MrRain422

You make it sound like that that's all this guy ever talked about in his sermons.

Also, how do we know that he never spoke to the pastor about things he disagreed with? Because this is the first time he gave a big speech on it? I bet they've discussed lots of issues in private before.

He agrees with him on some things and not on others. Why must Obama agree 100% with everything each of his advisors believes? And if he did agree with them, what would be the point of even going to them for advice, since he would have nothing to learn from their perspective?

Yeah, the point of the speech wasn't so much the actual differences between white and black America. It was the perception of those differences among and within both groups. So even if poverty is more of the issue than race when it comes to the difference between the haves and have-nots (which I only sort of agree with), that's not what the speech was about. It wasn't about wealth or poverty -- it was about racial divisions and the differences in experience and perception between people of different races in this country.

Right, but a lot of poverty is directly tied to race. And was even more tied to race in the past, and those fissures resulting from old racist policies haven't been fixed. That was the point. As tempting as it is to separate the issues, it's also sort of naive.

Obama's speech on race today: "A More Perfect Union" Constitution Center Tuesday, March 18th, 2008 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania "We the people, in order to form a more perfect union." Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted throug

I think it's cool at most small places, but it sometimes depends on what band is playing too. I'd recommend calling the club before you show up with a nice camera.

I think the song has been overdone a bit, but it got that way because it is a great song. I've never heard a bad version of it.

"Bootleg" refers to any unofficial merchandise, not just recordings.

Yeah, Boston is wise to try to get rid of him. I'm just not sure what team should want him though. Certainly not the Cubs, who have their own hot prospect in center. They shouldn't want Crisp for the same reasons that Boston doesn't.

Right, I said explicitly that he's above average in the field. Just not enough above average to outweigh his poor hitting. And just because he won doesn't mean he was a liability. It just means that he was not enough of a liability to bring down a team that was so stacked elsewhere. Anyway, to get back to the point that started this discussion (whether it makes sense for the Cubs to try to pick up Crisp), Pie is one of the most highly touted prospects in baseball, especially at that position. He is predicted by many to be among the best centerfielders (fielding and hitting) in all of ba

Sure, he was on the championship team, but unless you mean to say every player on the Red Sox is better than everyone on any other team, then I'm not really sure what your point is. By my count Crisp was about the 15th most important player on that team last year. What more could I ask for? Well, he put up an OPS+ of 83 last year, so he was 17% worse at the plate than the league average hitter. I think I could ask for a bit more there. And yeah, he's an above average centerfielder, but enough to make up for the hole in his bat? In my opinion, no. Sure, centerfield is a hard enough po

Coco Crisp has not been an above average centerfielder since probably 2005. They're better off giving the young guy a chance.

Well, he hasn't done much in a while other than that Tai Chi music album that no one (including myself) has heard. He did release two songs online earlier this year that are not bad but pretty standard Lou stuff. It's now been 4 years since his last rock album though.

Not since Mistrial. Edit: I forgot about probably 3/4 of The Raven. Never mind.

Still counting down the minutes here in the Central Time Zone.

Yeah, the notion is straight forward, but the way you expressed it was not.

Johnny Marr was good. Never a favorite, but I like what he did and think he was a good guitar player.

The Stooges - Fun House NATSUMEN - NEVER WEAR OUT yOUR SUMMER xxx!!! The White Stripes - De Stijl Mission of Burma - OnOffOn The Velvet Underground - White Light/White Heat Arcade Fire - Neon Bible Meat Puppets - II Elvis Costello - This Year's Model The Go - The Go The Minutemen - What Makes a Man Start Fires? Wilco - Being There Radiohead - The Bends The Mars Volta - Frances the Mute TOOL - Aenima Mike Watt - Contemplating the Engine Room Neko Case - Furnace Room Lullaby Pere Ubu - Dub Housing The Pixies - Doolittle Thunderbirds Are Now! - Justamustache The Toadies - Hell Below/Stars Above

In no real order. I grouped a couple guys together where I really liked a band's guitar sound with the two together more than I really like either individually: John Frusciante (RHCP, Mars Volta, Ataxia, solo) Jack White (White Stripes, Raconteurs, etc.) Roger Miller (Mission of Burma) D. Boon (The Minutemen) Mick Jones (The Clash) J. Mascis (Dinosaur Jr) Thurston Moore/Lee Ranaldo (Sonic Youth) Tom Verlaine/Richard Lloyd (Television) Ron Asheton (The Stooges) Sterling Morrison/Lou Reed (Velvet Underground) Jonny Greenwood (Radiohead) Billy Zoom (X) Robert Quine (Richard Hell & the Void

From those quotes, I think he may be attacking technology less than he is the way that people are using the technology. He knows there's high quality mp3's out there -- he's going after people for being so content to listen to the shitty ones.

Anytime anyone breaks a law, they run the risk of facing legal consequences. But that doesn't mean that every law is equal, and it doesn't mean that I should be equally appalled by every law broken. Some things are just bigger deals than others. I didn't complain that Spitzer may face consequences for going to prostitutes. He broke the law, and he knew that that was a risk he was taking so I don't feel sorry for him, but that doesn't mean I especially care about what he did either.

I read some blogs speculating about this earlier. I don't really understand why the wives are always next to these guys at their press conferences. I don't think anyone would think they were wrong to not show up for that particular event. The best explanation I've heard is that perhaps they do it so that the press doesn't come seeking them for comment later. Like, if they show up and stand with their husband for the press conference, they're less likely to be hounded into commenting afterward. Sort of makes sense I guess.

Right, that's exactly what I said. If I shared his bank account, it would matter to me. But I don't, so it doesn't.

Might make a difference to the person who shares his bank account, but doesn't matter an ounce to me. You make it sound as though I've defended hypocrisy from politicians in other instances. Yes, politicians are hypocrites all the time, and it's a problem every time.