Relative Exceptionalism

American Exceptionalism, was coined by a Frenchman.

American exceptionalism refers to the theory that the United States is qualitatively different from other countries. In this view, America's exceptionalism stems from its emergence from a revolution, becoming "the first new nation,"[1] and developing a uniquely American ideology, based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire. This observation can be traced to Alexis de Tocqueville, the first writer to describe the United States as "exceptional" in 1831 and 1840.[2] Historian Gordon Wood has argued, "Our beliefs in liberty, equality, constitutionalism, and the well-being of ordinary people came out of the Revolutionary era. So too did our idea that we Americans are a special people with a special destiny to lead the world toward liberty and democracy."[3]

Well, not literally. It was actually first used by Joseph Stalin.

The specific term "American exceptionalism" was first used in 1929 by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin chastising members of the American Communist Party for believing that America was independent of the Marxist laws of history "thanks to its natural resources, industrial capacity, and absence of rigid class distinctions."[4]

Speaking of original intent*:

Although the term does not necessarily imply superiority, many neoconservative and American conservative writers have promoted its use in that sense.[1][5] To them, the United States is like the biblical "shining city on a hill," and exempt from historical forces that have affected other countries.[6]

Since the 1960s "postnationalist" scholars on the left have rejected American exceptionalism, arguing that the United States had not broken from European history, and has retained class inequities, imperialism and war. Furthermore, they saw every nation as subscribing to some form of exceptionalism.[7]

But here is the trigger** for my lede. See *** there:

Which communities use lethal force for crowd control? Anyone with health concerns should be careful where they press their 1st amendment rights.

*mine was in the lede(pre-wiki)
[But here are more links]
** not to suggest more than civil disobedience(but Relative in the lede)

[Meanwhile, there also may be room for a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. But that is problematic, in that I suggest a choice. Or rather politics might make it. The idea is not that dangerous, but putting any parameters on it, is what would make it a deal breaker. If it could be the GOTV for 2012, it might make for good dialogue for the Republic.

Follow-up: Tragedy or not[! Still Life with Romney.]

Un-Exceptionalism

Are there conflicts of interest in economics today?

Undoubtedly[!]
Buy definition and nature.

This may take us back to my Try-UNism, and one, none or all of punderous pondering.
[Mid-post tangent and update.]

No Twain in Try-ing. Well, I did not mean to display un-exceptionalism by example, as in "there he goes again." But my original point was that conflicts of interest are what economics and politics and government are all about. There, is that clear enough?

The "Try-UNism" is a pun in this regard. A sorting of one, none or all. Now, technically the physics might be beyond anyone to say if freedom is a force, and psychologically it may be closer to philosophy for some. But economically, I am saying that without an intent, we will be getting only where we are going, and even that is not a won way street.

My apologies for any missed links or leaps(in your scroll or click-on), but it is an ongoing process. Economics contains and is about conflicts of interest, and politics and government, play crucial rolls for (sum) people.

In regards to my lede, Un-Exceptionalism, I take it from one of the economists, who notes that any field will present conflicts of interest between the professional and the profession or the field if it has a purpose other than the individual. Well, he did not go that far, but I think he could. The "one, none or all" of my tangent relates to Exceptionalism, as it is seen, possibly in that light.

BTW: The first three links are an economic series of videos. Other links may require clicking on and scrolling the link address for a compendium of purpose. For example, "Buy definition and nature". The first two simply reference the ledes. The "be-all-and-end-all" a reference from part 3 of series. The "funny-thing-happened" is a recap of the CW. And regarding "nature" the address is a search of my blog for "Adam+Smith"(without, now with the quotation marks). Skipping over the "Try-UNism" and "Mid-post tangent"(lines) the Twain is deeply embedded in Trying.
[Speaking of exceptions(won): just to be sure.]

[Insert more Ed here and here: enthusiasm gap]

American Exceptionalism

The lighter side.

The darker side.

