Jump to content

uncool2pillow

Member
  • Content Count

    4922
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by uncool2pillow

  1. Salon.com makes an interesting point that this SCOTUS decision basically robs the GOP of one of their standard election-year scare tactics: claiming that the Democratic nominee wants to take everyone's guns away.

     

    The headline for their piece: Supreme Court gun ruling could backfire

    I think the segment of the population that votes on SCOTUS issues (abortion, guns, gay marriage, etc.) will almost always vote for their party of choice because many either don't understand precedent and the principle of stare decisis or don't trust the court to respect it. Those who want their guns will still vote Republican, those who want to take them away will still vote Democrat.

  2. If you look at it in the context of the time it was written, the main threat to the right to bear arms was a colonial government trying to suppress militias. The idea of taking away individuals' guns for safety reasons or to try (and fail) to prevent crime would probably have been viewed as crazy.

    No doubt the founders provided a context of the necessity of militias. What is the historical basis to say that owning guns to prevent crime would've been considered crazy by the founders?

  3. On a semi-related note, does anyone watch the Morgan Spurlock show, 30 Days? This week, a woman against gay adoption lived with a gay (male) couple who had 4 kids. She would get so upset when people would question her beliefs that all of these gay people she was around shouldn't have children. The only justification she had was her religious faith, which is fine. But faced with the prospect of the lives these kids would be living without gay people being willing to adopt them, she still said it was "wrong" even though she admitted they were great parents. It was funny and sad at the same time.

  4. Hearing this on the radio this morning just burned me the eff up. I just don't understand why, when they are making billions in profits, they would allow them to get off with such a small amount of retribution to those fishing communities. It's been nearly 20 years-- they still have not recovered, economically.

     

    I am curious what the SC's ruling on the 2d Amendment will be.

    (This being the possession of handguns w/in the District of Columbia case that they are expected to rule on today.)

     

    Kevin

    The Supreme Court has lifetime appointments because they are supposed to ignore the day-to-day whims of the masses. I have no idea about the constitutionality of this case and won't bother to read this decision because it doesn't really interest me, but if they were to "punish" Exxon for an oil spill that happened nearly 20 years ago because of their massive profits today, I would completely lose faith in our court.

  5. The Replacements - A friend bought Let It Be at a record store after a store clerk recommended it. I think my friend was impressed more by song titles such as Gary's Got a Boner than any musical attributes the record may have. We listened to it and I recall liking it. We listened to a lot of stuff in those days though, so the band sort of slipped from my view for a while. A few years went by when I spotted CD copies of Let It Be and Tim at a record store in Buffalo. Well I got those home and something clicked, I was going to be a fan for life.

    My introduction to the Replacements was - like most of the music I like - through my older brother (though, I'm proud to say, I turned him on to Wilco). Around 1986, he bought me Hootenanny because he'd heard a few good things about him, then browsing the record store, saw that Hootenanny had a song called "Buck Hill". That's a ski hill in the Twin Cities where we learned to ski. The Replacements song is a surf-rock instrumental. I always imagined it as a theme song for a show about a spy/porn star.

  6. In spring 1989, I read a review of Bob Mould's first post-Husker Du album, Workbook in Rolling Stone. I'd heard of them, but never listened. I bought Workbook and listened to it at a friend's house. His folks had a top-notch stereo system, which probably added to my appreciation of it. That was 19 years ago, but I remember it like it was yesterday. It was the most powerful musical revelation I've ever had.

     

    Every once in a while I go to RS's Web Site to re-read the review that led to the most important musical discovery in my life.

  7. Carlin was one of the smartest, funniest people. I lean conservative, so I disagree w/ a lot of his politics. However, he was so damn smart and funny, he always made me appreciate his point of view even when I disagree w/ it. He will be missed. :(

     

    I hope he's wrong about the afterlife for two reasons. 1) Just to shock him, 2) So we can all hear him again.

  8. The trailer is iffy, perhaps, but I thought the same thing about the trailers for Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and The Incredibles. I think I've learned my lesson.

     

    I'm looking forward to this, mostly because we're planning to make it the very first movie our young daughter sees in the movie theater.

    I'd be curious how old your daughter is. My 3-year olds love watching the trailer on the computer and we're probably going to take them to the theater for the first time, too. They've been to live shows before, but not to a movie theater. I'm a little worried about their behavior and attention span bothering other viewers.

  9. Has EW ever pretended to be anything other than an echo of popular taste? This list reads exactly as expected.

    I usually ignore EW because of this, but c'mon. Give them SOME credit. Crumb at #14?? That's sublime. That said. I think Royal Tenenbaums is Wes Anderson's masterpiece, not Rushmore; and it didn't make the list at all. In fact, I like Bottle Rocket better than Rushmore. Overall, I think EW deserves some credit for the number of indie movies on that list. Excluding Titanic, it's a pretty fair top 10.

  10. Why? Our Lily will be two in almost exactly one month, has been able to ask for it by name for quite a while, and shows no signs of stopping - I'm just wondering how you came to this conclusion.

     

    "The World Health Organization recommends that after an "initial 4-to-6-month period of exclusive breast-feeding, children should continue to be breast-fed for up to 2 years of age or beyond."

     

    I didn't know the WHO's stance on this. My wife was unable to nurse because we have twins and, being born about 4 weeks early, and probably a host of other reasons (lack of rest, lack of time to pump) her milk never came in great quantities. I am very open to nursing in public. It never really makes me uncomfortable w/ infants. But when we had some friends over, her daughter, whose age I don't remember but she was at least 2 maybe approaching 3, would push up her mom's bra and demand food. In retrospect, maybe my problem was more with discipline than with breastfeeding.

×
×
  • Create New...