marchingkazoo

This is the most pertinent comment in the thread.

I don't mean to speak for the parent poster. But FTA: "Spanning the years 1937–2001, the collection should especially appeal to those with an avant-garde or musicological bent." The tracks cited by the parent are not avant-garde nor musicological, but popular. I think the point is valid and all but admitted.

I agree that it's an odd difference. Thanks for setting me straight on the cultural difference. I've also had worse starts to my Friday. Thanks again.

Not good at math...

Clearly. From Robert's Rules of order [1]: The word “majority” in this context means, simply, more than half.

[1] https://robertsrules.com/frequently-asked-questions/

The majority of Americans voted for this.

Not true. Trump got 49.8% of the popular vote [1].

[1]https://www.cnn.com/election/2024/results/president?election...

Both the Milky Way and sardine sandwiches are visible objects.

Sure. Aside from that? I'm trying very very hard to not be pedantic, but you are making that difficult. Thing is, comparing incompatible items is disingenuous.

Well, yes, it's true that the Milky Way could be compared to a sardine sandwich. As has been noted, that comparison would be disingenuous.

Comparing government expenditures on infrastructure (roads, bridges, sewers, power grids, schools, libraries), and earned benefits (social security, medicare) with a "charitable foundation's donations" can only be seen as disingenuous. Please don't insult us with this sort of sophistry.

In The States, it's an actual constitutional right. I won't try to justify how positive the role is or could be. However, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

A lobbyist's literal job is "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This was a civil case, not a criminal case. Steyn and Simberg were not prosecuted for their speech. They were asked to be held accountable for a tort. Different standard. That said, Steyn and Simberg would almost surely not be in the position that they find themselves now if they had simply refrained from using three words: Jerry, Sandusky, molested.

Article is clearly labeled as "Commentary."