Sea-side or C-side. "swimming against the current"? Not to take sides, but "American Exceptionalism" is about what is different about America. See bold side and "The" first link. For some it is about being better, not just different. A new form of patriotism. But is it really different than any other nation's patriotism, or "better than others" feelings? I think it is too much to get caught up in the term. But by focusing on what is different, how we were founded, it is true that no nation can find the grounds to plant new ideas, quite like we did. Not that they(ours) were all smooth transitions, these days they can be even more troublesome*. And there is a difference between what Obama can represent in American Exceptionalism by trying to spread our ideas around the world, and the way old regimes hang on or try to spread theirs.

*found link as after search:
original "troublesome" was international not domestic
The Wall Street Journal is not American** nor exceptional jouralism, but a class warrior against the American dream. (entitlements, taxes, free trade)
**not naturally born

[Try-ing, Try-ing***, Trying]

*** Bolton, no Twain
Obama, no Mark
or vice verse US:
The High Way or the My Way.
[links are not necessarily coordinated here]

Back to "The One Thing?"

It was not my intent to play on the "one thing" that Hucakbee got wrong in regards to British Imperialism, and the history as we know it.
Huckabee: "And one thing I do know is having grown up in Kenya, his view of the Brits, for example, is very different than the Average American."
Also: "When we elect a president, we entrust to him not just our security but also our story. The two are inseparable because our security depends on the story that we believe in, that inspires us, that we teach our children, and that we, as a nation, are willing to fight for."

The one thing was the chart and spinning off from that *, all things.


[While the link might be tenuous** in these two items, Huckabee and Economic Recovery, it can be seen in the flip-side of the two-birds equation: the economy loses, Obama loses.]

*Page 17: Q27 - a combined 59% of the people support raising taxes or postponing elimination of the deficit.

[Ribble =ribbing and riddle (Embedded in Q27, is reference to "missing link" in earlier post: where thanks to someone not getting me, I got more out of it. Not to be mis-understood as a reference to "the one",but maybe win-win...for Democrats and the Economy.)]

** New RNC chair is old Wisconsin Republican State Chairman

[Speaking of original intent or missing links: it is about the story and...Stephanie Miller***. (She or a caller maybe broke the story on January 25th: a timeline of sorts)]
[On another level.]

*** earliest reference

[American Exceptionalism and three views. In my view the Obama exceptionalism is what makes America great, not what makes it the next empire.]

[3-6-11: Media Matters for Huckabee whether on book tour or campaign , but is "brain slip" really valid? Yes, his true thinking may have been outed from his hours of shilling his book. Tells US: "These people should read my book and they would know what I mean..." Well thanks for the excuse, for all artful dodgers.]

No Teddy

No Bully* Pulpit.
Disagreement and innovations.

Main Stream Perspectives:
CBS
ABC
PBS
Huffington Post
Salon
Washington Post
YouTube
Boston Globe
"Contensions?"(sic**)
More Follow Up.

[Mean-while up date*** No Rapture.]

* Mika 1 Joe 0 Are you serious, Joe?

** counter intuitive: Bully Pulpit is a good thing, like American Exceptionalism, unlike the link or the namesake.
*** and I did not see the Herman Cain link before my Teddy reference and there is no relation between my pen name LeRoy-Rogers and the therogersinsitute, nor Newt's middle name (Leroy).
[See ** "Are" yes I may be. Apologies for the multi-dimentionalism again, but in regards to Newt and Libertarianism, I think that it could be called Tea Party Nuance, and Ginrich is attempting to be the Obama of the Right(or the No Labels of the Right), while I am somewhere not between Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz.]
[Profits verses Prophets(Chris Hedges) and more.

[The square of the esoteric.

