Clause Wits

...war is politics by other means
I'm sorry... someone*** has made a point of my tangents. But it might be Germane*, or was he Austrian. No.. Prussian and Hegelian.
Could it not be said that economics has been the same, politics by other means?
What about religion?** Is that a valid spin?

*intended spelling
** in an evolutionary sense

[See update paradox of congress regarding line item veto]

*** also bowing to someone I include a definition from spin link:

Clausewitz’s trinity comprises three specific elements. The identity of those elements is readily evident to anyone who actually reads the first paragraph of his description: It is "composed of primordial violence, hatred, and enmity, which are to be regarded as a blind natural force; of the play of chance and probability within which the creative spirit is free to roam; and of its element of subordination, as an instrument of policy, which makes it subject to reason...." (emphasis added). This set of elements is usually labeled "emotion/chance/reason"; sometimes "violence/chance & probability/rational calculation"; or, even more abstractly, "irrationality/nonrationality/rationality."

It would seem that this creates our reality as opposed to an original intent begetting results, let alone values. Oh, but I guess it does. But some just have a different ge oh me try.
[12-15-10 Speaking of timing or tangents(footnote)the original purpose of my blog was to record such leaps, not always capable of recording their inspiration.]
[In the above footnote I succeeded in not loosing that inspiration, though it was close, but we have lost a very important piece in our power portfolio in Richard Holbrooke, may he rest in peace.]

Give us a brake?

[Originally Posted evening 8-30-12]
Raw Hide!
OK, the RNC convention is over. 
It is hard to say much about the Clint Eastwood performance. 
Was he in character, or was he just acting his age? 
It was a good performance, but the Romney camp has defended it as an ad lib.
It was a break from the rest of the speeches, except for the empty chair. 
Rachel Maddow is reporting it as wierd.  I would give it more credit.
They are saying that much will be made of the Clint Eastwood performance. 
Which will detract from the other so-called messengers of the convention.
So much of the convention were good performances, if you forget that governing does not go by a script. 

[8-31-12]
The above** might not be my usual script.  But is less or more* a Charlotte's Web.
"Move em up!" might have been its original heading, but it is lost on the edit-room floor. 
"Give us a brake?" is the pun on the break or the foot in the mouth on the brake?
The point is what is the point.  And it's politics, not its politics.***

*Mitt Flop=?[!]=meaning? Not!
**written "as is" 8-30-12[UPDATE]
*** "Stunk and White(and Angell)"[!]?

[Note the simplicity of the bottom line(see bold ** to*** of text ).  Note the elements over the style. Not exactly a pun, far from Socratic.  A bit more Platonic, less Pythagorian, not exactly by the book as for the "Elements...(or)Style". See turn around and braking script or characters. Don't scratch too deep.  Or is it scroll ?]


[Footnote: I really should brake and change gears, but here I note that I may later insert links beyond the original raw hide.  BTW:  I know the series was one word, but it is the way I literally rove and un-rove.  

Writing while nuanced.

Several alternatives to this heading were considered.  "Reading while nuanced." 
"Something while white." "Anything while Brooks."  OK, they all kind of evolved.*





My point is that Brooks and West are both critical of Coates from a Dream Perspective.






Mean~while there aRe other Elements** of Style[!]







* on the other hand
(Elements) italicized till read  / Bolds emphasized read.


Not to be misunderstood, West is about realizing the dream, Brooks is about not realizing the perspective.  Both attempt to compliment, but then...there may be the need to complement.
[...UC]


(7-24-15) NFRY SEGWAY:  Prior to the Sandra Bland "tragedy"*, I had my own experience with a traffic stop.  I was going 48 in a 35, on 4th of July, just outside Mount Rainier National Park. (So the officer told me.)  Actually I wish I could recall how he framed his initial comments in the form of a question.  I was completely accepting of his information, although my wife thought it may have helped if I had thrown in a "sir" here or there.

What occurred to me later, was what form of answer was I expected to give.  I mentioned having just pulled over to allow tailgaters to pass and had just pulled back into traffic and maybe been concerned about those that may be about to replace them, not remembering the speed had been reduced from 55mph.  Actually I know I am now recalling it more carefully, than I probably framed the answer at the time.  The point is whether it is a practice to frame charges in the form of a question?  Of course remembering the question and giving an accurate answer may be beside the point.  Are there appropriate answers that would change the situation?  Thankfully several inappropriate answers or questions did not occur to me. 

