Framing Narratives

Don't even Think of an Elephant!

The Last Word

Game Change

The Rachel Maddow Show

The gist of this riff?

The impact of whine and geez!

Walk** Like an Egyptian!*

[3-14-12 asterisks added ]

[ "I feel like I can say anything[!]..." NOT!***]

*It is ironic that Betty Knox went on to be a war correspondent.

** U.S. Autumn

*** an example of spin: former quote actually in latter link.

(Excuse me for the cross threads, no pun on mean [!])

(warning under "anything" (maybe)requires Facebook membership)

[Not to pun on Dead C Scrolls, but I hope there are no cross ups(2) in my links.]

[Oops, see comments, and cartoon.]

[Re: Market Forces]

[Re: Comments ! ]

[Re: never mind N-FRY.]

Under "never mind" I have now read the latter and the former maybe later. The "mind" is a very academic place. The "never" a more pragmatic problem under the umbrella of our creators. Whether I ever get to read the "git mo" piece may be irrelevant. The point germinates from our "Try Angle" and the dilemma of transparency and the dangers of ab-solutions. (pun on absolutes) [I don't think absolute freedom of information is possible, let alone pragmatic. But the emphasis it on "absolute", as well as a careful reading of our architectural documents, which I believe lay the organic groundwork for progress, as opposed to Jeramiahs(^). Critics of the president must realize that he is responsible whether Congress frames the right tools or the Global Village (let alone Supreme Court) goes along. Yet I am still digesting James Fallows take here, where ultimately it is our choice to choose forward or Re-verse. C- Elephant (3)]

(^) 3-16-12 spell check Jeremiah

(Original: synonym for pessimists, not to pun on prophetic hope.)

A Penchant for Leaning

Meaning squared*, or cubed**.

* words with frenemies
(not original in tent (off the cliff and ledership/following/tides)

Not to mention a day that will live in infamy. A day of REnown.
[What is the antonym of penchant? The slippery slope of indifference.]

** (x,y,z)
}*{ (C or Sea "words") not exactly Baldwin
Note: sequence of asterisks and references }within{ asterisks

Post comment: Speaking of Triggers(Reich/Boehner & The Place for Politics) Ad Hominem is kind, Lyin'ization is the reality.



[Speaking of Daddy(papa]
[Care2-Raw Story-Move to Amend/ 12-6 Thom Hartmann]
[Lewis Black on Trump.

12-8-11
[Don't Think of an Elephant/DawnKeyOT As for the conventions of the GOP 2012: it may go down the un-Gingrich, un-Romney, un-Koch Brothers or Rove. "Make or break moment for the middle-class." President Obama]
[Jansing and Wassermann-Schultz, Wagner and Steele***(Counter attack, count down, Trump panel.)]
[Capitol Punishment?, Founding Resources ]

*** Is Steele on the edge of the pit e full? Speaking of ledership and X-mass lists & F=ma.

[Sunrise, sunset? Ctrl F tides... and gyro scopes? Note the irony that Germany and France are involved in saving Italy and Greece. Note the balance of the un-bubble-up of the GOP. And the "Reich", "Place" are not the Right Link, but here is the Coffee Party. Which Teddy?]

Notes on anachronism, labelism, seg way, Com Pro Mises[!] (dot, dot, dot...Dylan ? )
[Churned Media]
[Rough Reader/Swift Rider)<-Links Retro-actively inserted. But here is the deal. Also inserting sunrise, sunset, or so not found yet.]
[Speaking of apPEASmeant, see Ed Schultz and Senator B.S.(It seems that both Romney and Perry really want to, but something Trumps them debating on Newsmax.)]
[Last Word / First Word or not, at Rest.]

The Tetra Heed Run

Of Iron Knee and flip-flop**.
I'd rather pin the tale on the Dawn Key,
than pull the knows off an elephant.
[Oops.]

Con Text : Fields Apart.
Joan asked "why is the the main qualification"
Hitchens: "I don't know."
That is just one loose brick in the difference between polemics and debate, which are not the only foundations of progress.  There are limits to logic*, and Hitchens certainly pushes even those of reason.

It seems like the old saw on common sense.
NOT[!]  I mean that in a mathematical sense.

* See "saw"
**   Footnotes  W, X, Y, Z [!]
*** I will let you jig for the Lakoff
[No pun intended on Admiral Perry. See Trip/Lex of Middle]

[All Labels Added 12-20-11]

i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy

[Post dated 7-12-12]
[7-19-12 Anachronistic Caution * ! ]

Tetra Heed Run?