Strauss on reading In 1952 Strauss published Persecution and the Art of Writing, commonly understood to advance the argument that some philosophers write esoterically in order to avoid persecution by political or religious authorities. A few readers of Strauss suggest esoteric writing may also seek to protect politics from political philosophy -- the explosive reasoning of which might well shatter fragile opinions undergirding the political order. Stemming from his study of Maimonides and Al Farabi, and then extended to his reading of Plato (he mentions particularly the discussion of writing in the Phaedrus), Strauss proposed that an esoteric text was the proper type for philosophic learning. Rather than simply outlining the philosopher's thoughts, the esoteric text forces readers to do their own thinking and learning. As Socrates says in the Phaedrus, writing does not respond when questioned, but invites a dialogue with the reader, thereby reducing the problems of the written word. One political danger Strauss pointed to was the acceptance of dangerous ideas too quickly by students. This was perhaps also relevant in the trial of Socrates, where his relationship with Alcibiades was used against him.

Ultimately, Strauss believed that philosophers offered both an "exoteric" or salutary teaching and an "esoteric" or true teaching, which was concealed from the general reader. For maintaining this distinction, Strauss is often accused of having written esoterically himself. Moreover he also emphasized that writers often left contradictions and other excuses to encourage the more careful examination of the writing. Leo Strauss's favourite novelist was Jane Austen.[5]

This spin off is from actually reading the previous bold "and more" but is relevant to the Gingrich "Exceptionalism" and Obama practical and incremental. And Platonic Dialogue.(sic)]
[Spell Check Gingrich: left Ginrich for link & search purposes: but note Strauss to Chomsky philosophical dynamism(Wittgenstein) via esoteric Tea Party Gingrich attempt at nuance.]

Flip-Flop, Nuance, Mitt-Flop

Kerry, Obama, RawMoney...
Etch-a-sketch [!]

Pressler, Foreign Policy !
American Exceptionalism:
Exception to the rule, or rule without exceptionalism?

Mitt-Flop On !

Update Charts !
Images ?
NOT 

Nor Foul nor Foot Bowl.




















10-16-12  Sometimes I feel like a...
 Tea-Partier, sometimes a We Gee Bored[!]
Butt 4 the perspective* !
* not the link, I am still looking for one shared on other thread w/ comment.
[The word comprehensive and dimentionalism are key.  Apologies for Obtuseness, or vice verse us ? ]

Politics is local?

Ground Game ? *

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://open.salon.com/blog/ted_frier/2012/09/12/losing_gop_in_denial_over_own_failures
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/10/why_i_left_the_gop/

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/12/mitt%E2%80%99s_shameful_libya_statement/
http://theweek.com/article/index/233148/the-death-of-an-american-in-libya

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/cairo_embassys_statement_what_went_wrong/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press/vp/48959856/#48959768 ***

Not the usual MO.** 

[ http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/09/13/house-race-koster-opts-for-the-full-romney/ ]

*Scroll over is sufficient until [fn] and post /under-construction(also redux labels) R done.
** "well" not exactly [!]

*** dropped link [!]

[Unfinished read, refinished read.(perspectivism) Politics over war.  Obama has made progress in foreign policy, but Republicans want to take it back.  The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Iran(an evolution) are the examples of diplomacy(d) over preemption.  It all sprung from the 2000 election debacle, resistance to Clinton policy and the failure on September 11th with the supposed post-9-11 world.  But it is spelled out in the perspective that we cannot expect to teach democracy or politics over there, without practicing it over here(^).  I will refrain from further tangents or links on this post, but I will note that the two reads just mentioned also reflect a bit of a balancing act that is not nearly as cut and dry as it might be written.  One of the key differences in the big picture that makes the previous administration a stand out failure in American History is the combination of the voodoo(b) economics(arithmatic/fuzzy math+fuzzy English) with the neo-con perspective of American Exceptionalism (which is not) exemplified by choosing a war without paying for it.  The success that is so difficult is because politics is local except for them^(f).  This is demonstrated by the current Radical Republican opposition(c) to the Arab Spring,^^^ which removed dictators and is allowing(a) for democracy that might not turn out to be to our liking.  Bush said war is hard work, but just because you want to fight, does not mean that progress and peace(with diplomacy and politics) are not harder work, and more profitable.  That is part of true exceptionalism.

