From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2006 #338 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Website: http://jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Sunday, September 17 2006 Volume 2006 : Number 338 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. [Andeemac2006 ] murderous intent njc [Dflahm@aol.com] English Jonicover [Benedicte Nielsen ] RE: Joni's Brainy Quotes [LCStanley7@aol.com] Re: English Jonicover [notaro@stpt.usf.edu] Re: gas, now the economy tanks. . njc [LCStanley7@aol.com] Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. [Victor Johnson ] 6 Years - 5.45 Minutes njc [Nuriel Tobias ] The Te-na-ment Castle ["P. Henry" ] Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. ["mack watson-bush" ] book review from NY Times for list politicos njc ["Mark Scott" ] Re: Joni's Brainy Quotes ["Randy Remote" ] Re: book review from NY Times for list politicos njc ["Gerald A. Notaro" ] Re: 6 Years - 5.45 Minutes njc ["Mark Scott" ] Re: from NY Times Ticket Watch: Dylan on Broadway njc ["Gerald A. Notaro"] Re: from NY Times Ticket Watch: Dylan on Broadway njc ["Mark Scott" Subject: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. I see that G W Bush is resorting to Blackmail now, the latest thing he has said is incredible " http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/16/us/16bush.html?_r=2&hp&ex=1158379200&en=7d8e65f94df9f997&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin&oref=slogin Speaking at a late-morning news conference in the Rose Garden, Mr. Bush said "he would have no choice but to end a C.I.A. program for the interrogation of high-level terrorism suspects if Congress passed an alternate set of rules supported by a group of Senate Republicans." so if another 9/ 11 happens and the CIA is found to be at fault!! he will blame those who didnt want to vote his way!!!! Now this guy has crossed the line here Blackmail??? This guy is so stupid and ignorant that its beyond belief that he is President. So we have had 80 years of the Geneva convention and along comes G W Bush and all of a sudden it needs revising And you know the thing that makes me laugh is when closet or real Republicans say to me that : ---"you use excessive punctuation, poor grammar and poor spelling". when G W Bush is looked apon as the Political clown of the world, he can hardly speak English, Which is more important in this world today that my Punctuation, Grammer, and Poor spelling is correct or------- That our President commands the English language in a intellectual way that people look up to?????????????????? nowwww let meeee think Mmmmmm. LOL, this is a tough one. Only Republicans will be annoyed at this post.Sorry to upset you all. The thing that upsets me is that most closet Republicans have jobs at least paying $70,000 a year or more and are really saying " we have our Wealth and Health Insurance to hell with everyone else". There is only one guy that has split the nation in half. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:43:47 +0100 From: Chris Marshall Subject: Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. On 17 Sep 2006, at 10:15, Andeemac2006 wrote: > Only Republicans will be annoyed at this post.Sorry to upset you all. > The thing that upsets me is that most closet Republicans have jobs at > least paying $70,000 a year or more and are really saying " we have > our Wealth and Health Insurance to hell with everyone else". Or people outside the US. Jeez, listen to yourself will you? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 14:06:32 +0200 From: "ron" Subject: Re: new stryngs album njc hi >>>>chris wrote >>>>> If I can dig them out, I may take the liberty of posting up the lyrics >>>>> to one of Strings' finest songs to date: I honestly think it's right >>>>> up there with Joni. sounds like a good idea - well, actually, i just would like to know what you consider as one of her finest songs. i'm still a little overwhelmed trying to digest it all - i get about half way through reading a song, then have to go take a walk to settle down again........ ron ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:54:16 EDT From: Dflahm@aol.com Subject: murderous intent njc One vigorous argument against your outlook, Lori, will come from those who are not sure what constitutes "guilt." Various legal systems seem to have been struggling with this for decades, if not centuries. DAVID LAHM ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 2006 13:47:10 +0100 From: Benedicte Nielsen Subject: English Jonicover I guess few Jonirelated things escape you people, so you would know about the English singer Ian Shaw who makes cover versions of her songs? I saw him in Soho this summer, the show was announced as "Ian Shaw sings Joni Mithcell", I think because he made a record with that title, but he actually sang (and talked about) whatever came to his mind. Random but fun, and on top of it it was his birthday and mine too... Benie ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:23:27 EDT From: LCStanley7@aol.com Subject: RE: Joni's Brainy Quotes Michael gave us the following link: _Joni Mitchell Quotes_ (http:// www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/joni_mitchell.html) Hi Michael, Thanks! This particular quote woke me up this morning: "We have a war dictator who was not elected, he snuck in. so he punishes people that threaten him in any way, or even say something he doesn't like. It has no resemblance to democracy. " _Joni Mitchell_ (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jonimitche266610.html) Wow, vivid. Wonder what colors she'd paint this with paints? Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:29:44 -0400 (EDT) From: notaro@stpt.usf.edu Subject: Re: English Jonicover > I guess few Jonirelated things escape you people, so you would know about > the English singer Ian Shaw who makes cover versions of her songs? Ian is known to us thanks to the ever vigilant King of Joni Covers Bob Muller. But we always appreciate posts about those who perform Joni's music, not only as a reminder, but in the rare case Mr. Muller had not heard of it. Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:35:58 EDT From: LCStanley7@aol.com Subject: Re: gas, now the economy tanks. . njc A think tank wrote: I think the economy is going to tank. . I am losing sleep over the national debt. . atrocious! And: How are your children and grandchildren going to buy their own homes? . . And: (well, I know I am the other extreme . . I tend to delay my gratification over and again. . . and I know I need to have some fun. . and I want to spend my money to go to the grand canyon one of these years.) Hi Brainchild, Here is a lullaby to help you get to sleep: You who are on the road Must have a code that you can live by And so become yourself Because the past is just a good-bye Teach your children well Their father's hell did slowly go by And feed them on your dreams The one they pick's the one you'll know by Don't you ever ask them why If they told you, you would cry So just look at them and sigh And know they love you As for houses, they keep building them and somebody's gonna inherit them. God forbid Uncle Sam! Fun? The Jonifest man. Can hardly wait! Love, Stormy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:06:35 -0400 From: Victor Johnson Subject: Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. > Which is more > important in this world today that my Punctuation, Grammer, and Poor > spelling is correct or------- That our President commands the English > language in a intellectual way that people look up > to?????????????????? Actually both are pretty deplorable...nothing I would brag about anyway. Victor ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:52:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Nuriel Tobias Subject: Re: gas, now the economy tanks. . njc Laura wrote: "Here is a lullaby to help you get to sleep: You who are on the road Must have a code that you can live by And so become yourself Because the past is just a good-bye Teach your children well Their father's hell did slowly go by And feed them on your dreams The one they pick's the one you'll know by Don't you ever ask them why If they told you, you would cry So just look at them and sigh And know they love you" Thanks for the this lovely lullaby, now let's rock! Thay fuck you up, your mum and dad They may not mean to but they do They fill you with the faults they had And add some extra, just for you But they were fucked up in their turn By fools in old style hats and coats Who half the time were soppy-stern And half at one anothers throats Man hands on misery to man It deepens like a coastal shelf Get out as early as you can And don't have any kids yourself Nuri (Don't worry) - --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:11:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Nuriel Tobias Subject: 6 Years - 5.45 Minutes njc If you only click on 1 link this year - make sure it's this URL. Noah took a photo of himself everyday in 6 years and turned it into the most mesmerizing video. From a teenager to a young man - 6 years in Noah's life in 5.45 Minutes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B26asyGKDo Nuri - --------------------------------- Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 01:26:05 +1000 (ChST) From: "P. Henry" Subject: The Te-na-ment Castle Just in case this hasn't been posted before, as a matter of Joni history, here is an actual picture of the apartment building Chuck and Joni lived in on the 5th floor, just off the Wayne State campus in Detroit back in '65-'67. The 'tenament castle' referred to in IHAK: http://www.campusvillage.com/Detroit/home.htm This is verified by the name of the building and the street corner it occupies which can be found in this article: http://www.jonimitchell.com/library/view.cfm?id=647 This is for sure the very same building. Just thought some might find this interesting. Cheers, Pat ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:05:36 -0500 From: "mack watson-bush" Subject: Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. Andee wrote and Victor wrote:. >> Which is more >> important in this world today that my Punctuation, Grammer, and Poor >> spelling is correct or------- That our President commands the English >> language in a intellectual way that people look up >> to?????????????????? > > > Actually both are pretty deplorable...nothing I would brag about anyway. Bad punctuation, spelling, and grammar is deplorable. hmmm! mack ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:51:59 -0700 From: "Mark Scott" Subject: from NY Times Ticket Watch: Dylan on Broadway njc I don't think anybody else has mentioned this. Dylan on Broadway. The times they are a-changin', indeed. What's next for Bob? Vegas? A sit-com titled 'Desolation Row'? Mark E. This fall, two legendary artists, Twyla Tharp and Bob Dylan, unite to create an entirely original Broadway musical: THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' And now, as a loyal Ticketwatch.com customer, you're being given the opportunity to see this exciting new Broadway event at a terrific savings: See THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' for just: $62.50* (for Mon. - Thur. at 8, Wed. at 2; reg. $111.25) $67.50* (for Fri. at 8, Sat. at 2, Sun. at 3; reg. $111.25) That's a savings of up to 40%. Get your tickets right away for best availability! Also, with this offer, you can get mid and rear mezzanine seats for just $56.25*. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE: 9/25/06 - 10/29/06: Mon. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2 Beginning 10/31/06: Tues. at 7, Wed. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2, Sun. at 3 Conceived, directed and choreographed by Tony Award. winner Twyla Tharp (MOVIN' OUT) and set to the iconic songs of Bob Dylan, THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' tells the timeless story of two generations at odds... and the young man who breaks free from his father's expectations to find his place in the world. THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' will take you on a journey unlike anything you'll experience on Broadway this season. Performances begin September 25th. Opening night is October 26. