lost highway

So because Al Gore flies in a plane, global warming is a conspiracy? Pretty weak reasoning- straw man kind of deal there. Ask yourself which perception of reality is more financially lucrative: a. All the shit we put in the air is ruining the environment. b. Everything is fine, continue consuming as much as possible.

I can relate to all of that, for sure. In a lot of ethical, and environmental areas the current trend of the "empowered consumer" who makes lifestyle choices to effect the greater good, can be pretty limiting. No knock on people who focus on it, there can be lots of good side effects (minimalism, healthy diet, exercise, time with nature etc), but it can prevent people from noticing what you're describing: it requires greater powers and infrastructures to change. Not just what you buy at the grocery store.

It's like cancer. You can keep lighting up saying "I'll have to die sometime." But you're ignoring the harrowing experience you could be setting up. Human kind isn't going to be gently put to sleep one day and hit a quick reset so the world can evolve new species (although in geological terms it might be close to that, timeline wise). It is going to be a long, slow, painful dismantling. People don't treat each other nicely when there is a glaring lack of resources. This doesn't even peak into the ethical crimes of causing countless species of plants and animals to go extinct, while we a

I really think it comes down to styles of music. If you got into Wilco so many years ago because you were particularly fond of whatever stage they were at, you also had no way of knowing where the band would go. As they've changed they've landed on some musical approaches that some fans are less fond of. Weirdly for me the band has evolved from stuff that I listen to sometimes (roots rock, americana) through some styles that I listen to a fair amount from other bands (chamber pop, beach boys rock) and eventually seemed to occupy the same sphere as the majority of my listening (hybridized pop

Here's another one: climate change. The scientists keep dropping more serious urgency on us, Obama did fairly little about it first term, and has kind of pledged to do more. Thoughts?

It isn't. Read about it:

That's pretty weak reasoning for anyone who values personal liberty. The justice of 'the law' has had some pretty high highs, and low lows in this country. It's better if we think critically about it. The popular demand for immigration reform stems from the understanding that the current laws are practically unenforceable, inequitable, and economically counter-productive.

No you merely suggested they get deported. I, personally would prefer being "picked on".

I've known illegal and legal immigrants (Mexico, Chile, Bosnia, and Canada). You're right in that even the folks that married into citizenship had to invest a ton of time and money into the process. I also think it's bunk when a non-latino uses a chicano friend as a pass to pick on newcomers. I've also known dudes who've hidden in the back of truck's and crossed stretches of desert for an opportunity to wash dishes. Somehow I don't think one's effort cancels out another's. I also don't think my knowing them means I have a full understanding of what they've been through. Immigrants are

You can summarize an entire nation of people's wants with one sentence (as well as their supporters)? I think some Palestinians may want support in getting Israel to go back to the legal agreements they made years ago, instead of continuously expanding their borders. There are some Israelis who want the same. I support Palestine and I want peace. Now let's talk about what all of America wishes for in our relationship with Mexico- oh wait, that doesn't work.

I still feel like something is missing in this conversation. The pro gun side has correctly pointed out that gun laws can not fully prevent gun violence. What I'm looking for is a substantial argument why your owning a gun is important enough to choose it over even a statistical probability of less homicides, or accidental deaths. While we have pointed out that shooting happen in Norway, or Australia, we also know they happen less. So what is actually worth the exchange there? Tyranny is not going to cut it, because we have been noting both tyrannical, and free nations with tougher gun

Is it that comedians can't be right, or that other news organizations won't have celebrities?

You clearly do not understand what I'm saying.

Yes, the symbolic supreme asshole of the modern era. Also the center-piece of more impractical, emotive and illogical pieces of rhetoric than any other historical figure. It's a pretty easy litmus test these days: Hitler comparison= full of shit.

Hitler took away guns, so did modern day Norway. The U.S. has relatively lax gun laws, and so does Pakistan. Where do you want to live? All of these cheap shots at fascism, or failed states on either side are intellectually lazy. You can find plenty of good and bad examples no matter what your argument because GUN LAWS AREN'T WHAT MAKES A GOVERNMENT. If your strongest argument for your second amendment rights is "Hitler took away guns", then you have successfully proven how obsolete your gun privileges are. (also of note is the fact that the Obama administration hasn't made a single

For those of you who say you can't get rid of the millions of guns in the country here is a viable alternative:

And then we would taste the tyranny that the Australians and Norwegians have suffered so brutally through..... And then we would be left with only more precise and effective firearms than the people who wrote the amendment into the constitution..... A single bolt action .22 is a perfectly reasonable way to practice marksmanship or keep the deer population in check (if you have the skills), it would also be an incredibly difficult weapon to commit a massacre with. I for one love your slippery slope scenario.

I think adequate human ethics have often been able to see their way around law. There have been many legal situations in the history of law that would excuse things most reasonable people would find unjust and despicable.

Now that's some callous bullshit. I've had two cars broken into, if someone would have shot the person doing it I'd call them a murderer. When I was in high school I was in an immature egging, tp'ing, vandalism battle with some other kids. One of my buddies must have crossed a line when he let the air out of one of their tires. A week later my family woke up to the sound of a boulder going through my windshield out front. Years later one of the dudes confessed (we're more or less friends now) to me at a bar. He said the guys were drunk and riled up- they really crossed the line. I gues

Person on internet forum investigates political thread and dismisses unoriginal polemic that will not change the world.

Guns are unnecessary.

Yes!!! I've been digging this for early morning work:

I find it to be a curious song.... which is good. Even if it doesn't work (my mind is not made up), it's better than another song about love sprinkled with nature imagery.

The thing that I always come back to, is there are the Wilco songs on the album, the songs that don't make the album that end up on B-Sides, special downloads, soundtracks etc, but then there are the others the ones that you never ever hear. Some of the material in the Wilco book was like that; it was as much interesting to listen to so you could understand their process and things that had to be tried, as it was just good music. With the way the band operates I bet there are some 20 odd recorded songs that no one has ever heard from SBS, WTA, TWL alone. The problem with that concept, is i

I can't help but wonder if Wilco's label independence allows them more freedom in the album release cycle. It seems like a lot of bands that ditch their labels end up messing around with the typical 3 year album- tour cycle; they might release things more suddenly, do some EP's, internet-only singles etc. More interesting is what musical turn another Wilco record might take.