IPod Plug-In for WinAmp?

Got an IPod? Got WinAmp? They don’t talk?

Apparently, now they can, via a WinAmp Plugin, that makes WinAmp a better music manager than I-Tunes.Wired News has the details

I’ve always liked WinAmp, anyway.

Oh, while I have this subject in mind, let me give you a reccomendation for another WinAmp plugin… “Sound Solution” If you’re a radio type… you’ll find this very useful. It’s like a more flexable Orban Optimod. Only thing it doesn’t have, for you AM types, is a phasing reversal to allow those high positives.

Very worth it, particularly as a prodction tool, once you get it working right. A basic understanding of audio processing is needed to get the desired effects.

I have some presets… very loud, dense presets I’ve developed for this processor. Drop me mail if you’re interested.

Update:
If you’re interested in the Ipod Plugin for WinAmp, here’s the site.

AS I did last week, I’ll call your atention to The Radio Equalizer who gives us the talkradio ratings breakdowns.

Hint: Err America’s losing ratings. bigtime, in all markets.

Blogger says they had server issues last night.
Response times seem normal this morning.

AP is moving a story I found on the ABC site that says in part:

WASHINGTON May 24, 2005 — The Senate voted Tuesday to end years of delaying tactics that blocked the nomination of Priscilla Owen to a federal judgeship, the first fruit of a bipartisan agreement to break the logjam over President Bush’s judicial choices.

The vote was 81-18 with opponents of the Texas Supreme Court justice falling well short of the 60 needed to continue their filibuster. A vote to confirm Owen could come as early as Tuesday.

(Eyebrow raises) Curious.

Something’s not right here, I think.  This is a bit bigger margin than the 14 votes involved in the breaking of the original impasse.

Nice to see Rip Vap Musil waking from a long slumber. He’s got a great post on the Nuclear Senate deal today.

Keith Thompson writes a really fine article in the SanFranChron today:

I’m leaving the left — more precisely, the American cultural left and what it has become during our time together.

I choose this day for my departure because I can no longer abide the simpering voices of self-styled progressives — people who once championed solidarity with oppressed populations everywhere — reciting all the ways Iraq’s democratic experiment might yet implode.

My estrangement hasn’t happened overnight. Out of the corner of my eye I watched what was coming for more than three decades, yet refused to truly see. Now it’s all too obvious. Leading voices in America’s “peace” movement are actually cheering against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom.

RTWT
BBCT: Boortz

Boortz had some news this morning:

Back in the 2004 campaign, John Kerry released some of his Military records on his website…and promptly pretended that they were all there.  The truth was he selectively posted the records that made him look good.  The media, ever-eager to see Bush defeated and The Poodle elected, never called him on it.

Well, there is a bit of news today.  During an interview yesterday with the Boston Globe, The Poodle said he has signed the form SF 180, which authorizes his military records to be released.  We’ll all finally get to see exactly what the circumstances were surrounding the awarding of his purple hearts, as well as how his discharge went down.  Not that it matters too much since he’s not a presidential candidate anymore, but we’ll finally know.

Except…as is always the case, The Poodle waffled just a bit. After he and his spokesman were pressed, he reported that Kerry did sign the form, and they would get the records from the Navy, who will send out the records.

So, what they’re saying here is that Kerry gets to act as a filter for what gets released?
And how many records went missing during the time we all waited for him to sign the damned form?

Without looking below the surface, it’s kinda hard to call a specific winner, here. Seems clear to me the Democrats backed off to reach this agreement, when they really didn’t have to…  or at least that would be my read on the stated issues. I mean, they ha dthe votes they needed to block all the people bush proposed, and they backed off to allow those nominations to the floor. The big question is why.

The answer is simple enough… The Supreme Court.
Look at the stated agreement; No fillibuster except under ‘extreme’ conditions.  Comments about what the Democrats consider extreme aside for a moment, they’re clearly setting things up for a serious fight over anyone Bush nominates that is a constitutionalist. say, Judge Estrada, for example.

And the Republicans, I’m afraid have brought this future problem on themselves by backing off, when THEY didn’t have to.. by bacing up and playing nice when they had the full victory in hand. You’d think they’d have leanred by now that making nice with Democrats only leaves footprints on your back. A lesson the current president’s father leaned not so many years ago.

And I make a prediction to you now; Unless the Senate swings further toward Republicans… which at the moment is a toss-up, this issue will come up again, and the Republicans will be forced to drop the big one, anyway.

Mark this; It will happen.

Channel 3 says:

“ROCHESTER, N.Y. President Bush is headed to a Rochester suburb this morning to discuss his ideas for reforming the nation’s Social Security system.”