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:12:07 -0500 From: "mack watson-bush" Subject: Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. Andee wrote and Chris responded: > On 17 Sep 2006, at 10:15, Andeemac2006 wrote: >> Only Republicans will be annoyed at this post.Sorry to upset you all. >> The thing that upsets me is that most closet Republicans have jobs at >> least paying $70,000 a year or more and are really saying " we have >> our Wealth and Health Insurance to hell with everyone else". > > Or people outside the US. Jeez, listen to yourself will you? Don't know exactly what the response was referring to. Don't know the average income of Republicans but would venture to say that 'all' don't make that much. As for the wealthy ones the post is right on. They don't care as long as they have what they have. Course, same could be said for many wealthy Democrats. mack ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:04:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gerald A. Notaro" Subject: Re: from NY Times Ticket Watch: Dylan on Broadway njc I think you have to give Twyla Tharp a little more credibilty than Vegas. As long as someone is going to do it, I prefer her. She did Movin' Out on Broadway and tour and it was very good. Way above the average juke box musical. Jerry Mark Scott wrote: > I don't think anybody else has mentioned this. Dylan on Broadway. The > times they are a-changin', indeed. What's next for Bob? Vegas? A > sit-com > titled 'Desolation Row'? > > Mark E. > > > This fall, two legendary artists, Twyla Tharp and Bob Dylan, unite to > create > an entirely original Broadway musical: > THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' > And now, as a loyal Ticketwatch.com customer, you're being given the > opportunity to see this exciting new Broadway event at a terrific savings: > > See THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' for just: > > $62.50* (for Mon. - Thur. at 8, Wed. at 2; reg. $111.25) > > $67.50* (for Fri. at 8, Sat. at 2, Sun. at 3; reg. $111.25) > That's a savings of up to 40%. Get your tickets right away for best > availability! > Also, with this offer, you can get mid and rear mezzanine seats for just > $56.25*. > PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE: > > 9/25/06 - 10/29/06: Mon. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2 > > Beginning 10/31/06: Tues. at 7, Wed. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2, Sun. > at > 3 > Conceived, directed and choreographed by Tony Award. winner Twyla Tharp > (MOVIN' OUT) and set to the iconic songs of Bob Dylan, THE TIMES THEY ARE > A-CHANGIN' tells the timeless story of two generations at odds... and the > young man who breaks free from his father's expectations to find his place > in the world. > THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' will take you on a journey unlike anything > you'll experience on Broadway this season. > Performances begin September 25th. Opening night is October 26. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 19:17:27 +0200 From: "ron" Subject: Re: NJC Blackmail, Poor grammar and poor spelling. hi > Andee wrote (??): >> Which is more important in this world today that my Punctuation, >> Grammer, and Poor spelling is correct or------- That our President >> commands the English language in a intellectual way that people look up >> to?????????????????? >>>victor responded >> Actually both are pretty deplorable...nothing I would brag about anyway. >>>>mack responded: >>>> Bad punctuation, spelling, and grammar is deplorable. hmmm! i agree with victor. these bad grammartricians should be put up against a wall while lori eats shoots & leaves ron ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:19:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: The Te-na-ment Castle now njc - --- "P. Henry" wrote: > Just in case this hasn't been posted before, as a > matter of Joni history, > here is an actual picture of the apartment building > Chuck and Joni lived > in on the 5th floor, just off the Wayne State campus > in Detroit back in > '65-'67. The 'tenament castle' referred to in IHAK: > http://www.campusvillage.com/Detroit/home.htm > > This is verified by the name of the building and the > street corner it > occupies which can be found in this article: > http://www.jonimitchell.com/library/view.cfm?id=647 > > This is for sure the very same building. Just > thought some might find > this interesting. > > Cheers, > > Pat > I was looking at the floorplans and I'm impressed that there are four bedroom apartments in the building. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:25:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Paging Kellerfrau! Sorry not to mark this njc but I'm trying to reach Moni Keller-person and am not sure if she's Joni-only or other. Moni, you sent some info about a program you use in preference to MS-office and I think you said it was a free download. I seem to have lost your e-mail from several mos ago. I've upgraded to XP and am looking now for my office disks. I recently moved and I know they're in a shoebox, but havent' found it yet, although I have found many shoeboxes full of many other things and know I have seen this stuff since moving at some point. If I don't find them, I'd like to check this out and would like to try it anyway. Thanks. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:44:13 -0700 From: "Mark Scott" Subject: book review from NY Times for list politicos njc Theater of War By IAN BURUMA Published: September 17, 2006 As a former theater critic, Frank Rich has the perfect credentials for writing an account of the Bush administration, which has done so much to blur the lines between politics and show business. Not that this is a unique phenomenon; think of Silvio Berlusconi, the media mogul and master of political fictions, or Ronald Reagan, who often appeared to be genuinely confused about the difference between real life and the movies. Show business has always been an essential part of ruling people, and so is the use of fiction, especially when going to war. What would Hitler have been without his vicious fantasies fed to a hungry public through grand spectacles, radio and film? Closer to home, in 1964, to justify American intervention in Vietnam, Lyndon B. Johnson used news of an attack in the Gulf of Tonkin that never took place. What is fascinating about the era of George W. Bush, however, is that the spinmeisters, fake news reporters, photo-op creators, disinformation experts, intelligence manipulators, fictional heroes and public relations men posing as commentators operate in a world where virtual reality has already threatened to eclipse empirical investigation. Ray Bartkus THE GREATEST STORY EVER SOLD The Decline and Fall of Truth From 9/11 to Katrina. By Frank Rich. 341 pp. The Penguin Press. $25.95. Remember that White House aide, quoted by Rich in his introduction, who said that a "judicious study of discernible reality" is "not the way the world really works anymore"? For him, the "reality-based community" of newspapers and broadcasters is old hat, out of touch, even contemptible in "an empire" where "we create our own reality." This kind of official arrogance is not new, of course, although it is perhaps more common in dictatorships than in democracies. What is disturbing is the way it matches so much else going on in the world: postmodern debunking of objective truth, bloggers and talk radio blowhards driving the media, news organizations being taken over by entertainment corporations and the profusion of ever more sophisticated means to doctor reality. Rich's subject is the creation of false reality. "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" is not about policies, or geopolitical analysis. The pros and cons of removing Saddam Hussein by force, the consequences of American military intervention in the Middle East and the threat of Islamist extremism are given scant attention. The author, an Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times, has his liberal views, which are not strikingly original. I happen to agree with him that Karl Rove and George Bush manipulated public fear and wartime patriotism to win elections, and that Dick Cheney and his neocon cheerleaders favored a war in Iraq long before 9/11 "to jump-start a realignment of the Middle East." Whether Rich is right to say that this has "little or nothing to do with the stateless terrorism of Al Qaeda" is debatable. The neocons may well have believed that an American remake of the Middle East was the best way to tackle terrorism. They were almost certainly mistaken. But the point of Rich's fine polemic is that the Bush administration has consistently lied about the reasons for going to war, about the way it was conducted and about the terrible consequences. Whatever the merits of removing a dictator, waging war under false pretenses is highly damaging to a democracy, especially when one of the ostensible aims is to spread democracy to others. If Rich is correct, which I think he is, the Bush administration has given hypocrisy a bad name. This is how the war was sold: We were told by Dick Cheney in late 2001 that an official Iraqi connection with the 9/11 terrorist Mohamed Atta was "pretty well confirmed." In the summer of 2002, Cheney said that Saddam Hussein "continues to pursue a nuclear weapon" and that there was "no doubt" he had "weapons of mass destruction." The vice president mentioned aluminum tubes (they had been reported on by Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller in The New York Times), which Hussein would use "to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon." This uranium, we were told, had been procured by the Iraqis from Niger. President Bush, in October 2002, said, "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." We now know that none of these claims, which together constituted the official reason for unleashing a war, were even remotely true. The later excuses about honest beliefs based on faulty intelligence would have been more convincing if a memo had not surfaced from the British government, quoting the head of British intelligence as saying that the Bush administration had made sure that "the intelligence and facts" about the W.M.D.'s "were being fixed around the policy" of going to war. He said this in July 2002, eight months before the invasion of Iraq. Even without the memo, it has long been clear that some of the United States government's own analysts had cast severe doubts on the reasons for going to war. Yet - and this is where Rich is particularly acute - most serious papers published the White House claims on their front pages, and buried any doubts in small news items at the back. Political weeklies with a liberal pedigree, like The New Republic, fell in line with the neoconservative Weekly Standard, stating that the president would be guilty of "surrender in the war on international terrorism" should he fail to make an effort to topple Saddam Hussein. Bob Woodward, the scourge of the Nixon administration, wrote "Bush at War," a book that seemed to take everything his White House sources told him at face value. As soon as the fighting began, showbiz kicked in. Already in Afghanistan, the Hollywood producer Jerry Bruckheimer had been given access to the troops to make a television series about American bravery, even as reporters from papers like The Washington Post were kept away from the scene. Then in Iraq, heroic stories, like the brave battle of Pfc. Jessica Lynch, were invented and packaged for the press, and those who pointed out the fakery were denounced as leftist malcontents. President Bush dressed up as Tom Cruise in "Top Gun" and landed on an aircraft carrier for a photo op declaring a great victory. And the press, by and large, took the bait. How could this have happened? How could some of the best, most fact-checked, most reputable news organizations in the English-speaking world have been so gullible? How can one explain the temporary paralysis of skepticism? This is perhaps the most painful question raised by Rich's book, since his own newspaper was clearly implicated. An air of intimidation, which hung over the United