I'm going to chime in about the war because ... well ... because I can. It seems to me that a lot of people have some false understandings about the war. Primarily, I hear things like "This war is bad because it's only about oil." Well, there are many things wrong with that sentence. First and foremost, of course war is bad. It's not supposed to be good. War, by necessity, involves death and bloodshed. So, of course, war is bad. But there is a reason we have an army; to fight wars. No person in the Armed Forces is deluded into thinking that they couldn't be killed at any possible moment; they all understand that their job is to fight and they might end up dying because of it. We've been spoiled since Vietnam (which was also a 'wrong' war) in that: a) the cold war didn't actually involve any fighting and b) that the Persian Gulf War was over in an hour and half.

But, about this war particularly. Of course, to understand it you have to go back to the first Persian Gulf war which was about Saddam Hussein abusing his power, and about oil. In the early 90s Iraqi Kurdish minorities started complaining about being oppressed by their country's leader (Saddam). Neighboring countries also started complaining about Iraq's political issues disrupting the region; to stop the complaining and to free up better access to the ocean Saddam marched his military into Kuwait. When the US complained, Saddam started cutting off oil supplies to countries in the area that were friendly to the US (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, etc.). His solitary actions affected oil supplies and prices around the world. Pres. Bush 1 managed to get support from the UN to go in and stop the abuses and free the oil lines that were being tied up.

Of course, after we 'won' the war, Saddam said "Ha ha, I was just kidding," and promised to be good. Since then he has done everything in his power to taunt the US and the UN. He has violated OPEC regulations and varied oil output to cause wild fluctuations in oil prices, he has allowed his military to continue to oppress the kurdish minorities, he has given his sons free reign to terrorize the populace, and he has given aid and support to known terrorist organizations (including Al Quada). Reliable intelligence by countries other than US showed that he was assembling a nuclear program (which he was, but only now are we finding out it was power-related, not weapons-grade) and had factories producing biological weapons in contravention of numerous UN treaties. Of course, those reports now seem to have been wrong, but how were we to know that when Saddam stood in the way of every inspector to ever step foot in the country.

Our nation is very oil-dependent. We need it to power our precious automobiles; and if anything our SUV nation has become even more oil dependent. The GM Hummer gets 11 MPG on the HIGHWAY and the average SUV gets a little under 20 MPG. Meanwhile, auto manufacturers can't make the things fast enough. Our country needs oil and it needs it at a cheap price; otherwise we'll have to start using mass transit and we all know that Americans love their cars entirely too much for THAT! So, until you are ready to get rid of your SUV and jump on a train or at least drive something a little more gas-friendly, you can't complain about the need for oil.

Having established that Americans need oil, Iraq is one of the most powerful oil-producing nations in the world; behind Saudi Arabia. Given the worldwide (and US-specific) need for oil and the lack of stability from a country run by a leader gone amok, something had to be done. While there doesn't appear to be any 'tipping point' that is usually unmistakable in war-scenarios, it was clear from shortly after the Gulf War ended that Saddam had to go. He was de-stabilizing the region and de-stabilizing gas prices around the world. In the US prices fluctuated wildly from $1.00/gallon to unheard-of prices in excess of $2.50/gallon. Bill Clinton was too preoccupied (perhaps rightly) by domestic issues, but when the situation presented itself, we took advantage of it.

We were already in the region looking for Osama bin Laden and reports started leaking that Saddam was helping him out. Having the largest military in the world allowed us to keep pressure on Al Quada to keep them on the run and in disarray while we committed the rest of the military to a task that should have been accomplished years ago. Did we rush in prematurely or hastily? Probably, but we didn't really expect to be there prior to 9/11/2001. And, as I said, since we're there, we might as well just take care of it.

Problems have creeped up, mostly how to let the country run itself since we seemed to have worn out our welcome. But, "luckily" our President and Vice-president come from oil families and have significant contacts in companies that are large enough and diversified enough to control the situation without a whole lot of babysitting. Have things gone wrong with Halliburton? Sure. But the same types of things you would expect from any company that was handed free reign to rebuild an infrastructure (namely the "3 for you, 1 for me"-type shenanigans). Overall, having one company control the physical rebuilding is certainly more efficient than the government having to supervise/babysit/coordinate multiple companies. Such a situation leaves the government free to undertake other activities, like establishing a democracy and hunting down Bin Laden.

I'll be the first to admit that perhaps our administration is being something less than direct with the American Public. But hasn't every President? ("I did not have sex with that woman", "No new taxes", "I forget, I think it was Ollie North's fault", "We'll get the hostages from Iran", "I am not a crook", "Russians are getting ready to attack from Cuba", etc.) Regardless, I believe that ousting Saddam Hussein was the right move. And everytime you go to the gas station to fill up your SUV you can thank President Bush.

Post No Bills 01/09/04

OK...back to posting...I suppose...for now.

I don't understand why Andre3000's "My Favorite Things" is so reviled by the critics who seem to love the album. I have a feeling that this album reached a critical mass (pun intended) and now people are jumping on the bandwagon and don't even know why. Undoubtedly Speakerboxxx/The Love Below is a great (set of) album(s). As many know by now, Speakerboxxx, Big Boi's effort, is fairly traditional for Outkast (if such a statement exists). The album is straight up (for the most part) hip-hop-funk in the Outkast/Southern Rap style. As such, it is well-executed but boring. Of course, many are offended that I would call such a work 'boring,' but compared to Andre3000's effort almost all prior hip-hop is now boring and irrelevant.

The Love Below has set a new standard for rap and hip-hop. Like Beck before him, Andre has transcended the idea of mixing genres to achieve an entirely new genre unto himself. "Happy Valentine's Day" could have been written by Parliament (if George Clinton hadn't been smoking crack) and "Pink & Blue" does a good imitation of Sly and the Family Stone. But where do you stick a song like "Hey Ya!"? It's quite possibly the most perfect, brilliant pop song written since REM released "Stand" back in 1988. Some of the songs on "The Love Below" are on the money and only held back by Andre's absurdity; for example "Dracula's Wedding." DW is a great song, the tune is memorable and the melodies are catchy, the lyrics are absurd and just get in the way. Often, Andre's absurdity works in his favor (for example, Happy Valentines Day) but on this particular song, it keeps a good song from being great.

And where does a song like "My Favorite Things" sit? It's a bit of an enigma, that song. Created as a show tune, it sat for many years relegated to status as a childhood favorite to keep the kids quiet. Many people (most notably reviewers who tend not to like Andre's re-imagining of it) I'm guessing have never heard John Coltrane's version. Even knowing that John Coltrane re-worked the song, instantly makes Andre's version a little more understandable. The song, as performed by Andre, is a jazz masterpiece. DJ Shadow and all of the nu-electro-jazz leaders could take notes from Andre here. Floating in and out of the song structure is what made the Coltrane-Davis-Monk-era jazz so refreshing and vital. Of course, listeners now want their hands held. They don't want to have to strain too hard to get the melody and they want their solos concise, to the point and in time with the rest of the song. Jazz doesn't work that way. The song goes where it goes, it's up to the players to take it there. And here, Andre takes modern instrumentation and takes where no one expected. In my eyes that's a good thing.