SharedThought

Yesterday, the Washington Post did a review of the latest crop of music downloading software and rewarded Apple’s iTunes the best in show ribbon over Napster and Musicmatch. I downloaded and installed iTunes for Windows last week and have been using it regularly since then. I’ve purchased music and been able to move files back and forth between machines. The interface is elegant and easy to use. It brings together in one place everything you need — from playing, ripping and recording CDs to purchasing and downloading music.

The only complaint I have is that the program wouldn’t recognize my old Windows Media files (not too surprising there, however), and wouldn’t allow access to its CDDB feature to pull down any track information on my old .mp3 files. It clearly prefers you to re-import or purchase your music using the iTunes frontend. There also appears to be a bug in the way the software displays track time for music ripped using a variable rate codec.

Despite the few glitches, I’m so impressed by the program that I’m going to willingly re-import my existing CDs into the iTunes library. I’ll also be looking to pick up an iPod for the upcoming holidays! I encourage you to check it out!

Proving again why President Bush should not be allowed to leave America, the administration is bungling its trip to the APEC summit in Bangkok, Thailand. First he insulted the Japanese by referring to his stop there as a “layover,” then he incensed others in the region by referring to Australian Prime Minister John Howard as the “Sheriff” of the region. Memo to the President: you are not John Wayne, and the world is not a John Ford western.

openDemocracy has an interesting article highlighting the influence of Leo Strauss on the Bush administration neo-conservatives. You can check it out here. Here’s an excerpt:

The effect of Strauss’s teaching is to convince his acolytes that they are the natural ruling elite and the persecuted few. . . . So, they come to the conclusion that they have a moral justification to lie in order to avoid persecution. Strauss goes so far as to say that dissembling and deception — in effect, a culture of lies — is the peculiar justice of the wise.

The Energy Task Force document imbroglio, the justification for the pre-emptive war against Iraq, the justifications for the President’s tax cuts are all examples of the “noble lie” that Strauss championed for the ruling elite. Now it’s time for the “vulgar many” (Strauss’s term for the non-elite) to take note, and take action.

If you weren’t a little worried about President Bush calling his war on terrorism a crusade, then maybe this story will (registration required). Here’s a little blurb from the General tasked with tracking down Osama Bin Laden:

Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told another audience, “I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.”

Gannett News Service is reporting on a rash of identical letters to the editor “written” by soldiers in Iraq. The letters detail how well things are going, and all the great work being done. This seems like one of those great productions worked up by Dustin Hoffman in Wag the Dog. Check out the story here.

If there is any hope to keep the State of California out of the hands of an inexperienced puppet administrator with stars in his eyes and no plan in his pocket, a man without respect for women, please send this article, or the link to it, to all your California friends today. Hopefully they will see the light.
I am copying a couple quotes just to illustrate a point.

“Am I sorry? Of course. If I did the things that they said I did. Am I sorry, do I apologize? Yes. But it is time to get on and not look back,” he said on the CBS news show.

“I will say most of it is not true,” he said during a school tour as children waited in droves to see him. “Other things may be true, and in case it’s true, I apologize.”

Sound familiar? The first is not a quote from Arnold Schwarzenegger, however. That was former Senator Robert Packwood of Oregon, in 1995, commenting at the time of his resignation from the US Senate after a vote for his expulsion on sexual harassment allegations by the Ethics Committee. The link:

http://www.texasonline.net/langley/columns/packwood.htm

The second was Mr. Schwarzenegger this past week, commenting on allegations of similar behavior, to which he admitted committing, that have surfaced in the closing days of the recall election campaign. (See link below)

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/10/03/MN246826.DTL

If Mr. Packwood’s actions were sufficient for him to be expelled from the US Senate, what would qualify a man with the same character and no experience in politics to be our elected governor? I heard it expressed succinctly this morning on the radio, comparing Mr. Schwarzenegger’s exploits to a game of cat and mouse.
The cat and mouse have quite different perspectives on the game.
Have we sunk so low as to prefer a sexual batterer in office? If you doubt the allegations, I ask you this: What is truly in it for women who come out with their accounts? (Rhetorical question)
Different is not always better. Let us not go from bad to worse. Arnold the Governator is a sequel the State of California does not need.

From the Washington Post:

Leaders of the House intelligence committee have criticized the U.S. intelligence community for using largely outdated, “circumstantial” and “fragmentary” information with “too many uncertainties” to conclude that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda.

This is a Republican committee, made up of a majority of Republicans, and chaired, of course, by a Republican.

And yesterday we heard that while the rich are enjoying their tax cuts and getting richer, the number of Americans living below the poverty level increased and the median income level fell.

Median household cash income, the level at which half of Americans earn more money and half earn less, fell 1.1 percent, to $42,409 in 2002, from $42,900 the year before. Annual median household cash income, which excludes non-cash payments such as food stamps or housing subsidies, peaked in 1999 at $43,915, and has dropped since then by 3.4 percent.

Gee, what happened? Oh, I remember. The Supreme Court chose George Bush as president in 2000.

