“Earlier this week, fellow Fool Rick Munarriz wrote about Google CEO Eric Schmidt accepting a seat on Apple’s (Nasdaq: AAPL) board. Rick suggested that Schmidt’s move was about making life miserable for Microsoft. I’ve got a different idea,” Jack Uldrich writes for The Motley Fool.
“In the short term, I think it’s more about Apple landing a spot for its iTunes digital media service on Google’s toolbar, and Google finding new ways to leverage its advertising network. In the longer term, though the picture begins to get cloudy, I have a sneaking suspicion that video content will play an increasing role in the two companies’ future relationship,” Uldrich writes. “Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I see a link here, in the person of former Vice President Al Gore.”
“A board member at Apple and “special advisor” to Google, Gore recently turned Hollywood star with a leading role in the global-warming documentary An Inconvenient Truth. In addition to his political and environment interests, Gore is also the founder and owner of Current TV, a current-affairs TV channel that shows user-generated programs,” Uldrich writes. “I find Gore’s roles at Apple, Google, and Current TV particularly interesting.”
Uldrich writes, “It could be true that Google, Apple, and Current TV won’t do anything together to rival television — but color me skeptical. For one thing, Gore was also at the Edinburgh event, where he said that he hopes his new channel will reach 50 million people by 2010. A little help from Google and Apple could only help to meet such an ambitious goal… If Google does have plans to eventually rival TV, I’d simply encourage the company to be more candid about them. But then again, showing its hand so early might be just the sort of strategy that Al Gore would advise Google against.”
Full article here.
You know, because “Current TV” is soooo very successful and Al Gore’s strategic advice is soooo tremendously valuable – almost as much as Naomi Wolf’s.
The usual late-August Apple news lull seems to have caused a particularly virulent strain of daftness this year.
We think Apple put Google’s CEO on the board because Steve thought it made the boardroom table visually balanced from his perspective: four per side. Having four guys sitting on one side and just three on the other was driving him absolutely crazy! It’s really that simple.
Plus, as anybody knows, 8 is better than 7: the 8 spokes of the Dharmachakra, the 8 dynamics of life, tarot card No. 8 means “strength,” turn an 8 sideways and you have ∞, Carl Yastrzemski’s retired number, 8 maids a-milking, etc.
Related articles:
Google CEO on Apple’s board opens up many possibilities, including outdueling Microsoft – August 31, 2006
Re: Google CEO elected to Apple Computer’s Board of Directors – August 30, 2006
Dvorak: Does Apple’s board addtion of Google’s Schmidt portend Apple-Sun merger? – August 30, 2006
Apple and Google cozy up to make Microsoft jealous – August 30, 2006
Google CEO to help shape Apple’s future – August 30, 2006
Google CEO Dr. Eric Schmidt joins Apple’s Board of Directors – August 29, 2006
G-Spank: “The bay of pigs very well could have resulted in multiple nuclear strikes on American soil. Would that have been better? Maybe you wouldn’t exist!”
Well, now you are really showing your ignorance.
But I think its kind of funny that a you make an excuse for Democrat President Kennedy; as in Kennedy wisely called off the overthrow of Castro because of multiple nuclear strikes….from whom?.
As if Kennedy didn´t plan the Bay of Pigs event (along with brother Bobby), didn´t know it was going on and suddenly he saved the U.S. by aborting the plan he approved to get rid of Castro for fear of nukes.
LOL.
The Bay of Pigs happened , the CIA-backed anti-Castro people invaded Cuba…it´s just that Kennedy got cold feet at the last second and would not allow the U.S. military provide cover for the anti-commie, anti-Castro forces. Democrat Kennedy wimped out. The pro-US, anti-Castro forces that landed in Cuba got wiped out.
Oh, yeah, and Democrat Kennedy concocted the Gulf of Tonkin event so he could have an excuse to start the war in Viet Nam.
But all that is okay, because Kennedy was a Democrat, right?
Paul in Florida:
Don’t be too harsh with G-Spank. G-Spank’s partiality for unilateral strikes against nuclear-armed countries that pose a threat to world peace could be useful. I’m sure that even now; G-Spank is tallying how many bombs and cruise missiles would be needed to eliminate Iran as nuclear threat, and is itching to press the button. You go, G-Spank, send those wacked out Muslim nuclear-armed extremists to their paradise for the glory of Utopia. I’m with you, boy.
Soooo, if the West were to nuke Iran and martyr all 50 million of its citizens, were would they get 72×50 million virgins for the big reward? And do the women of Iran get 72 virgins, too? Are you sure that’s not 72 white grapes instead of virgins?
These are the kinds of questions that serious muslims need to ponder. Don’t bother your brains with ridiculous stuff like science and engineering. After all, real muslims don’t need computers, just a worn copy of the Koran, thank you.