*debacle

Obama Economy Town Hall

Defending His Record on Economy, Jobs(CNBC)*
Republicans Cry Class Warfare...(The Progressive)
&...Balk @ Obama(...)Proposals they Backed(Bloomberg)

*(see update)Business leader's perspective favors Obama (video approx. 28:00 to 35:30)
[Duoh, stubbed my TOW, (37:00 in) 38:50 infra-structure %GDP]
[Re: social security - it might be only a technical difference but Social Security is a separate issue in the debt picture. While some elements of the discussion/solutions are similar, it may be difficult to discuss simultaneously.]
[Re: Tea Party 40:00 to 44:22 or so, then constitution & commerce clause]
*UPDATE 9-23-10 Top link is good compendium for Obama Town Hall Video as is original asterisk

WTF?

What the Fudge?
Or rather Fungible?
Transition of sorts.*

*anachronism
(fn)^

^ {re done duncy? Heck no. Dot/dot/dot ?}

Note to check Elements of Style and bracketing, not to mention lastest bibliotech4mating in the spirit of style or E.B. White, Ie/my Transition of sorts. C-*,^, #'n 'n ),(,],{.  No emoticon N-tendoughed.  
(case in point: l5 QeD@} Speaking of legends/?\...

Lt. Watada: "Unbecoming" Mistrial

“Very interesting" Oops, wrong accent or show.

“I see nothing" from Hogan’s Heroes may be the one I was stretching for.

My commentary has to do with whose perspective or spin is taken off from. As in “here comes the judge": "saying the soldier did not fully understand a document he signed admitting to elements of the charges." And this take from other participants .

My perspective? Should not intention count? And what was the intention of the war? And can this ever stop spinning if "intention" is not on the table, but the war was all about preemption of intentions. I am not sure just who understood what about the charge but the defense put it all on the table, and it was "not a matter that can be settled in military court."

NOT A MATTER THAT CAN BE SETTLED IN MILITARY COURT?

I believe that the 1st and 3rd bold are from "Laugh In" or similar times, but that is not to make light of the seriousness of our "defining" times, as in Bush's ideological run around the dictionary of about all that matters.

But as you can see from the vision thing, it may not work if you focus, and I could be wrong about the links. NOT EXACTLY BUT...

NOT A MATTER? THERE IS NO OFFENSE IF THERE CAN BE NO DEFENSE.
Ow! The irony of circular intention or "the yellow brick road". Or maybe it is that there are only three branches of government and conscience is where principles are found or lost or the battle ground we should be on.

Proof of Life...

is a term that is used in hostage taking.  Hostage taking is a tool of terrorists.  Torture has been a tool against terrorists.  Noting these as such is not an endorsement or argument.  But...
what is the word and when does it change? 

CIA Director Brennan:  word[!]
/ Pelosi: will of words (?)
(/)will of the people: Rumsfeld/Cheney
(fn)viscous cycle

[!] I think Brennan made a very nuanced and carefully parsed review of the so-called Torture Report.
There is a sense of E.B. White and M.C. Escher in this 4mat.  Let alone Cromnibus.

 

Hint(/)Rib [!].


[Note: E.B. > Elements of Charlotte.
M.C. > not exactly !]



12-16-14 Torture may be watching Meet the Press, I may waterboard myself later.

Owe what a web...

Elements of Style* Weaves. 

No you're audience[!]

[!]~(sic)/ sarcasm in coinage
Or We gee bored.

*Hint: E.B. White
Edit: 3-16-14 (asterisk/arrangement/labels)
(metapropism?)
(speaking of webs)

Too Random...

...Righty[!]

Knot 2 fraught with fraud'nfreud? 
Freedom the foundation or fountainhead? 
A stopped clock is right... 
too undimention,
1* over infinity has left. 


* poetic license in 3 or 4-D.
won over


**

knot exactly; 1/infinity= zorro?

But seriously to unpun one in particular, freedom over everything is the problem. 
Freedom over everything equals nothing over physics.