^refrain from a bumber snicker]

9-15-12
(a) FOX wrong about Libya says McCain.
(b) Foreign policy is Bane of Politics: bankruptcy bailout business not an option in either.
(c)  Loose lips? Republican Threat to National Security
(d) not! but whiney!

(^) ibid re^frain [see (d)]

9-17-12 (e) not embedded  i.e. that's right, there is no (e)
Seriously [!] folks ?
[^^ Apologies for sarcasm, but there is a diversity of reliability in the perspectives/sources provided.]
[NOW^^^ w/Alex Wagner w/Martin Basher on America Abroad.^^ But natural track of changing the strategy for Romney of change or status quo. i.e. hijacking change and boogieman status quo. Cam-Pain not working, Obama not running.]
[There is an (f) ]
^^ viscous cycle of anachronism
^^^ then Martin Bashir (NeoMitt)(Mittastrophe of asterisked?)

Post-Turkey Day

RSN[11-25-11][12-1-11 Punchline? Spoiler Alert, do not click on Punchline, before reading full post.]
Krugman, connecting the dots,
Will Durst,
Relative Exceptionalism

Speaking of good dialogue and jokers and will. I met Will Durst at a Democratic function probably in 2004. I managed to catch him at a disadvantage, not intentionally but anything to get a word in. His hands were full or reaching for something in his pockets. Well maybe it was an advantage )IF[*]( you wanted to be prepared for a spit take, as he had an empty coffee cup in his mouth. So I tried out a joke that had come to me. "If corporations are people, where does the death penalty fit in?" So, he was polite or inconvenienced enough to laugh, if I recall correctly, with the cup still in his mouth.

Where do we go from here, the Turkey table? Well... have a good one[!]?

Post Game:
Stieglitz and Krugman new paradigm or paramorphology. Lexical creativity, texts and contexts.

Speaking of Turkeys or even the country[!] {t}=tangent slash criss cross or Relative Exceptionalism, or satire and witch[!]came first, the satire or the jihad? Thanks to Joseph Campbell...

Reader Supported News: The Sharia Turkey
The American Thinker: Happy Halal Thanksgiving
Rob McKenna
Literally in that order. The McKenna ad was found in the American Thinker link, which was in the RSN link, which was from TPMMuckraker. My original intent was to track the satire. Which came first the halal or the peta? Well more correctly in who was sat iring whom? I mean is this really along the lines of the war on Xmas? The FOX in the hen(turkey) house? I mean sat ire[!] at the table! No not IRE but pass the trip to fane.

Actually, I am trying to find something in common*. But I must check the history of halal** and the people for the ethical treatment of animals. The only point in common may be the freedom to choose, another brand, and that may be sharia. Am I carving the irony or just stuffing the turkey?

*Geller and PETA?
** Sharia and hunters: healthy treatment of food
[*] typo original is to IF.

Follow-up

And post insert.[Update]

Old Digs: Slate on Health Reform

Case Study:
If his crime is so clear he should be prosecuted, but that is part of the problem. Part of the constitution involves treaties being the law of the land. I did not get into the particulars of his charges but his treatment is possibly a violation as well. If his intent or principle was to be a whistle blower for international crimes, he should have been more select, not that he would not have to face justice just the same. The likely reason he can't face justice is our country can't face justice. So I am saying that even if he thought he had principles he should not have done what he did. And even if he does, he must face trial, but then there is the difficulty of exposing more by allowing him a defense and having to defend the country. So I do not willy nilly and neither do the PsySR expect that there not be standard treatment for traitors,(which it seems has been gone beyond) but if this is it, then that is another exposure and point of my so called Case Study...Justice and American Exceptionalism.

A calling of Blues and Jazz?

Under the QCON this is a ramble of sorts and news. There is a common thread in the contact of the tangent being others only lightly referenced or embedded.