Speaking of Tetras, not the fish.

(Not to mention NOW, "there, there". Romney Files.)

T for Bane or, E for Cain, Tr for Issa and A for Priebus? 

i.e. Raw Money the 5th Elephant or L-lament?

Re: the Tetra Heed Ron, the I Ron Knee of the BOron or MoRon?

Ne BO*Son re:Biden

Re: Paragons v. Paragones

Re: Models v. Meta4s

(Not exactly) Re: Caricatures and Labels

Re: NOW, Fiscal Cliff predictable B.S. 

Knot? To we' ve.

Note that the third image is my original in[!]tent or rather Platonic Tetra Heed Run[!]. 

[!]= sarcasm/satire paragon/paragone thing 

The top two tetrahedron are later labeling, but may also represent a die-caught-o'me,  

PER or PRE culture/environment-al. The web is inFable!    

Hitting the Nail on the Head

Not on the thumbnail.
And the chart on the wall, not the tale on the donkey.

Update 1-14-09: [The above thumbnail is a suggestion by Dean Baker that other's may improve on, while the chart is a pull of the elephant tale of 52 weaks of Positive Job Growth and who to pin it on. Here is another chart that some think of flipping for their Moody Blues. A shocking revelation to those that want to spin or unspin. This is the all spin zone, as how can one without nailing something down. Seriously, the Blues is the chart that others would like to nail and the spin or unspin are very reflective.

Artificial...calls for impeachment.

Hit and Run.
[See New Label and bottom link: Straw Elephant - and other search options.]
Democrats should be cautious that Republicans don't get ahead of them on both the war and impeachment, but more likely it is just a "hit and run" diversion. However, Bush may take it as a message *. Hah!

The timetables will be removed and then they will continue to have the war and Bush to run from. Impeachment would put their jobs on the line, because they would have to put a vote on the line. If they ever get to impeachment it would be more of the same, but it would be there for the people to see them "hit and run". While Republicans are all about running, Democrats should be doing their jobs as well.

[8:39 AM link added: originally "the message" was the one from the Republicans to Bush, but the link incorporates the Democratic message]

Mobius Nuance?

For Careful Processing: *

TPP / Iran
There was the 3 AM call...
The day of the Elephant?

New Clear ?

*off track ;-) was there a 2nd?
[New Clear , that's(All In) the ticket ?]

A. B. C.  ? [congress w/GOP]
(bs) 1, 2, (a-i) 3., LOL! Deep Purple? Prince '~' ?

Will the Press fail again?

On Iraq? Editor and Publisher
On Iran?
On Impeachment?

Well this is a train that may have left the station.
Will they ever learn?

See "Straw Elephant"
Top link, thanks to Rachel Maddow.

FOOTNOTE JUNE 2013 PAGE TWO

6-5-13: too b.s. really? (1/11, 2 /11, 3 /11, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 /11, 11 /11)
Gemini : Two Points / 18, Para-model, Brackets and the Debt Clock, Commander-in-Chief Obama, 5/ , 6, Two Wrongs Make a Right?,  Un-Social Darwinism., 9 /, 10 of / , 11 /, 12 / , 13/From GOP to NOP, 14 /, N-oddly Enough... , 16 / , "OFF A CLIFF", 18 / 18.
Cricket:,   Clinton(Bill) is full of B.S. of 9, 2/9,  The Real B. S. of the F. C. /9, Rubric's Peek/9,  Now the Un-Voodoo Math/9, The History of B.S./9, CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)/9, 8  /, Straw Elephant /9 .
Jiminy Buffet?

6-24-13 hmmm? Under(sc) not to pun on UW or my academics. But under the (b.s. ) may be the balanced solution. But embedded here on the NOW(correction AM), is that Russia may currently hold Snowden.  Another Irony?  That China and Russia not keep Snowden.

6-25-13 More in eff able parsing (Nailed it[!], Index 9-21-11, And Bailout...) (fn3)

Political Strings Pulled

Bush upcoming big speech.

McCain wants debate delay.

Ed Schultz plays a good question McCain faced but refused to answer while spinning it back on the Dems. The administration has known this was coming for some time while McCain's advisor has been on the payroll of Freddie Mac.