States like a noxious vapor after 9/11, is part of the explanation. Susan Sontag became a national hate figure just for saying that United States foreign policy might have had something to do with violent anti-Americanism. When John Ashcroft declared to the Senate that people who challenged his highly questionable policies "give ammunition to America's enemies," he was simply echoing the ranters and ravers of talk radio. But they are poisonous buffoons. He was the attorney general. No wonder that the mainstream press, after being continuously accused of "liberal bias," preferred to keep its head down. Newspaper editors should not have to feel the need to prove their patriotism, or their absence of bias. Their job is to publish what they believe to be true, based on evidence and good judgment. As Rich points out, such journals as The Nation and The New York Review of Books were quicker to see through government shenanigans than the mainstream press. And reporters from Knight Ridder got the story about intelligence fixing right, before The New York Times caught on. "At Knight Ridder," Rich says, "there was a clearer institutional grasp of the big picture." Intimidation is only part of the story, however. The changing nature of gathering and publishing information has made mainstream journalists unusually defensive. That more people than ever are now able to express their views, on radio shows and Web sites, is perhaps a form of democracy, but it has undermined the authority of editors, whose expertise was meant to act as a filter against nonsense or prejudice. And the deliberate confusion, on television, of news and entertainment has done further damage. The Republicans, being more populist than the Democrats, have exploited this new climate with far greater finesse. Accusing the media of bias is an act of remarkable chutzpah for an administration that pitches its messages straight at radio talk show hosts and public relations men. Rich gives many examples. One of the more arresting ones is of Dick Cheney appearing on a TV show with Armstrong Williams, a fake journalist on the government payroll, to complain about bias in the press. Something has gone askew when one of the most trusted critics of the Bush administration is Jon Stewart, host of a superb comedy program. It was on his "Daily Show" that Rob Corddry, an actor playing a reporter, lamented that he couldn't keep up with the government, which had created "a whole new category of fake news - infoganda." Rich is right: "The more real journalism fumbled its job, the easier it was for such government infoganda to fill the vacuum." THERE may be one other reason for the fumbling: the conventional methods of American journalism, marked by an obsession with access and quotes. A good reporter for an American paper must get sources who sound authoritative and quotes that show both sides of a story. His or her own expertise is almost irrelevant. If the opinions of columnists count for too much in the American press, the intelligence of reporters is institutionally underused. The problem is that there are not always two sides to a story. Someone reporting on the persecution of Jews in Germany in 1938 would not have added "balance" by quoting Joseph Goebbels. And besides, as Judith Miller found out, what is the good of quotes if they are based on false information? Bob Woodward, one of Rich's chief bjtes noires, has more access in Washington than any journalist, but the weakness of his work is that he never seems to be better than his sources. As Rich rightly observes, "reporters who did not have Woodward's or Miller's top-level access within the administration not only got the Iraq story right but got it into newspapers early by seeking out what John Walcott, the Knight Ridder Washington bureau chief, called 'the blue collar' sources further down the hierarchy." This used to be Woodward's modus operandi, too, in his better days. Fearing the loss of access at the top and overrating the importance of quotes from powerful people, as well as an unjustified terror of being accused of liberal bias, have crippled the press at a time when it is needed more than ever. Frank Rich is an excellent product of that press, and if it ever recovers its high reputation, it will be partly thanks to one man who couldn't take it anymore. Ian Buruma is the Henry Luce professor at Bard College. His latest book is "Murder in Amsterdam: The Death of Theo van Gogh and the Limits of Tolerance." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 19:51:07 +0200 From: Moni Kellermann Subject: Re: Paging Kellerfrau! NJC Hi, Catherine, The program in question is called OpenOffice.org (it really is called that way, with .org at the end not only for the website). To get it, take a look here: http://www.openoffice.org/index.html I have used it for 3 years now and have my customers switch from expensive MS Office solutions to OOo. The components are very similar, so is the interface. You can open Word (*.doc) in OOo Writer, Excel (*.xls) in OOo Calc, PowerPoint (*.ppt) in OOo Impress, you also have a drawing program called Draw (similar to Corel Draw). You can save documents in MS formats. You can also export documents to PDF. And it's all free. moni ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:54:26 -0700 From: "Randy Remote" Subject: Re: Joni's Brainy Quotes Thanks for posting this, Laura. Considering all the Bush talk, it's nice to know where the QUOMB stands. - ----- Original Message ----- From: > "We have a war dictator who was not elected, he snuck in. so he punishes > people that threaten him in any way, or even say something he doesn't > like. It > has no resemblance to democracy. " > _Joni Mitchell_ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 14:58:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gerald A. Notaro" Subject: Re: book review from NY Times for list politicos njc Hello, twin of a different mother. I grew up reading his theater reviews and his autobiography Ghost Light is one of the best theatre memoirs, ever. When he decided to quit writing about the theatre I was disappointed, but his essay