comments

i recently participated in my first comments conversation, held entirely in a fellow blogger's comments section. essentially i challenged a fairly conservative blogger to rethink his interpretation of a scientist's statements. i also called him out on his own hyperbole.

here's the thing - i often complain about how polarized this country has become. attribute this to the proliferation of vapid cable news talking heads, the religious right's insidious insertion into politics, ann coulter, whatever - this country is on its way to an intellectual civil war if we can't find some common ground. and yet, when confronted with someone whose political views i think are off base, i feel the need to challenge/change that person's opinions. which, as we all know, is pretty much impossible. so i'm just wondering... why? why does it matter to me? why put forth the effort when i know that person is as firmly entrenched in their way of thinking as i am?

i have no answer for that. but i think the challenge for me is to maintain my views without becoming polemic. i guess that's everyone's challenge, right?

good f#%king luck.

link o' the day:

john squire was the phenomenal lead guitarist for my favorite band ever, the stone roses. he has a site for his artwork, and there are two new instrumental tracks from him that play on it. check it out.