P.S. A particular charge(PC?) that one side makes is that the otherside has not read bills. I posit two concerns. Have they read the bill? Of course it is valid that they do not have the time sometimes. But why not at least mention what they have issue with. This of course this is especially related to the second link in this post. I will not be reading all of these things, but we can sometimes let others be our filters.

[BREAKING: Not to Lampoon*, but up on READING?]
*no pun intended but this just in my INBOX and upon reading makes it back to the P.S.[and just prior...an update]

[There is more than a Ribble run through this, and it is not just Dialogue or Dialectic, nor wordplay intended, but it seams** American Exceptionalism.]
** see Labels

[In a less uniting manner Thom Hartmann comes through again, not that there is anything wrong. But he does correct a name and give some party history.***]

*** Thom has altered his course in regard to pronouncing Boehner's name despite the principle it was founded on, Bane or Democratic Republic. It is interesting that Jefferson and Lincoln are involved in the history of party name changes. BTW: would it be too far fetched to call the No Labels Party, the Platonic Party? It is not really a party, but then it might be the latest niche in the evolution. I came to this in a reflective(read bounce) way. Would it be right to call them The Republic Party?

Two Birds

Under No Illusions...
or dot com or one stone.
There is no rejoicing in the FOX and the Badger** events, or Beck's* and Walker's travails.

* see FOX under "up"
**recall/recounts
[nor one flock]

[PAST THREE POSTS: Postal and back again.]

[UPDATES]
Friday April 08, 2011
[The Test of Post Links or Leaps.(See under stone above)]
[To parse later: "the world's best hope"..."idealists and pragmatists"..."that the world would improve"..."dissipated in the Romantic"..."secular missionaries"..."the imperial age"..."continued to enlarge". "These then are the antecedents." "Does the U.S. indeed occupy..." "Is it merely our superior military..."

It is unfortunate that the political discourse these days dictates that you can't love your country if you don't believe in its exceptionalism. Such oversimplification is one of the reasons why national campaigns focus on symbolic language instead of substantive problems and the alternative plans candidates propose to resolve them sensibly.

Exceptionalism seems to mean, "We lead, others follow." Instead, let's try: In spite of our commanding power, we lead judiciously by consulting with allies and seeking widely agreed-upon solutions to international crises. Can't America be unique among nations without dictating? That seems to be the true articulation of President Obama’s view of the contested term

speaking of one beak]
[Drawing the line.]

In the begining

was the word
The word* was Exceptionalism.
So it goes.[**]
But that depends on what your definition of "it" is. I am just saying, it all depends on what your definition of "exceptionalism" is.
We are the greatest! But it depends on what your definition of "greatest" is. And so it stops for some or goes round and round.

Reality aside...a definitive follow up.
Speaking of mixing it up. "Why can't the president acknowledge the value of an unexpressed thought? Thank You Tucker Carlson on FOX!
P.S. Vikings over Vick!

[*] Tumulty
[**] see the irony of origins in the French connection.
[Re: Niching a will to labels or change?]

FN/FP erization?

11-14-14 platonics(b.s.), co-op(T)ed, where T= "A Deeper Mess Age." of (fp3-erization)
no f 'n p4. where p3= axis of good(ow) ? 'n p4~erization ~> Rat Races Van Mices? ,(fp), (fp), Un-Social Darwinism. , Try Angle , (mee) [axis of good : Exceptionalism and the Slippery Slope , I.Q.* (draft) , Red Bull... ]

F'n 8ing[!]

 [Original intent:  FOOTNOTES PAGE TWO OCTOBER 2014 ]
10-27-14: The Age of Fed Upism TRYAngel8ing to CNN (FN?) Epicyclical Poet Tree , Punderous Ponderings , C? D? Gitmo or less.

NOTE: BlogSpot Change in Scheduling OpShuns.  i.e. No BL8ted change of D8s..**
(FNx)=Footnotes Pages(FN1,2,3,! ? x...) 

