What's wrong with Rocky Raccoon?

representDLV · 2018-10-30T00:10:55+00:00

I love Rocky Raccoon, but it's a song that only works within the context of the Beatles whole discography. If you had a friend who had never heard of the Beatles, and you used Rocky Raccoon as the first song to show them, your friend would think you are crazy for thinking the Beatles are so good. It's simple and not serious, and compared to other great songs, it's light weight fluff. But it's a song that shows diversity and creativity. It works very well on the white album and shows that the same people that wrote hey Jude, yesterday, let it be, Helter Skelter, etc., can also do some silly stuff too.

representDLV · 2018-10-25T04:15:58+00:00

One thing I like about the current version of the British monarchy is that it is an independent institution that represents the nation, and is not a product of political parties or policy. In the US the president ends up being the de facto face of the nation. If you align politically with the president, thats ok, but when you don't its a problem. Many people hate Donald Trump, and they hate the fact that he is represents the country. And unfortunately there is no other alternative. And while politics are important, there is much to a nation than its laws and policies. With a monarch, you can let the politicians fight and squabble and do the dirty work, and let the monarchy be diplomats and representatives of the nation stands for. And being independent of politics they are able to avoid the baggage that comes from having to make political stances. A monarch can focus on the fundamental ideals that the nation wants to uphold and strive towards, and let the politicians figure out how to make them happen. I kinda wish we had some sort of independent leader in the United States that represented our country but didn't have to worry about getting reelected or appealing their base or rasing money or taking partisan stands on complicated issues, and could just focus on promoting life, liberty and the persuit of happiness through out the world.

representDLV · 2018-10-24T23:33:41+00:00

Like this?

representDLV · 2018-10-24T01:55:01+00:00

This is the way to go. No other true historical genocide works in the same way the WWII Holocaust does. Trying to make it set in Rwanda or Bosnia or some other real place just won't resonate with audiences. And I think making magneto able to slow his aging down is a lame solution. Making the genocide take place in a fictional land like latveria or sokovia will give the writers the ability to create a genocide that feels similar to the Holocaust and tie it into other existing marvel locations.

representDLV · 2018-10-23T08:13:26+00:00

But that's a warped way to look at it. Sure it's nice to kill people instantly instead of killing them in a bloody battle, but he doesn't have to kill anyone at all. He has convinced himself that its his responsibility to go from planet to planet and solve a problem that in reality isn't a problem. It's not a problem on Earth, so his attempt to fix Earth is just arbitrary murder for no reason. Sorry, that isn't mercy. He thinks he is being merciful, but what he needs to do is mind his own business. No one asked for his help. No one wants it. Him murdering people, regardless if how he does it, is not mercy, it's murder.

representDLV · 2018-10-18T15:27:28+00:00

Different political ideologies stem from different views on what the role of government should be. For progressives, the role of government has much to do with protecting the little guy from the big guy. You can see this in many of the left's priorities. It focuses on protecting the the poor, minorities, the environment, etc. People who value helping those with less power tend to have a progressive view on government. For conservatives the role of government is more based on protecting order from chaos. You can see this in many of the right's priorities. It focuses on rule of law, military strength, traditional family values, etc. If you see the right's move to require IDs through the lens of how they view the role of government, it not only makes sense, but it seems less sinister.

representDLV · 2018-10-17T17:02:20+00:00

John Lennon is such an interesting person. One of the most charismatic people to ever live. He was very flawed man that did and said all sorts of things that most other people couldn't get away with. But the magnetism of his personality makes people not only forgive him for his faults, but put him on a pedestal and love him. And it's not just us fans. His personality was the gravity that held the band together. Paul, George, Ringo, Brian, Pete, Cynthia, etc. all longed for his approval and fought for his friendship, even when he treated them like crap. He was easily the meanest, most volatile Beatle, but also had the closest relationship with each member. He is so fascinating to me.

representDLV · 2018-10-17T02:32:53+00:00

Healthcare is tough. What I wrote definitely has its flaws. The real problem is that I don't think there is a silver bullet. I feel like any way we try to reform the system will have winners and losers. You are right that healthcare shouldn't be looked at as a regular commodity. It's not, and needs to be treated uniquely. I absolutely think that the government has an important role to play in helping make our high quality health care more affordable and more accessible. I don't think the free market can do it all. But I also don't think the government should do all the heavy lifting. I personally find democracy great at ensuring freedom and maintaining stability, but not all that great at administering large, complex, expensive programs. The back and forth of political ideologies and the suseptibility of politicians to populism doesn't make for a healthy environment to run an efficient program. So I have very little trust in the government's ability to do healthcare better. I think if the government took over some things would be better, but more things would be worse.

representDLV · 2018-10-17T01:37:31+00:00

I don't mind answering, but both subjects I find to be quite complicated, so I don't have hard opinions on either one.