If the debate is cancelled the meeting with Bush should take them to task or at least be framed as who you bring to the table. Who will Obama and McCain be bringing and who will Bush have there? What will the purpose be? It would really be fun if it were only Bush, McCain, and Obama and us. What would the Independents, the Greens, or the Libertarians bring to the table? I think it would be a smart move if the purpose is unclear to skip the meeting and let McCain and Bush play politics, and let congress give them the business. Or rather take them over.

On the other hand, could it be that McCain has finally changed?

Maybe we are finally there.

White House welcomes plans. Just as I suspected. Another Straw Elephant.

Meanwhile just as I post this and search for links, this breaks:
"We must meet as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, and we must meet until this crisis is resolved," McCain said. "I am confident that before the markets open on Monday we can achieve consensus on legislation that will stabilize our financial markets, protect taxpayers and homeowners, and earn the confidence of the American people. All we must do to achieve this is temporarily set politics aside, and I am committed to doing so."

How this is enacted could be a clean break for us. But I think the real "panic" is political. And McCain ad proves it. Or at least not a clean break for McCain.

Now Ed's got it. The networks should give both candidates a rebuttal. Especially if one is going to run for the other rather than debate.

The day of the Elephant?

Democracy is... [?]
The table ... ?

The point to be* illuminated later**.
There are other tusky references in the works. 

[ ? : A. Too Random..., B. What the Beck?, C. hmmm?, D. Saber Rattling]
... "the worst form of government"
De "form of worship"?

*2B: Hegelian Rationality? , Para~graph Three! ?
tusky:  a., b.Original Intent , c., d., e. The %th EleFont

**  my comment @
 

The TPP seems to be similar to the Iran nuclear negotiations in its secrecy.
Now there are leaks or portions of what are on the table being used to argue against what is generally the responsibility of the administration; foreign policy.
Could it be that opposition from the left on this is as off base as opposition from the right on almost everything President Obama has tried?
...

Not that I support anything where the fine print is withheld from the public, couldn't this fit within the general progress that the Administration has achieved despite concerns over words like compromise and moderation? [...]

Tusk! (Divide to conquer?, Work in Progress, CPS, Fight On!, It's Obama's Turn)
O W ?

4-1-15 Update.
 

Fed~Upism?

Knit One?
(a. FP4 (2-20-15) FP$, b.Footnotes Page December 2014(Page One), c. Schiller, Schelling, Shell Lacking and Schopenhauer*?, d. Shilling / Schiller, e. Try Angle Nation )
Pear Type-Oh? Re:nacre
(a. Knit one , b. or ?, c. Going through Hegel or..., d. Crooked Timber, e. 'n?, f. Gatekeeper on a High Horse?, g. Remember Pearl Harbor! )

Ctlr F: type-O.(...) [!]
Irony within Onion ? [!]
Misplaced support ? (...)
(a. QCON and Flip-Flop: AN IRAN OUT, b. Under the Table?, c.The day of the Elephant?, d. Leveling the World Stage?, e. For Careful Processing:, f. There was the 3 AM call..., g. And Bailout..., h. GOLEFT TV  ...?)

(un-Mbedded consequences? 4Lab-L's)

4-14-15
(fp?) mobius :A. THE TRUTH APPARENT: A MOBIUS LAP , B. , C. Too Random... , D. Re:Figure , E. Rough Riders , F. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government. G. Borrow and Twist- a surfing metaphor? , H. Stuart Smally Anyone? , I. RUNNING WITH RHETORIC .

Straw Elephant

Misery Loves Company
Or Day Late and a Dollar Short?

So much has been made of the pre-emptive leak that there will be a troop "surge" that it almost overshadows the rest of his potential plan. But the possibility that there are a "few good" ideas are overshadowed by the increase in "a few good men" and women. My pre-emptive take on the former is dampened by the pre-emptive reaction to the latter. My pre-emptive cynicism has taken the biggest hit, but here is my take nevertheless.

Whatever the reasoning behind the "escalation" there is always hope that it will work. However, there is more likelihood that it is just a form of "cut and run". It is more than the concept that we must "support our troops" which does not entail agreeing with the president, but that there is emotional strength in numbers in that they support each other. But it must be remembered that the president is the commander-in-chief in that he is responsible for the plan. The possibility that he will not be allowed to carry out his plan, lays the responsibility on congress where it also belongs, in their job of holding him accountable. That is the job that the voters have chosen the Democratic Congress to do, based on the president’s record and the rubber stamp his party has given him.