12-2-13 (...)added and *reframed

** s/b standard mobius/infinity (Thought I had previously used one, not this one.)

Embedded links:(Not fully read.)
1.  The Difficulty with Hegel
2.  Hegel or Anti-Hegel

Fully Read and Reviewing:
The Hegel Myth and its Method: (Kaufmann 1959)Akin to Plato's Form(The Socratics of the Ideal and States)^
Selections:
"The writings of Hegel and Plato abound in admittedly one-sided statements that are clearly meant to formulate points of view that are then shown to be inadequate and are countered by another perspective. Thus an impressive quilt quotation could be patched together to convince gullible readers that Hegel was — depending on the “scholar’s” plans — either emphatically for or utterly opposed to, say, “equality.” But the understanding of Hegel would be advanced ever so much more by citing one of his remarks about equality in context, showing how it is a step in an argument that is designed to lead the reader to a better comprehension of equality and not to enlist his emotions either for it or against it."

"Hegel was rarely cited in the Nazi literature, and, when he was referred to, it was usually by way of disapproval. (...) Rosenberg also stressed, and excoriated, the “Socratic” elements in Plato."

References to 3D/4M@.  English***, Math, Form~process.
*** generic word language/numbers as an ideal and a language/so-called results.

I do not necessarily want to break out of my understanding of Hegel, not say he would have understood it my way or anyone else's.  But is Popper properly popped?  Yet I do use a method of labelism/reference/progression-digression.  The hazards of the Internet, not to mention old material, one might not recall running into sources before.  I developed my tetrahedron courtesy of my older work on The Republic(1970~), delineating the mass-energy equivalence formula, and possibly Milo Wolff.(2004~)

In the above not yet reads, but glanced at's, they may have a point, and may be missing or pointing from their own point.  I may yet to agree or disagree with them, but still appreciate or depreciate their points. 
^ & ~ must be reviewed.  "Dates~" note time of encounter.

12-3-13 (FP1) Have yet to locate "^". [rtd]

12-4-13 That's the ticket ! ?



But to tilt at swans?

12-9-13 Roughly 13 in rough. 

12-10-13 Scientific American Dispute over Infinity Divides Mathematicians
verses RealClearPolitics Newtonian Government
Trinity Squared ? 

No Bearing?

Good! The president's words have no bearing on the 2008 race.

[In a statement, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., shot across the bow: "It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 6Oth anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel. Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power -- including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy - to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."]

Last read? (nfry)

[Embarassing is a reference or interesting usage in the top link here: "ABC News' White House troops point out..."]

[Embedded and unembedded, but pulled up? See inserted block quote above.]

FOOTNOTES PAGE THREE ARPIL 2013

4-1-13 C-shells! T-shalls? Oar tangent shall = blog(sc) search. 

4-2-13 Re: cull pas knaught? [?]   (b.s.)Swift: The Irony of the Message (sc),Fiddle Sticks^ , c, Recent Letters., Red Labeling!, Swift Reading! (sc), g, H, I, J, K, l, M, Moos Room, O, P, Q, R, A PEAS meant... , T(sc).  /  (b.s.) anacronism: Fiddle Sticks^, b, Primary Boogeyman, D(sc), E(sc),

4-3-13 to too two dimen(t)sionalism [!] ?

4-4-13  to boldly borg by G ?

4-16-13 follow up: not to link meaning nor emphasize leadership, history, dedication, debtedness. (but Ctrl F)

4-22-13 : Speaking of 4 mats ! (GW)
Or the Q T? "math later"
Q = arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy
T= grammar, logic, and rhetoric
Alternate Q = No Borg [!]

4-23-13 Ctrl F ? Faith, Filter and Fervor ? Frack 'n Fudge ?[!]?
4-24-13 third line : "pun on"  P.C. (b.s.)Rhythm /  Con Fluence..., Iron Knee of Inflation  (see fore)
4-25-13 Capitalizing on fonts(1) or elements(2) of #$ines (3). (R/R) (1) Clause Wits (sc), Give us a brake?, WTF?, (g), Charlotte 2012! , Why OWS is bigger than Left vs. Right.(sc), GPS , K, L, M, N?   (2) The %th EleFont  (3) (A) Post "don't ask, don't tell"^ ?  Bby Stiob?!?   (4) (a)Punderous Ponderings, B, C(c), (D)Un-Exceptionalism,(e)  
4-30-13 My intent was 'twain footnote and liveblog. Note the list of labels and missing reference to Checks and Balances to bring it to six.  Ctrl F [!]