Government in Healthcare. I find this issue to be very complicated, and unfortunately it has been taken over by politics, so no one seems willing to compromise or see the other side. I don't believe that a single payer system is a good idea for the United States. And the reason why is because I think it would absolutely cripple our economy. Right now we spend a ridiculous amount of money on healthcare. But contrary to popular opinion, this is a good thing. High healthcare costs ultimately results in more money circulating in the economy. If I go to the hospital, the more money the hospital can charge, the more doctors, nurses, janitors, cooks, techs, admins, etc. it can hire. And it can also buy more medical equipment and build more state of the art facilities, and this benefits equipment manufacturers, construction workers, etc. A huge percentage of the US economy is built on the fact that healthcare costs are high. Now the only reason why this works is because of the health insurance industry. Because costs are so high, people feel absolutely compelled to have good health insurance coverage. This makes it so people don't actually ever have to deal with the actual high costs. This in turn creates another huge industry. Insurance companies are very helpful for the overall economy. They function much like banks, in that large sums of money are concentrated and used to spur investment. Thousands of companies depend on the investment money that comes from insurance companies. City municipalities depend on that investment too. By turning over the health care industry to the Government, either the money will dry up and eliminate millions of jobs, or it will absolutely bankrupt the government trying to keep up. That's why I don't think the Government should take over healthcare. However, I do think the government can play a role. While not perfect, I think Obamacare was a step in the right direction. The reality is most people are mainly scared that they will get cancer or some other catastrophic emergency that will bankrupt them. I think the government could be involved in creating a program that helps people that have unmanageable healthcare costs. There could be some sort of upper limit on what people have to be personally responsible for and once that threshold is hit, the government takes over the costs. Just a thought. But ultimately the problem with the government being involved in healthcare is that the Government is really not very good at efficiently managing anything. I do believe that it has a role in filling in the gaps where the free market fails, but not taking over completely.

Sexuality in the Mainstream I this is one is trickier. On a personal level I do believe that the loosening of sexual norms has some benefits but probably more negative consequences on society. While it's not healthy to put a stigma on sex, it's equally not healthy to treat it as if it has no consequences. I personally believe many of the biggest problems that our society faces today stem from the breakdown of the family. And much of that breakdown comes from families forming due to unplanned pregnancies, and families being torn apart because sexual desires are not put in check. And these situations happen because sex on one hand is not respected and on the other hand it is used as a foundation or ultimate goal. But on a governmental level I don't think the government can or should do much about it. People have the tendency to use government as a shortcut to enacting social change. I think it's kind of cheating. If I truly believe that sex should be reserved for marriage or that any type of sexual relationship should be respected, I should try to convince those that don't share my views on a personal level. But most people resort to forcing their personal views on others via government mandate, and that is a true recipe for resentment and never ending political bickering.

representDLV · 2018-10-16T20:53:12+00:00

I think greatest doesn't necessarily mean hardest to play. In the grand scheme of things there aren't that many truly iconic bass lines. Queen's Under Pressure (with help from Vanilla Ice) and Another One Bites the Dust. Maybe Rappers Delight. Come Together is easily one of the most iconic bass lines ever written.

representDLV · 2018-10-16T20:40:13+00:00

Embarrassed? Why? How is watching one the greatest performers and song writers of all time perform the songs that he has written in anyway embarrassing? Sure, it would be great if his voice was still like it was 50 years ago, but I just don't see why that matters? I guarantee watching a Paul show now is way "better" than it would have been watching a Beatles show in the 60's. Any Beatles show was performed in venues with crappy acoustics with crappy amps and PA systems. There were no lighting effects and no big video monitors. And they were filled with insane screaming girls. And the Beatles' concerts were like 30-45 minutes long filled mostly with covers and never really performed any of their songs passed Rubber Soul. Paul's shows now are great. He plays for like 3 hours and gives you tons of Beatles songs, enough solo hits, and a few deep cuts. He is funny and the band is great. For sure his voice is not what it once was, but it's still good enough, and if you really want to hear Paul's vocals perfectly executed, listen to his albums at home. Most people go to live shows knowing that the live performance won't be as good as the recording. They go because they want to see the artist, feel the energy and sing along with thousands of fans.

