Matthew Bologne's decided to respond to my comments which you may read here:
In choosing to comment on some of his thoughts Matthew stated:
As for the lyrical reference to Houston, well, I would agree with you wholeheartedly if it weren't for the simple fact that the lyrical reference actually works here. It revisits a character and a time, updating a memorable phrase with its aftermath. That's very different from simply adding "part two!" to the lyrics
I have no problem with the idea of a song being used showing the aftermath of a previous song or being a follow-up if we are talking about an album where we have a linear progression from start to finish, i.e. your typical rock opera for example.
But now we are jumping from album to album bringing Fred and Wilma back from Accelerate into this new album with the previous album's context in mind. What will the next album speak about? The BP Oil Spill?
Of course I am writing this with not a full context of 'Claps Into Now" which of course the pinheads will shun me for even expressing my opinion.
And lets not forget, the R.E.M. conspiracy theorists out there will claim that all the albums are interconnected, so who knows.