MC / EB

Elements of Course. 
The ave eh knew. 
Contrary House.
aka the gang plank.
Sea LabeLs...? [!] ?

Why OWS is bigger than Left vs. Right.

Stuck in the game frame?
Bright Bart and Big Government?

Why OWS is bigger...

Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.

Whine and G's?

On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that "I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests". (I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).

Really?

What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.

Not your grandfather's "traditional".

This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power - but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast

Really?

Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.

I have read Matt Taibbi's piece three times now over the course of parsing this, and I will let you read your own conclusions.

[Then I signed the petition at DCCC (see bold) "I stand..." with the following amendments.(see 3 links)]

[Each of the above blockquotes are directly from Matt Taibbi's piece, with the bold segues my comments. But the final Really?, "Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately." sounds a bit naive if not libertarian. Companies and Wall Street will not reform themselves any more than they will let themselves fail or let the market do its magic. But it is a matter of who's on board or overboard as well as some sort of tents.]
[Speaking of ironies, or Bright Bart and Big Government, just whose side is who on?]
[Meanwhile I have four posts to further parse. Starting with the big bite. @ 7 minutes 15 seconds in: Over two thirds of New Yorkers support Occupy Wall Street.]

[Oh what a web. No E.B. White:
SCroll up! Tol Keen? Rubric, Elements, what "October", Mis-attribute? Justice and/or sand witchbracket.]
[Alternative Reich? Not to pun on the furor, but is there an alternative?]
[A Democratic* strategist touched on something(on Martin Bashir) that has been embedded in my thoughts, and even more embedded in my writings. The Republican candidate will not come from the activist wing. And indeed the current leader often trails "anybody else". Well, they are not really polling that candidate, but the leaders are still struggling for less than a third of the Republican's votes(current Gallup Romney 20%). My point is that there just might be a compromise or coalition candidate. On the other hand... who am I to say democracy will prevail over the Republic?]
* 10-19-11 I have yet to find the proper link but place some others under Democratic Strategist and Martin Bashir.

Brook No Truck ?[!]

Another May Day !

[!]= punctuated 'twain* sarcasm and satire if not irony

Just to be clear, my previous post is to indicate my disagreement with disruptive elements that don't intent to face the music.  I heartily agree with the capture of Bin Laden, but that does not mean justice should** not keep on truckin'. *** 

* current(fp1) (b.s.) A - Q
** later inserts( Ctrl F Irony ! ?)
*** read double negative carefully(fp2) = positive

A New Draft

If corporations are people...*
i.e. I diverge:  The Gum Ball Theory?
KP PK

Regarding the prism** of history. ***


On the left we have the good cop. On the right we have the bad cop.
Too bad cops(or filibusters), aren't in the constitution, but they are metaphors for elements of progress.  ^  [There are three equal branches of government. On the left we have the Republican executive, on the right we have the Democratic leader.]
   

*pre-emptive syncratic process
The Divergence of Hardball
** compliments to and complement to David Gregory [11-26-13 Roger Simon]
^  OW  (Ted Cruz' Glass House) see Hardball.
Re:image- on the right the unified executive, on the left the constitutional O~B^^won.
[Bush/Cruz/Walker/Rubio? The pure pol?] ABC (anacronistically blogging culture)
^^ Remitt-flop (i.e. Congressional infinitive)
FP All In. Fear of Process.
Chris Hayes No chyron? This is what Democracy looks like.  Too diluted.
*** the big hint

, comma added , also Roger Simon link
[fair and balanced ? ]
The two Manicheans?

Replacement Refs or Not...

If it were a debate* we would have stopped it. 
Not to pun on Xfinity, but while the Comcast links*** will expire.**,
it's the congress John!  Bring it on, Joe!  The President needs to hold a Sit Down.

Before I get down to the task of preserving<*> those links whether read or not, I will explain the Rogue John and Wax Leak of the asterisks.  Although the lesson learned from "Simon says"^^ might be to actually read links more thoroughly, the lesson from the Debate may be more complex but parallel of sorts.  By "rogue",<*> I mean that former Presidential Candidate McCain(first link) confesses an expectation for him lowering the expectations of Paul Ryan, while  disrespecting the Vice President and framing an expectation for gaffs.  Then in regard to the " ball of wax " that Palin leaks, it connects the "boys" to the other "race" speech.^^^  (There, that's the GPS-uncross-Rhodes.)