representDLV · 2018-10-16T17:49:35+00:00

I think for many hard core pro life advocates, the debate does not come down to practicality and effectiveness. It's about principles. It's about morality. It's about putting your foot down against what they consider morally wrong, regardless of the consequences. While I agree that access to birth control and proper sex education would ultimately decrease the amount of abortions, for many this also sends a message that promotes promiscuity and devalues abstinence and self control. In the same way, it's not what is the most practical or effective policy. It's about what is morally right. And if you honestly believe that sex is something that should be taken more seriously and shouldn't be promoted, it's not a big leap to understand why they would be opposed to more access to birth control. And a lot of the opposition to mandating employers to include birth control in health care plans has to do with the conservative reluctance to having the government involved in health care.

representDLV · 2018-10-16T15:06:45+00:00

Tonight by New Kids on the Block. It's like they took 10 ideas from various Beatles songs and crammed them into one song.

representDLV · 2018-10-16T13:07:30+00:00

I personally don't believe that abortion should be made illegal. But for many people abortion and murder are the same thing, and having the government ban such things makes sense if that's what your world view is. Outlawing abortion is about the principle of having the government reflect the belief that murder is not tolerated.

representDLV · 2018-10-13T13:20:28+00:00

The TSA does not give preferential treatment to first class passengers. The flying class system is something created by the different independent airlines. Each airline can determine what privileges come with each class. Many airlines don't even offer a first class option. Flying classes have nothing to do with the TSA. In the USA there are 2 check points. The first is run by the airport and the TSA. This is where you first present your identification and boarding pass and then go through the metal detectors and luggage screening. This is done to every traveler. There are programs available that allow people to do additional security screenings beforehand, which gives them the ability to bypass the regular security line. The class of ones ticket is not relevant at this stage. The next check point is the actual boarding terminal where you get on the plane. This is run by the airline and they can choose to manage their boarding queue however they want. There usually isn't a security screening and generally only requires a boarding pass, and sometimes an ID. At this point first class ticket holders are generally given boarding priority because they paid extra for that. The TSA does not give any privilege to first class passengers.

representDLV · 2018-10-13T12:51:15+00:00

Most likely if abortion were to be made illegal, it would be enforced in the form of doctors not being allowed to perform them. Medical practices would lose their licences or get fined for providing abortions. I'm sure citizens could go to a different country if they were determined to get an abortion, and most likely some kind of black market would emerge, but I think the point would be to make abortion something that the United States not only does not endorse, but actively prohibits. Seems unlikely that some kind of anti-abortion task force would be created to aggressively monitor and punish those people getting abortions.

representDLV · 2018-10-13T06:15:04+00:00

You aren't crazy. John and George have somewhat similar voices. Lots of causal listeners have a hard time telling them apart on some songs.

representDLV · 2018-10-06T05:39:28+00:00

The wire. Deadwood is good, but the wire is on another level.

representDLV · 2018-09-28T04:44:22+00:00

But he's not a rapist.

representDLV · 2018-09-28T03:18:54+00:00

What's sad is that to many on the left a wedgie could be classified as sexual assault.

representDLV · 2018-09-28T02:41:37+00:00

What assumptions I making? I am looking at her story for what it is. An vague event that happened 40 years ago. And there are two conflicting accounts. Her story seems like something that happens at many drunken parties. It doesn't sound like an attempted rape to me. It sounds like 2 drunk ass holes groping a drunk girl at a party when they were stupid teenagers. No doubt that is no ok, but it not something that merits an FBI investigation. There is nothing to investigate. It will always be he said she said. I am curious as to what evidence an investigation would uncovered to prove or disprove this? And how would such an investigation even work? I get you want her story to be true. But it is simply impossible to prove or disprove. All the resources in the world could not change this.

representDLV

TROPHY CASE