writing is first class, some of the best around. He is a frequent target of the right wing because of his frequent and heterosexual support of gay and lesbian rights. Jerry Mark Scott wrote: > Theater of War > > By IAN BURUMA > Published: September 17, 2006 > As a former theater critic, Frank Rich has the perfect credentials for > writing an account of the Bush administration, which has done so much to > blur the lines between politics and show business. Not that this is a > unique > phenomenon; think of Silvio Berlusconi, the media mogul and master of > political fictions, or Ronald Reagan, who often appeared to be genuinely > confused about the difference between real life and the movies. Show > business has always been an essential part of ruling people, and so is the > use of fiction, especially when going to war. What would Hitler have been > without his vicious fantasies fed to a hungry public through grand > spectacles, radio and film? Closer to home, in 1964, to justify American > intervention in Vietnam, Lyndon B. Johnson used news of an attack in the > Gulf of Tonkin that never took place. What is fascinating about the era of > George W. Bush, however, is that the spinmeisters, fake news reporters, > photo-op creators, disinformation experts, intelligence manipulators, > fictional heroes and public relations men posing as commentators operate > in > a world where virtual reality has already threatened to eclipse empirical > investigation. > > > Ray Bartkus > > THE GREATEST STORY EVER SOLD > The Decline and Fall of Truth From 9/11 to Katrina. > By Frank Rich. > > 341 pp. The Penguin Press. $25.95. > > Remember that White House aide, quoted by Rich in his introduction, who > said > that a "judicious study of discernible reality" is "not the way the world > really works anymore"? For him, the "reality-based community" of > newspapers > and broadcasters is old hat, out of touch, even contemptible in "an > empire" > where "we create our own reality." This kind of official arrogance is not > new, of course, although it is perhaps more common in dictatorships than > in > democracies. What is disturbing is the way it matches so much else going > on > in the world: postmodern debunking of objective truth, bloggers and talk > radio blowhards driving the media, news organizations being taken over by > entertainment corporations and the profusion of ever more sophisticated > means to doctor reality. > Rich's subject is the creation of false reality. "The Greatest Story Ever > Sold" is not about policies, or geopolitical analysis. The pros and cons > of > removing Saddam Hussein by force, the consequences of American military > intervention in the Middle East and the threat of Islamist extremism are > given scant attention. The author, an Op-Ed columnist for The New York > Times, has his liberal views, which are not strikingly original. I happen > to > agree with him that Karl Rove and George Bush manipulated public fear and > wartime patriotism to win elections, and that Dick Cheney and his neocon > cheerleaders favored a war in Iraq long before 9/11 "to jump-start a > realignment of the Middle East." Whether Rich is right to say that this > has > "little or nothing to do with the stateless terrorism of Al Qaeda" is > debatable. The neocons may well have believed that an American remake of > the > Middle East was the best way to tackle terrorism. > > They were almost certainly mistaken. But the point of Rich's fine polemic > is > that the Bush administration has consistently lied about the reasons for > going to war, about the way it was conducted and about the terrible > consequences. Whatever the merits of removing a dictator, waging war under > false pretenses is highly damaging to a democracy, especially when one of > the ostensible aims is to spread democracy to others. If Rich is correct, > which I think he is, the Bush administration has given hypocrisy a bad > name. > > This is how the war was sold: We were told by Dick Cheney in late 2001 > that > an official Iraqi connection with the 9/11 terrorist Mohamed Atta was > "pretty well confirmed." In the summer of 2002, Cheney said that Saddam > Hussein "continues to pursue a nuclear weapon" and that there was "no > doubt" > he had "weapons of mass destruction." The vice president mentioned > aluminum > tubes (they had been reported on by Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller in > The New York Times), which Hussein would use "to enrich uranium to build a > nuclear weapon." This uranium, we were told, had been procured by the > Iraqis > from Niger. President Bush, in October 2002, said, "Facing clear evidence > of > peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could > come in the form of a mushroom cloud." > > We now know that none of these claims, which together constituted the > official reason for unleashing a war, were even remotely true. The later > excuses about honest beliefs based on faulty intelligence would have been > more convincing if a memo had not surfaced from the British government, > quoting the head of British intelligence as saying that the Bush > administration had made sure that "the intelligence and facts" about the > W.M.D.'s "were being fixed around the policy" of going to war. He said > this > in July 2002, eight months before the invasion of Iraq. Even without the > memo, it has long been clear that some of the United States government's > own > analysts had cast severe doubts on the reasons for going to war. > > Yet - and this is where Rich is particularly acute - most serious papers > published the White House claims on their front pages, and buried any > doubts > in small news items at the back. Political weeklies with a liberal > pedigree, > like The New Republic, fell in line with the neoconservative Weekly > Standard, stating that the president would be guilty of "surrender in the > war on international terrorism" should he fail to make an effort to topple > Saddam Hussein. Bob Woodward, the scourge of the Nixon administration, > wrote > "Bush at War," a book that seemed to take everything his White House > sources > told him at face