With all the hope for success and support for the troops always there, it is difficult to say that this is probably the ultimate cut-and-run. For if the president does not seem like he has a plan, there can be nothing for Republicans to cut-and-run from to cover their past, not to mention move forward on. The Democrats have the job to correct the past, and make sure it is not repeated, but Republicans will gladly settle for passing the buck, with an appearance that they are not as united as they were. This takes an old saying into a new camp, from "divide and conquer" to divide to run. There is something to be said here in that Democrats are divided to unite.

Where "fair and balanced" means putting up a straw dog, against a straw issue, there is a lot of "hard work" sorting the many positions and potential solutions to any problem. Is there irony or extreme congruity in the image of former Democrat Ronald Reagan and a 20-mule team not to mention the Borax needed to come clean?

The 1st thing that went wrong.

LOYALTY

Ties to GOP trumped skill on Iraq team
In rebuilding effort, loyalty to Bush administration was paramount

This is probably the most important piece of the failed course that will not change. It not only rules out opposing views but limits the number of available skilled staff for an administration with little faith in the government serving the people. Then it also penalizes even those in the same party with open minds that see things differently. It should be no wonder that failure is so frequent and change is so difficult. Even those with merit that chose to keep giving their input will have no effect without the administration being willing to change and risk further exposure of their failures.

As George Lakoff, points out in the book, Don't think of an Elephant Know your values, Frame the debate there are a pair of parental metaphors Strict Father vs. Nurturing Parent and I earlier joked it was about the "Golden Rule", or rather the rule vs. the joke,(Those with...etc.). However there is a much simpler and more familiar way of putting it that explains the philosophy which is behind this all. "Do as I say, not as I do." Sadly the reaction to the reality that is in the results is also familiar to the strict father metaphor. "I'll give you something to cry about."


A second point, (not necessarily in order in the article)and I have not read beyond a few words in a few paragraphs, is probably the goal of privatization of government. It sounds good, but in reality it is a double edged sword that is not even half good. The two sides are either, you are on your own, and corporations will take care of what matters. It should simply be remembered that "privatization" is really "corporatization". Not that corporations are a bad thing, only that too much freedom is as much a concern for corporations as to individuals, for none of us would fair well on our own, even the ones that are trickling down.

[I will try to add links to my earlier references.]

CUT THAT

BU** SH** OUT! [see note]

Munch Munch. At the G-8 a few weeks ago, Bush had some ideas for Putin between chomps, that the U.N. should tell Syria, to tell Hezbollah to cut that S*** out. If that is the "nature" of how the world works, then please try it in his own back yard. The two above expletives represents links to the RNC.

Dems Rejoice: Ruling Weakens Terrorist Surveillance Program

Liberal Judge Backs Dem Agenda To Weaken National Security

The linkage of Democrats and liberal judges to a weakening of anything are a cut and run from their sworn duty to uphold the constitution and fight for democracy. The only enemy the Republicans can defeat are the phantom "do nothings". No body wants to stop law enforcement or the military from any efforts to protect America, they only expect that we do so under the constitution or they have literally ripped the heart out of the foundation of this nation and the hope of the world.

Picture this:
An elephant with King George the 43rd, stomping on the constitution and strangling the founding fathers in their graves.

Note: The links actually represent a lot of "hard work" meaning a filtering of opinions that may have individual merit as opinions or snippets of facts, but the image of Democrats as terrorist reflect the intention that must be shoveled back with the image above.

Elephant Expectations?

Thomas Friedman’s “The global debate returns to Earth” ends in a great joke that I had already jumped to, in a way. First I had the final two paragraphs to absorb as I was made aware of “teeth-gnashing” at the thought that of course what goes up, must come down, so to speak. He had talked about elephants flying at the Davos World Economic Forum last year and landing with a thud this year. It made me think of the high-wire balancing act he was doing just to walk the line with the 3 issues: the US thinking it could go it alone in Iraq, the opponents to that strategy trying to dominate in their own way, and globalization.

I will leave their analysis to those who want to follow up on the original, but just because they have landed with a thud does not mean they will rise before they sink further. It may seem that someone is not fence sitting, but the elephants may have only hit the wire. A very similar punch line. And if the image of balancing the concept of support is not clear, maybe just this sound-bite will do: It’s the world economy stupid.

To go further, just because what goes up, may come down, does not mean we may not still have to go to hell and back first.