One thing is true. Bush IS the president, he sits in the chair at the White
House, he has the Joint Chiefs of Staff at his beck and call, and he has
installed his cabinet and fired some of his selections. He certainly seems
to be the President.

But we need to let this stuff drop and get back to the important issues of
audio, like, like...well, I guess I just don't see any important issues in
audio right now other than my ability to afford any new upgrades simply
because marketing has convinced me that I can't come out with a decent CD
without Pro Tools HD. Or maybe I should argue that MXL mics have achieved
the level of quality of Neumann mics?

Did anyone do any interesting live recordings over the 4th holiday weekend?

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
George wrote:

In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:

subject header says it ...

Respectfully I disagre what we(in the geocentric USA view) need is a
president that actually gets elected

The last election was so close it went beyond the resolution of the
voting system. The system was not equipped to capture the information,
so the results were, in a sense, random garbage. This is just the
same sort of thing that would happen if you tried to capture a short
25 kHz sine wave with a 44.1 kHz sampler, or if you tried to measure
the width of a human hair with one of those wooden rulers many of us
used in grade school.

The point is, if Gore had been chosen to take office, it would hardly
have been totally legitimate either. Given the way the election went,
*neither* of them could have been described as "actually elected",
at least not 100%.

That is why I personally find this "Bush wasn't elected" stuff to be
really juvenile, just as I would find it really juvenile if Gore had
been elected and the conservatives said the same thing about him,
which they certainly would have. It's actually a little bit worse
than the "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for XYZ" stuff. But both of them
are really about congratulating yourself about how right and good
you and your party are and how you and your party are not to blame
for any of the nation's problems. People who do this kind of
cheerleading for their own group seem, to me at least, to be more
concerned about proving that they're right than they are about
doing anything constructive. It's a natural enough human tendancy,
but that doesn't mean it's anything I want to hear about.

Honestly, if you want someone else in office and you think that
would be more constructive, an election is coming up very shortly,
and you could try to convince people why one candidate would do
better than another. As it is, you seem to be just convincing me
that some liberals are kind of nutty and too inconsiderate to let
things drop when practically everyone in the newsgroup is asking
them to. (Don't worry -- I also believe that the same is true
about some conservatives.)

- Logan