lost highway

I haven't gotten to dive in yet. Interesting to hear your take. I'll report back with mine.

Interesting. Most of the Colorado districts, including mine, just declared an extended spring break 2-3 weeks starting on Monday. I feel like I'm going on the weirdest vacation ever.

Reviews for the new record have been pretty good. I've got my hopes up.

Does Gabbard know she's still in?

This thing isn't even over and I'm already exhausted by engaging the social media spout-offs about how the DNC is already screwing Bernie, cheating to get Biden to win, and going to fail. Biden has gotten more votes! More democratic voters preferred him as their choice on Tuesday. What the hell you need a conspiracy for.... people like him. I don't really know how, but they do. This conspiracy theory crap is all a great way for everyone to stay home in November so they can talk about what an activist they are by sticking it to the democratic party, while somehow doing absolutely nothing. Mea

I feel more comfortable with my appreciation for Blur. Oasis is like some charismatic, handsome kid that goes to your highschool who's kind of narcissistic and a total dick sometimes, but is randomly friendly to you and you feel all charmed and hate yourself for it. My love of Oasis is kind of like that. Blur has better albums, but not a better single.

I have a musical question: I was recently sitting in front of a cover band. They were playing lots of crowd pleasers and it seemed to be as inoffensive and pleasant as a cover band might be. Then they started playing "Wonderwall" by Oasis. You could feel the place light up. So this is all to say, what's the deal with Oasis? Why were they so good? Why were they a single band more than an album band? Why didn't they last longer? I should hate that band. Many people do. The Gallagher brothers seem like complete wankers.... this only intensifies my question. What's the deal with Oasis?

To me it comes down to this: Who other than the most popular candidate would be the nomination? Someone with fewer delegates?

When it means 'the most', or 'the greater number'. A majority is only 51% when the contest is between two people or groups. Our politics is so binary people have a hard time picturing one winner in a 7-way contest having clearly the most, the majority, and less than 50%.

I feel the same way. There's a bit of rhetorical slight of hand when they say you need a 'majority'; a candidate could have the majority of the delegates but not have 51%, which is not 'the majority'. If having the most delegates is not reason to be the nominee, then what reason should someone else with fewer votes be considered instead?

I would think he'd take some compromise, instead of nothing once he's in the big chair. That remains to be seen (or not seen at all). It is a funny notion that Bernie or Warren could bring a big, bold health care initiative that could get whittled down by the legislature into something that would look more like what Biden or Buttigieg would cook up.

You're so right. For my money Binaural, Riot Act and S/T all came around the time people started ignoring PJ, and are 3 excellent records. What came after hasn't been as satisfying.

There is no obvious winner. A progressive ticket could alienate moderates and independents, a milquetoast centrist could be John Kerry or Hillary Clinton redeux. Sanders has energy behind him, that's more than we can say for anyone else right now.

OMG I just figured out where this came from.

Huh.... this doesn't suck. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOYdZ0GyQFQ It's actually pretty cool.

Am I the only democrat on the planet who's feeling the Bernie excitement, but not the Buttigieg hatred?

And to be fair, Democrats are good at enforcing rules upon themselves that Republicans have happily ignored.

You'd think some Senators will be in the hot seat having been on the record as voting against witnesses in a trial. They've really diminished their office, and I don't mean in the moral way you guys are already right about. If Congress votes to allocate funds and the President ignores it without explanation, that's diminished the Legislative branch. I wonder if these Senators feel comfortable with their actions being a precedent, should the Dems ever have an Executive who plays dirty and gets caught.

That new single is NOT what I expected. I can't see falling in love with it, but I'm excited that they're taking some new risks. They might pay off on some of the rest of the material.

He's really so good. I've been listening on public radio to and from work..... some really incoherent yelling Republicans (and a few sloppy Democrats too) have taken the podium in both the House and now the Senate steps of the process. He's so clear, and calm, and focused. If I say Atticus Finch-esque is that too much?

Still no Quiet Amplifier? I fear that song will never enter the rotation!

Yeah, me too. My buddy is down there now. I have a feeling the next two setlists will also have some treasures.

That's been my thing for the last few years, I want any kind of justice... if not legally, then cosmically. I'll take him being hugely embarrassed, or becoming frustratedly irrelevant, if we can't get him in jail, or throw out of office.

No matter what tepid album they're touring for, you should still absolutely go. If you've liked them for any length of time it will be worth a fair amount of cash to see them.... like our generation's Stones-level worth it.

Pearl Jam plans to release a new album inspired by the melting ice caps, heinous climate change denial on their facebook ensues. Not sure if that part was funny or sad. https://news.avclub.com/pearl-jam-are-finally-releasing-a-new-album-1840978410 I've learned to hope for the best and expect the worst in post 2010 PJ releases, but I always get curious. They have so much talent, they might use it right again.