To the best of my knowledge, not once does the Koran mention nuclear energy. So why do muslims have any reason to involve themselves with nukes? If it ain’t taught by the mullahs, then how could it possibly be of any value? I doubt there is even the mention of oil in the Koran.
I wonder if Al Gore is going to write some Mac software to teach us all how to become muslims? Who knows, maybe he invented Islam. Maybe Al’s been hidden away for 1200 years waiting to return and put on the righteous path? Al Gore is The Hidden Imam?
“were would they get 72×50 million virgins for the big reward”
After getting nailed by a Daisy Cutter, Osama made his way to the pearly gates. There, he is greeted by George Washington.
“How dare you attack the nation I helped conceive!” yells Mr. Washington, slapping Osama in the face.
Patrick Henry comes up from behind. “You wanted to end the Americans’ liberty, so they gave you death!” Henry punches Osama on the nose.
James Madison comes up next, and says “This is why I allowed the Federal government to provide for the common defense!” He drops a large weight on Osama’s knee.
Osama is subject to similar beatings from John Randolph of Roanoke, James Monroe, and 65 other people who have the same love for liberty and America. As he writhes on the ground, Thomas Jefferson picks him up to hurl him back toward the gate where he is to be judged.
As Osama awaits his journey to his final very hot destination, he screams “This is not what I was promised!”
An angel replies “I told you there would be 72 Virginians waiting for you. What did you think I said?”
Maczealot…
Actually, your “enemy” as defined by 9/11 was in Afghanistan, Pakistan and very possibly Saudi Arabia.
And I was perfectly happy for the USA and NATO to attack Afghanistan: let’s face it, it already had anything of any cultural value destroyed by the Taliban, so you could quite happily have rained bombs on it for a year and a day for all I cared. Sadly, given that the US had the attention span of a goldfish, the job of sanitising Afghanistan has been left half-finished which is about as much use as only partially removing Japanese Knotweed from your garden.
Afghanistan is now back to being a narco-state with opium shipments up 60%+ across the country and up over 150% in Helmand province; furthermore, the Taliban have regrouped and are now fighting a sustained insurgent battle in the south of the country. This is yet another iteration of the pattern of behaviour that has made Afghanistan what it is today and we should have done a more thorough and concentrated job before going to – unnecessarily – chase shadows in Iraq.
I also single out Pakistan as a co-conspirator in this whole mess: Pakistan developed the whole mujahaddin concept and sold it to the US back in the Eighties. Sadly, we didn’t understand that the Soviet Union was just as worried then about Islamic fundamentalism as we are know. Furthermore, Pakistan’s nuclear teams have – with what can only be described as cavalier abandon – transferred nuclear weapons know-how to other Muslim countries, regardless of whether these countries were stable or involved in sponsoring terrorism. That the man responsible was allowed to get away with this by simply saying “Sorry” beggars belief – personally, I’d beat him with a cricket bat until he stopped twitching, but then I favour a more hands-on method of discipline.
In addition, Pakistan’s porous borders and laggardly approach to trying to control the activities of the madrassas have been significant factors as to why we’ve been unable to pin down bin Laden and why we still have lunatics willing to blow up planes.
Saudi Arabia also gets a big fat slap on the head for sticking its head in the sand with regards to the activities of Al Qua’ida within its own borders and continuing to fund the afore-mentioned madrassas with the express desire of perpetuating the ascetic, intolerant wahabbist version of Sunni Islam that has put everybody from Bakersfield to Baghdad at the risk of some misguided fool who wants to be a martyr.
Iraq was a sideshow, which the pre-emptive invasion turned into a diversion, and if I can be bothered to reply to MeatOfMoose at some point tonight, I’ll explain why.
Okay, it’s time. Match the people (Rush Limbaugh, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy) to the quotes below:
1. “Republicans believe every day is the 4th of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15.”
2. “If you’re not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, and if you’re not a conservative at 40, you have no head.”
3. “An economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.”
4. “No nation ever taxed itself into prosperity.”
You know why there’s a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one. – Rush Limbaugh
So Mondale, obviously those places are our enemies too. You have to start somewhere dip shit. What type of war would have happened if we went after Pakistan do you think??????? Get a foot hold in Iraq then work your way around. You libs are so freaking dense to not see what’s going on. It’s all part of the master plan. How come Europe can’t keep Afghanistan under control? They don’t want to so that’s the US’s fault. You are an ahole.
Nicely stated Mondale. It’s a shame that your words are waisted in places like this. All these people know is anger, and they are clearly blinded by it.
Mondale:
Yawn.
A lot of words, but not much wisdom. You have a real talent for stating the obvious without providing any options for solving the problem, unless your goal is to bore our enemies to submission.
What can’t y’all look at ideas on their merit instead of which side they come from?
If you write insults, did it occur to you that you may need professional help or at least help with emotional control? At a minimum, you are not adding anything positive, only adding negativity. If all you write are insults, you are also raising serious questions about your intellectual ability, and, by omission, stating that you have nothing of substance to rebut/say.
