.

Christ some of you people are mean spirited. I made a poor choice of words, for which I've clarified and apologized (if that hasn't been enough, here: I should have used a phrase or term other than "treasonous," I will try and be more careful in the future), and yet the attacks continue. This (experience) is a first for me on VC. what a shame.

Treason: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." I will have to do some googling to find an example to illustrate what I mean, I don't keep them in a drawer. The kind of thing I'm referring to in general is those who, instead of stating something along the lines of "this war is wrong, we should end it"--which I don't find to be treasonous in the leas

for feck's sake, I said "frighteningly close to treasonous." I have not accused anyone of committing treason. It's becoming readily apparent that none of you cares one bit about an actual dialogue with me on this--especially cryptique, whose opinions of me have been unequivocably stated--so what's the point... Bush bad. Bush bad. Bush bad. I see a new, brighter world coming already...

then perhaps I should rephrase. I was using the phrase "frighteningly treasonous" to infer that some of what I'ver heard elected officials state (not posters on this forum) comes frighteningly close to treason. Those people are in positions of power, and people pay attention to what they say. I think they should be careful to stick to policy and alternative solutions, rather than mimicking the likes of chavez, etc. But if any of you felt that I was accusing you of treason or "treasonous" behavior, then I humbly apologize. I have yet to see anything on this board that I equate with treaso