Yep… my home town.
The President is appearing at a new Performing Arts Center at a High scchool in Greece which is a working class bedroom to the northwest of Rochester. I used to know that building pretty well, years ago, when I worked at the radio station there.  If I’m not mistaken, this PAS hasn’t had ANY events previously, and if true that’s quite a break-in period!

The report says 11am is touchdown time at the Airport here.

A couple dynamcs here; The Usual MOVEON nutcases are trying to stir trouble, but the local DNC has issued a statement that says the protests will be in the Downtown district, some 11 miles away from the site.  My take from their announcement is that the DNC is afraid the biggest concern is NOT the security types whisking the protestors away, but the locals beating up on them.  i SUSPECT THEY’RE RIGHT, TOO…Greece is traditionally a Republican town… and I suspect the MoveOn nuts figure they’ll get a better reception in the downtown area.

As to security, yeah, it’s tight; The traffic was a little off the mark this morning. To be expected, I suppose.

If anything major comes up, I’ll be on it, but I’m not expecting much out of the ordinary.

The Radio Equalizer points up a “Talkers” article, which reports that Err America hasn’t been able to even beat the bottom feeders in talk radio.. He suggests this is indicative of more problems for leftist talkradio.

I concur.

By the way, if you’re into radio, you may want to bookmark Brian’s site, here. Cool stuff.

The Running Conservative hasn’t had a good deal of good vibe of late.

Last week, it was her grandmother.
This week, a couple of close freinds, by way of an auto accident.
All I can do is wish her better.

You may want to drop by with a kind word. I think she could use it.

Chrenkoff has part 28 in his ongoing series.

Lonsberry points out that the pictures of Saddam in his BVD’s show us several things that are less then obvious:

They show a healthy man.

He doesn’t have any bruises. He doesn’t have any broken bones. He is being well fed and has the musculature to indicated that he’s getting appropriate exercise. He has clean and well-maintained clothes. He is in a clean environment and his hair and body seem clean, groomed and well taken care of.

And he has his head.

He’s not in shackles or chains, he’s not being mistreated, he has an area where he can move around and have a space of his own.

The pictures of Saddam in jail show that he is being treated better than every single prisoner who has been taken by our enemies in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Bob’s upset that the paper ran the photos, for other reasons, (and I disagree with him, frankly) Further, the quote I’ve posted here apparently isn’t his focus.

That said, however, I think these comments and the points they raise important, to the point of our treatment of him, vs how he (and his minions still in Iraq) treated others. Possibly, that’s why all the smoke over this matter. Better for the Baathist cause, I suppose, to be outraged about the posting of the photo, than to note he’s not being treated badly for a murderer of upwards of a million or so people.

McQ At Q&O over the weekend, asks an interesting question. He cites the case of one Luis Posada Carriles, wanted in a 1976 Cuban airliner bombing.

So what have we snagged here? A terrorist plane bomber?

Well sorta. You see the aircraft was Cuban, flying out of Venezuela. And Venezuela, as well as Cuba, consider the act one of terrorism. Personally, if true, I’d have a hard time arguing it wasn’t.

Naturally, Venezuela still wants this guy. But you see, the US is and has been opposed to the communist regime in Cuba, and at the moment is none to fond of the regime in Venezeala. So what’s the US to do?

To which I respond:

Seems to me the outcome of that question depends centrally on your definition of ‘freedom’.

I suppose I’ll catch hell from Beck for even the use of the word, but even he cannot argue that there’s not a major difference between the US’s definition, and that of Communist Cuba. 

Is it possible for a government to be wrong, to be unjust, to make the wrong choices?

McQ responds;

Absofreakin’lutely.

That’s the danger of politics in a nutshell, i.e. when politics is substituted for principle, it not only can be wrong, unjust and make wrong choices, you can sorta bank on it doing so.

And my response, which I’ll expand on here:

Then it seems to me that we must consider the idea that Castro’s wrong here, and our reaction to his being wrong.

Castro’s claim that if we don’t consider the man a terrorist, of there being a double standard is only true, if you consider as Jon apparently does, that Castro’s government is a just one, and one whose foundations are based in the freedom of the individual.

There does seem to me to be some room for argument on that point. Indeed; given this, This discussion seems to me very different from it’s original casting, now. The question you’re now forced into asking yourself at this point is, as you point up, one of principle. Namely…

Do we hold politics, or the freedom of the individual as our highest principle?

If we bow to the principle of individual freedom, as I think we must, the man must be considered a freedom fighter.

OTOH, If we play politics, holding the laws of a dictitorial and corrupt government to be higher than those stated principles, and thus label this man a terrorist… well ask yourself; are we not playing into Castro’s game and giving his illegtimate and dictitorial rule of Cuba, and the damage he’s done to the freedom of the individual, legitimacy?

It comes down to this: which principle do you hold higher?

You know your blog has made it when you ahve no less than 6 different mailed references to other poeple’s blogs.