value. > > As soon as the fighting began, showbiz kicked in. Already in Afghanistan, > the Hollywood producer Jerry Bruckheimer had been given access to the > troops > to make a television series about American bravery, even as reporters from > papers like The Washington Post were kept away from the scene. Then in > Iraq, > heroic stories, like the brave battle of Pfc. Jessica Lynch, were invented > and packaged for the press, and those who pointed out the fakery were > denounced as leftist malcontents. President Bush dressed up as Tom Cruise > in > "Top Gun" and landed on an aircraft carrier for a photo op declaring a > great > victory. And the press, by and large, took the bait. > > How could this have happened? How could some of the best, most > fact-checked, > most reputable news organizations in the English-speaking world have been > so > gullible? How can one explain the temporary paralysis of skepticism? This > is > perhaps the most painful question raised by Rich's book, since his own > newspaper was clearly implicated. An air of intimidation, which hung over > the United States like a noxious vapor after 9/11, is part of the > explanation. Susan Sontag became a national hate figure just for saying > that > United States foreign policy might have had something to do with violent > anti-Americanism. When John Ashcroft declared to the Senate that people > who > challenged his highly questionable policies "give ammunition to America's > enemies," he was simply echoing the ranters and ravers of talk radio. But > they are poisonous buffoons. He was the attorney general. No wonder that > the > mainstream press, after being continuously accused of "liberal bias," > preferred to keep its head down. > > Newspaper editors should not have to feel the need to prove their > patriotism, or their absence of bias. Their job is to publish what they > believe to be true, based on evidence and good judgment. As Rich points > out, > such journals as The Nation and The New York Review of Books were quicker > to > see through government shenanigans than the mainstream press. And > reporters > from Knight Ridder got the story about intelligence fixing right, before > The > New York Times caught on. "At Knight Ridder," Rich says, "there was a > clearer institutional grasp of the big picture." > > Intimidation is only part of the story, however. The changing nature of > gathering and publishing information has made mainstream journalists > unusually defensive. That more people than ever are now able to express > their views, on radio shows and Web sites, is perhaps a form of democracy, > but it has undermined the authority of editors, whose expertise was meant > to > act as a filter against nonsense or prejudice. And the deliberate > confusion, > on television, of news and entertainment has done further damage. > The Republicans, being more populist than the Democrats, have exploited > this > new climate with far greater finesse. Accusing the media of bias is an act > of remarkable chutzpah for an administration that pitches its messages > straight at radio talk show hosts and public relations men. Rich gives > many > examples. One of the more arresting ones is of Dick Cheney appearing on a > TV > show with Armstrong Williams, a fake journalist on the government payroll, > to complain about bias in the press. Something has gone askew when one of > the most trusted critics of the Bush administration is Jon Stewart, host > of > a superb comedy program. It was on his "Daily Show" that Rob Corddry, an > actor playing a reporter, lamented that he couldn't keep up with the > government, which had created "a whole new category of fake news - > infoganda." Rich is right: "The more real journalism fumbled its job, the > easier it was for such government infoganda to fill the vacuum." > > THERE may be one other reason for the fumbling: the conventional methods > of > American journalism, marked by an obsession with access and quotes. A good > reporter for an American paper must get sources who sound authoritative > and > quotes that show both sides of a story. His or her own expertise is almost > irrelevant. If the opinions of columnists count for too much in the > American > press, the intelligence of reporters is institutionally underused. The > problem is that there are not always two sides to a story. Someone > reporting > on the persecution of Jews in Germany in 1938 would not have added > "balance" > by quoting Joseph Goebbels. And besides, as Judith Miller found out, what > is > the good of quotes if they are based on false information? > > Bob Woodward, one of Rich's chief bjtes noires, has more access in > Washington than any journalist, but the weakness of his work is that he > never seems to be better than his sources. As Rich rightly observes, > "reporters who did not have Woodward's or Miller's top-level access within > the administration not only got the Iraq story right but got it into > newspapers early by seeking out what John Walcott, the Knight Ridder > Washington bureau chief, called 'the blue collar' sources further down the > hierarchy." This used to be Woodward's modus operandi, too, in his better > days. Fearing the loss of access at the top and overrating the importance > of > quotes from powerful people, as well as an unjustified terror of being > accused of liberal bias, have crippled the press at a time when it is > needed > more than ever. Frank Rich is an excellent product of that press, and if > it > ever recovers its high reputation, it will be partly thanks to one man who > couldn't take it anymore. > > Ian Buruma is the Henry Luce professor at Bard College. His latest book is > "Murder in Amsterdam: The Death of Theo van Gogh and the Limits of > Tolerance." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:07:48 -0700 From: "Mark Scott" Subject: Re: 6 Years - 5.45 Minutes njc The difference in the hair from one photo to the next made it appear that Noah was standing in a fairly strong wind and gave an illusion of movement that was rather unsettling. It made me think of my favorite lines from 'Sweet Bird': 'Out here on this horizon line/With the earth spinning and the sky forever rushing'. I felt as if the motion of the earth was creating a wind that moved Noah's hair, a visual representation of time flowing endlessly onward. And as the video progresses, I could see subtle changes in Noah. Fascinating. Thanks, Nuri. Mark E. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nuriel Tobias" To: Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:11 AM Subject: 6 Years - 5.45 Minutes njc > If you only click on 1 link this year - make sure it's this URL. > > Noah took a photo of himself everyday in 6 years and turned it into the > most mesmerizing video. From a teenager to a young man - 6 years in Noah's > life in 5.45 Minutes. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B26asyGKDo > > Nuri > > > --------------------------------- > Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small > Business. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:14:28 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gerald A. Notaro" Subject: Re: from NY Times Ticket Watch: Dylan on Broadway njc True enough, but not without his permission and payment :) Mark Scott wrote: > Ok, Twyla Tharp, I'll give you that. But lately it seems like Bob Dylan > is > turning into a brand name. Inevitable, I suppose. > > 'But reporters there's no sense in prying > Our blue-eyed son's been denying > The truths that are wrapped in a mystery > The 60s are over, so set him free' > > -Joan Baez > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald A. Notaro" > > >>I think you have to give Twyla Tharp a little more credibilty than Vegas. >> As long as someone is going to do it, I prefer her. She did Movin' Out >> on >> Broadway and tour and it was very good. Way above the average juke box >> musical. >> >> Jerry >> >> Mark Scott wrote: >>> I don't think anybody else has mentioned this. Dylan on Broadway. The >>> times they are a-changin', indeed. What's next for Bob? Vegas? A >>> sit-com >>> titled 'Desolation Row'? >>> >>> Mark E. >>> >>> >>> This fall, two legendary artists, Twyla Tharp and Bob Dylan, unite to >>> create >>> an entirely original Broadway musical: >>> THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' >>> And now, as a loyal Ticketwatch.com customer, you're being given the >>> opportunity to see this exciting new Broadway event at a terrific >>> savings: >>> >>> See THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' for just: >>> >>> $62.50* (for Mon. - Thur. at 8, Wed. at 2; reg. $111.25) >>> >>> $67.50* (for Fri. at 8, Sat. at 2, Sun. at 3; reg. $111.25) >>> That's a savings of up to 40%. Get your tickets right away for best >>> availability! >>> Also, with this offer, you can get mid and rear mezzanine seats for >>> just >>> $56.25*. >>> PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE: >>> >>> 9/25/06 - 10/29/06: Mon. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2 >>> >>> Beginning 10/31/06: Tues. at 7, Wed. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2, >>> Sun. >>> at >>> 3 >>> Conceived, directed and choreographed by Tony Award. winner Twyla Tharp >>> (MOVIN' OUT) and set to the iconic songs of Bob Dylan, THE TIMES THEY >>> ARE >>> A-CHANGIN' tells the timeless story of two generations at odds... and >>> the >>> young man who breaks free from his father's expectations to find his >>> place >>> in the world. >>> THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' will take you on a journey unlike >>> anything >>> you'll experience on Broadway this season. >>> Performances begin September 25th. Opening night is October 26. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 12:31:11 -0700 From: "Mark Scott" Subject: Re: from NY Times Ticket Watch: Dylan on Broadway njc Ok, Twyla Tharp, I'll give you that. But lately it seems like Bob Dylan is turning into a brand name. Inevitable, I suppose. 'But reporters there's no sense in prying Our blue-eyed son's been denying The truths that are wrapped in a mystery The 60s are over, so set him free' - -Joan Baez - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald A. Notaro" >I think you have to give Twyla Tharp a little more credibilty than Vegas. > As long as someone is going to do it, I prefer her. She did Movin' Out on > Broadway and tour and it was very good. Way above the average juke box > musical. > > Jerry > > Mark Scott wrote: >> I don't think anybody else has mentioned this. Dylan on Broadway. The >> times they are a-changin', indeed. What's next for Bob? Vegas? A >> sit-com >> titled 'Desolation Row'? >> >> Mark E. >> >> >> This fall, two legendary artists, Twyla Tharp and Bob Dylan, unite to >> create >> an entirely original Broadway musical: >> THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' >> And now, as a loyal Ticketwatch.com customer, you're being given the >> opportunity to see this exciting new Broadway event at a terrific >> savings: >> >> See THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' for just: >> >> $62.50* (for Mon. - Thur. at 8, Wed. at 2; reg. $111.25) >> >> $67.50* (for Fri. at 8, Sat. at 2, Sun. at 3; reg. $111.25) >> That's a savings of up to 40%. Get your tickets right away for best >> availability! >> Also, with this offer, you can get mid and rear mezzanine seats for just >> $56.25*. >> PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE: >> >> 9/25/06 - 10/29/06: Mon. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2 >> >> Beginning 10/31/06: Tues. at 7, Wed. - Sat. at 8, Wed. & Sat. at 2, Sun. >> at >> 3 >> Conceived, directed and choreographed by Tony Award. winner Twyla Tharp >> (MOVIN' OUT) and set to the iconic songs of Bob Dylan, THE TIMES THEY ARE >> A-CHANGIN' tells the timeless story of two generations at odds... and the >> young man who breaks free from his father's expectations to find his >> place >> in the world. >> THE TIMES THEY ARE A-CHANGIN' will take you on a journey unlike anything >> you'll experience on Broadway this season. >> Performances begin September 25th. Opening night is October 26. ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2006 #338 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------