Yes, sadly, vicious political attacks turn off the good, thoughtful people and cause them not to vote which is why they’re done. Sadly, in some jurisdictions, freedom of speech = the right to lie, which is just bizarre. And the right to bribe with unlimited “campaign contributions”.
Why can’t you rant (or better yet organize) about institutionalized electoral district gerrymandering where one party or the other manipulates the electoral boundries to favour their party? Isn’t that electoral fraud? Isn’t this deeply unhealthy for a democracy? A constitutional violation of the right to representation?
I don’t care who/which party does bad stuff – if its bad/wrong, its bad/wrong, period. Yes, the world is grey, not black and white, but still, there is right and wrong. Why aren’t politicans charged with fraud when they lie to the people? Corporations are (eventually, usually; attention lawyers: one word: Microsoft. Is the legal community sleeping?).
If you’re blindly criticizing something from the other political party and/or blindly promoting something from your political party, did you ever think for a moment that you’re being played by partisan political hacks/manipulators? And that you should back away?
What happened to independent thinking? Healthy skepticism?
We’re on a Mac forum for goodness sakes – why can’t y’all apply thinking differently, looking at both sides to politics as well as technology?
Remember that brainwashing, rote religious education, NOT thinking critically is how Islamic terrorists are created. It disturbs me to see signs of brainwashing/closed mindedness in the U.S. these days.
As an exercise in good mental health, healthy independence, what about looking for good ideas from the other side? And engaging in civilized, respectful dialog?
Did it occur to y’all that it is a DUTY of the citizenry to look out for the country – that is NOT get sucked in by slimey political schemes, be independent, think, be skeptical?
And why isn’t everybody in agreement that deficits are a bad idea? And that cutting taxes while raising spending is just plain brain dead? And that, obviously, in some cases, small targeted tax cuts can raise tax revenue by stimulating the economy, but that massive ones will not? And that piling on massive tax cuts, when there is a deficit will make the deficit worse, raise interest rates and HURT the economy?
Final thought: empty boxcars make the most noise. Think about this when you read/watch TV/write in a forum.
Sure am relieved = Liberal, Commie, Terrorist Lover, Period!
Gstank = Idiot
Sure am relieved – your premise is basically wrong.
Insufficient taxes aren’t the problem. Too much spending is the problem. Reduce the taxes to a level that is sustainable, then cut spending to match revenue. This is the way conservatives think.
Liberals want the government to tax everyone else, and then spend the money on liberal causes.
We got into this discussion because Al Gore, the supreme liberal idiot, got himself on Apple’s board. Not that Steve Jobs is any more conservative, but at least he has a brain.
gb:
Thank you for a civilized comment that didn’t attack the writer.
I’m really trying to avoid filtering everything through a “conservative” or “liberal” lens, since that seems profoundly useless, at least to me, coming from the perspective of reality, and living in the real world and all that.
Regarding spending, I’m basically trying to say look at things on their merit. For some things, most people would agree that spending is a good idea (a reasonable amount of well maintained roads, for example). If so, spend away, but tax accordingly.
Too much government spending is a bad idea since government is, generally, inefficient and hard to manage, but so is too little government spending. The private sector policing itself has an obvious conflict of interest, so reasonable, professional regulation and enforcement is necessary.
I also haven’t heard of anybody advocating a private sector military, where the army is, say, a Lockheed Martin subsidary – the military is a very big government expense. (yes I know there are private sector security firms in Iraq, and they’re getting shot up, just like the army).
I understand that there are philosophies about more spending vs. less spending. I’m trying to make a more basic point: tax according to what you spend.
Since government is usually trying to figure out what to spend on, that’s where the control has to come. But tie taxes to whatever you spend.
Don’t like raising taxes? No problem, cut spending. Don’t like cutting spending? No problem, raise taxes. What will typically happen is a bit of both cutting spending and raising spending, a bit of tax cut and a bit of tax increase, with the odd very noticable tax increase for major expenditures like the medicare drug benefit and wars. But these increases had better be rolled back when, for example, the war is over.
What is the right level of taxation? No deficit.
Now cutting taxes while increasing spending? That’s like seeing a truck pull out in front of you and flooring the gas instead of the brake – you’re going to crash if you do that, guaranteed, obviously.
Oh, and one more thing: since lying, sadly, seems to be part of the job description of politicans, why does anybody believe them when they claim media bias? A politican is saying somebody is biased….
Humm, that is possible but isn’t it more likely that the politican is simply lying, again? Or deceiving somebody to repeat what they know to be a lie?
Isn’t is possible that some news organizations (the ones who really try to be professional) are simply trying to do the best – report as they see it, with imperfect tools – human beings?
Sure Am Relieved:
Sad, just sad.