CALM PEN DIUM [!] OF SORTS.*
RE: F'n~/= ... furc8ing ! ...

** Footnotes Page One.
Footnotes Page Two
Footnotes Page Three
(FN?)

*To sort later (CALM PEN DIUM)
** bifurcation of irritation C~Note.

Monopsony? Huff Poe M-barrassmeant? 
Smerconish.  x-finity appropos.  Type-Oh. (-/-)
Economic FX! [Where's the ticket? <=still parsing ...  ! ?
NOTE: still parsing C-Type-Oh.
// Still footnoting: Who Let the Dogs Out?, (~ /~)  The Last Try Pod [!] (-/-)
2reids...  [- / -] Punderous Ponderings, b, c, d, e ~/~ Un-Exceptionalism , f.

Waking up to a New Year.

Americam Dreamer or Catsup Logging**.

Random Link Off My Desktop Top.*

*Not Exactly (it caught my eye)
** the order is now less lucid(or snoozing)

[speaking*** of two birds or mulberry rings.]
*** to be M-bedded or un
[p.s. you google so I don't have to (b.s. ), not to mention SCroll over, click or fun with labels]

Ribble?^ Marbles Clogs or American Exceptionalism.
(fn) Based on a Lucid Experiment (not really the source^^ but a punchline of sorts)
AC-DC?

^last insert
^^ but for "really","source" inserts

[Note parallel or geometric of some sort of sub-titles.  It might also be noted that I had only saved the *link, not listened to it that I recall.]

---   ---  BAM [!] --- ---
Hecuva derivative on two progressive New Year's reruns.  Ed & Thom!(and freedom of  association)

HiTetra!

An uncross rhodes of:
High Ate Us*
&
Tetra Heed Ron?**

Not to mention European[!]
And American Exceptionalism.


*speaking of Al Gore (v. doll) Rhythms
** my original intent ? 
X***
Y
Z
dt?

[!] = cubed?

*** not 2 we gee!
[actually not too kill two birds, but:
A. the "not" Thom Hartmann video s/b updated to 8-30
B.  so 2 the "too".]

[Plainly: Drifter *(my B.P. was originally 8-30)
Lastly: C-Level  See sarcasm of lifting boats also 8-30.]

[Twain ** & *** is a trippy 4a,
 but I must footnote 2d, or we've 2 ideas.  A.  bailouts  B.  bushes and birds  Not to be three B Nor are R R. BTW: literally but I will QL that...]

Obtusity?

Not Here.(Kay label added)
Nor Here.
But in context the former Here is the proper angler.

In a less embedded aside, Leonard Pitts Jr. hits the nail on the head of American Exceptionalism.

In another arena, a friend noted how trustworthy FOX and Bill O'Reilly are. Well, 28% and 9% are far from a margin of victory unless you are looking for an American Icon. NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and ABC combine for 29% while CNN's Cooper and Blitzer match O'Reilly's 9%, and the a4mentioned other network's hosts(Matthews, Brokaw, Couric and Sawyer tied) combine for 12%. So it is only in the winner[*] take all, not knowing what it takes world, where follow the leader matters. Now that is a real Laffer Curveball! Or is it?

[Then there is Pawlenty of problems. Bottom line: if money is a maker then tax it as much as labor. That is an inverse paradox or maybe praximoron.]
[The bottom line is obliquity with intent.]
[Sub** Text]

** asterisks apply to that link, but is not the missing link, but does fit the leadership narrative over people.
[*] boo yeah! Stewart boosts O'Reilly's ratings(**), which likely rigs poll. i.e. maybe FOX viewers are more fair and balanced when the left is presented.
(**) I don't have the Nielsen ratings but it might be reflected in the poll.
[Footnote: scroll over some links for some understanding, but unfortunately links that may need clicking on do not last forever. Hence I hope to be less obtuse but no less oblique in the future. There should be no joy in mud-ville, as the outcome of the NY26th shows, as divided meta(for) prevails. But to unembed these analogies, the Ryan plan was the issue in the divide to lose in New York, 48% takes it, while the issue will next be before the U.S. Senate with Democrats in the majority and Republicans faced with laying their votes on the line. Some will leave the sinking ship, diluting the lemonade. If I may make a few Truman references it is not a direct analogy, but hanging their votes on their necks will be like dividing to conquer.]
[Meanwhile Up-Date]
[Speaking of not Truman--something about:

If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.