And a far as my Tan Gents(Dr. Trumps), being a Seahawk fan has nothing to do with my take on the moderator.  Well, who knows?  But Mr. Lerrer has been critcized for not moderating or having a good performance, but I think that given the style over substance versus substance with style, these are not legitimate debates.  And within the political system (such as it is) it was not his job to interfere with the players being themselves in order to let them make the proper contrast.  Again having only heard most of the debate on the radio, I thought that the President walked away with it, but that was under the condition that facts matter.  Neither he nor Lehrer could have done a better job in the case that they don't. 

BTW^: Speaking of "boys", we have heard cracks about the Harvard "professor" and I suspect he has had to deal with a few wise-guys or gulls[!]

*if the link were fact checked...ditto.
(McCain goes rogue.)(Palin leaks ball of wax .)
** not that I have read them yet or the recommend them.
***The point of this lede and the heading...

^ apologies to literary geeks for my style over elements.(But that was Core Knell.) 
^^ added in edit mode
^^^ to be expanded later(but see lede and stupid...I mean congress and John, Joe & Ryan. i.e. the context of the politics of "relief' legislation.)
[In the spirit of medium...? ]
[Not to parse too acutely, but it is the medium and the mess age.]
(Bu' dump 'ump [!] ... )
Re:Ouch?(see FLASHNOTE)
Post-Subjectivism?  Might it be, rational subjectivism?

<*> 10-7-12(See FLASHNOTE: under construction)
<*> 10-9-12  slight edit ( "r.... ",)

GPS

Good Progressive Strategies?
Green Purple Systems?
American Exceptionalism.
Three Signs of a Profit Sea?
Now this is not just a wisecrack, but I have yet to retrieve the link** where I recall a reference to prophetic narrative* having three ingredients. It was in the context of a previous post, but I am unsure if I embedded the link or it was left behind. Speaking of fringe or conspiracy theories(...)dot dot dot

* emphasis on the narrative

** I will post it here(when found) to be clear that it is not one I have embedded so far(Not to send anyone off on a wild goose chase, ne ribble, but if any one does recall any recent reference to, I believe 3, elements of a prophecy, please comment.) As I recall, they may be fear, convincing, and fulfillment. Yeah, that may be the ticket of original intent.

Link to be found later...

or tangent.

Let alone course correction.

5-5-15
Speaking of trolling, I am fishing for a recent snag in my seine net or gill in my safety-net.  Somewhere in the area of foreign policy or economics, I recognized a contradiction in my lede-or-ship.  Bingo. 

(FP of sorts)
 [a thru i: order of link -- numerical order of insert.]
a 1, Five Things Ben Carson Doesn’t Get
b 2, A., B. C3-PO?, C., D., E., F. The Other Debates, G. Karl Rove vs. WA Hyperbole, H. Toll Keen, the Try-Logy?  , I. Toll Keen?
c 8, We R all Right?
d 9 Too Random... , (fp-11-13)
e 6
f  5
g 4
h 3
i 7 Divide to conquer?

[Elements to Hegel over ... ?]
[ MSNBC: AM inside joke Obama Letterman Dominoes! The Cycle. SB(t) Stochastic blowback or Honeypot? ]
[Seg way Hardball* Charlie/Bernie: Top 14 increased over bottom 130 million net.]

* 5-6-15 link attempt failed test
x, y, z
u, v, w?

Charlotte 2012!

The DNC Convention!
Turn-around is fair play. 
Missed sarcasm: watch word.
The watch word is turn around. 
Bring it on!
The whole table.

PIG: Progress is Good!
(Not to Or well[!]...exactly)
On elements or style...


Table of Context[!](to follow)...
CAUTION though.
[Updates used to leave the original date of post intact. That changed recently.
I don't know if that is a Rovism or an AlGoreRhythm, but what the google or frack.]

[!]TOC
[take to footnotes**/under construction]
frack
google*
Rhythm
recently
though- (scroll-over)
or- exactly- table- whole- word - watch- sarcasm- fair play- around- turn- convention- DNC-

*see chart
(need other image?)
** might not

Parting Words

Meaning and, not versus.

Bush:

The key to success in Iraq is to have a government that’s willing to deal with the elements that are trying to prevent this young democracy from succeeding.

That’s the whole meal deal, not the beef.

Belated words and belated farewell.