Throughout the evolution of the buildup and prosecution of the latest war in Iraq, what has escaped comprehension is how President Bush has been able to ignore all the evidence contrary to his rationale for this ‘preemptive’ attack. Last night all became clear. Ted Koppel was interviewing former Marine Corps Four Star General Anthony Zinni on Nightline. During this program, mention was made of the fact that our president does not read the newspaper! An excerpt from the end of a September 22, 2003 interview with Britt Hume of Fox News, included below, that reads to that effect.
The question, how can Mr. Bush continue to trumpet the same policy line over and over; weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein, terrorists, September 11; seemingly without regard for the evidence and the changing political and military climate in and outside of the US, has finally been answered. I quote, “I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are(sic) probably read the news themselves…the most objective sources I have are people on my staff…” Actually, by definition, the most objective sources are precisely NOT those people.
Apparently, Mr. Bush’s Yale education did not include Roman history. Had it, he would be all too well aware of the dangers of listening solely to your inner circle. (Insert name of any emperor, say Constantine, and do just a little research on how a few voices can manipulate a leader like a puppet)
That our president hasn’t the time nor the inclination to read for himself from the media really comes as no surprise. From his evident lack of expertise with the spoken language, it would indicate that he has not ever been much of a reader. Frankly, it is frightening that the most powerful leader in the world has his news spoon-fed to him by policy wonks, neo-conservative oil money hawks, and career politicians. This same man launches tirades against his staff for not unquestioningly falling into lock step with the party line. What is the upside, for a staffer, of trying to change his mind by telling him the truth?
Our president is out of touch with reality, insulated by a staff that is steering the United States into bankruptcy and perpetual war, their true agenda clouded by hyperbole and rhetoric. This administration must be removed from power. Mr. Bush’s policies threaten our very way of life to a much greater extent than any terrorist attack.
Please read the entire interview. It drags on and on, but soon you will start to wonder to yourself, “This has to be some kind of joke, right? This can’t be the actual text of an interview with a president, can it?” You may be assured, however, that the link below will take you to the complete, unadulterated text at foxnews.com. The interview was done by Fox, reported on Fox, and posted on Fox.
Judge for yourself.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98006,00.html

HUME: How do you get your news?
BUSH: I get briefed by Andy Card and Condi in the morning. They come in and tell me. In all due respect, you’ve got a beautiful face and everything.
I glance at the headlines just to kind of a flavor for what’s moving. I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are probably read the news themselves. But like Condoleezza, in her case, the national security adviser is getting her news directly from the participants on the world stage.
HUME: Has that been your practice since day one, or is that a practice that you’ve…
BUSH: Practice since day one.
HUME: Really?
BUSH: Yes. You know, look, I have great respect for the media. I mean, our society is a good, solid democracy because of a good, solid media. But I also understand that a lot of times there’s opinions mixed in with news. And I…
HUME: I won’t disagree with that, sir.
BUSH: I appreciate people’s opinions, but I’m more interested in news. And the best way to get the news is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what’s happening in the world.
HUME: Mr. President, thank you very much.
BUSH: Thank you, sir.

If you have read the whole interview, I rest my case.

Yesterday’s post about President Bush’s speech to the United Nations, marks the debut of a new author on this site. Chris knows his stuff, and has been publishing material by a mailing list for over a year now. Chris doesn’t know it, but his outspoken stance against the administration’s war (and build up to war) in Iraq is what inspired me to start this website last Spring. Chris will publish whenever his schedule allows, and on whatever topic he chooses. I think everyone (except for maybe Therapy Sessions) will enjoy reading his stuff. Please give him a warm welcome.

This morning was the opening of the 58th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Leaders of several countries spoke for a few moments each. Among them were His Excellency Mr. Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva, President of the Federative Republic of Brazil, His Excellency Mr. George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, and His Excellency Mr. Jacques Chirac, President of the French Republic. (The honorifics are directly from the UN website) I can only imagine how W must have felt being addressed as His Excellency. A dream come true, no doubt. What was most noteworthy about the remarks in general was the tenor of each speaker’s delivery.
Mr. De Silva spoke fervently and eloquently of international cooperation and multi-lateralism, worldwide improvement of the human condition, and peace as social justice. He outlined projects undertaken in Brazil to better the lives of their poor and disenfranchised.
Mr. Chirac additionally stressed the global vision of the United Nations and its unique position as a forum for discussion and resolution of international political, economic, and humanitarian problems which plague today’s societies. His speech was also one of conviction and deliberation of thought.
Mr. Bush’s remarks were a true disappointment to this humble listener. He opened with an account, once again the attacks of September 11, 2001. He followed up by citing Saddam Hussein as backer of terrorists accompanied by the specious claim of his possession weapons of mass destruction. (Who gave him those weapons again?)His remarks at times read like a junior high school student’s essay, which, required to be of a certain length, contained lists of locations and facts designed to fill out his allotted time. His general message was not one of vision, but of retribution, and was barely underlain with a spirit of venality. He did not extend an open hand to the world, but a closed fist. He attacked the proliferation of weapons of mass murder, while the US is in the process of designing newer and more horrible such devices. He outlined a philosophy oriented toward destruction, not construction. His opportunity today to lift the United States in the eyes of the world community was a wasted one. A leader without a truly positive vision for the future cannot help but lead us to the opposite.

I close with two quotes. The first, from Mohandas Gandhi, “I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.” The second, from John Boyes, “Violence in the voice is often only the death rattle of reason in the throat.”