With my lemon twist on it:

If it's a choice between a genuine Moderate, and a Moderate in Republican clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Democrat before they will a phony Moderate(update 10-11-2011), and I don't want any phony Moderate candidates in this campaign.

OK, it loses a little bit of it's zest, but that is the nature of the slippery-slope, trickle down, lemonade, mudville.]

[Update 12-8-11 The Last Word? As it seemed to line up.]

Holding Pattern

For last post see bottom link.
Last update, in this case SAME.

Last major comment.
[Raw Story Ron Paul "exceptionalism" heading? or Rubes teaser.]

Huckabee [update]

I have yet to see someone[*] make a point about the American Exceptionalism issue in regards to the Mau Mau history of Mike Huckabee, Birther Debate aside.

Well actually I found at least one...embedded in bold above, the rest I have yet to read.

[* 3-4-11 Not originally intended as a variant of "some people" which some media(FOX) are want to use as sources. It was more conversational in indicating that I had not heard anyone make the point that Mike Huckabee is implying that there was no British Empire, by defininition imperial. I may or may not get back to reading any of the rest.][Wonkette under Mike notes the "imperial" problem, as well as the Washington Post under Huckabee in 2nd update. Here is a Salon piece on Hucakbee and his Story-telling-in-Chief beliefs.]

FOOTNOTES PAGE DECEMBER 2013

Begun 12-3-13

12-1-13:(sc) math problem un4m~ulated. (NFRY)
12-2-13(cont.) Too Random... Righty? 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (the point ?)
[4 the record : 3 squared? ]
12-3-13: Parallel [!] un-Pink Floyd, He- /^\ , van-NO JOKE, ven-Rough Philosophy, Cry- / Star Chamber Revisited, river- / creek ? 

rtd 12-3-13

Retrieved from draft 12-13-13
State Theory <- heading // lede -> and duality // trinity/body  Headings and^ Leadership*. (dynamics)
  ^    of/or 8:  Snooze/Dream(4,6) *prof(it)C? (7,8) Bane or Right?  [Not to blog both ends against the middle.]
Don’t celebrate yet!: Why Boehner won’t really ditch the right-wing nutjobs. /  The Christian right wants civilization to collapse / (3/5) Head ~ Lead Paul Krugman: The GOP’s austerity agenda is winning / My critics have “income envy”: Ed Schultz unloads after backlash to his union quote 
Dual / nd: When will the media learn? Conservatives are not “centrists”! / 3 essential (and ignored) questions about Detroit’s bankruptcy  Try Ad of Caution?  (not fully read yet) (anachronistic construction) (duel conflation)~ (bc: bubble critics)  OW Hegel ~ Liebniz [!]
RTD


12-23-13 (4) A.  Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications., B. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! c. Snooze Alarm d. Tony Baloney e. WWW Wisconsin Lesson? f. We Need Ed  g, What's good for the goose...

12-27-13 
12-28-13 1 Was Wittgenstein Right? or behind [?^] 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 9  // 10 / 11
^ insert a - h
12-29-13 - Original 5 links.  A. Frank O File? B. Pi cAP Delta rOW(USC) C. 1. Inverse Reality?,  2.(i), 3. Fair and Balanced..., D. Wittgenstein , E. Re-Mix  ///
12-30  F.rough- 1. Punderous Ponderings , 2. State of Politics , 3. A Revolution? 4.Un-Exceptionalism 5.  , G.notes^ -1. 2.Heuristic Concurrence and  3.My Respects to Those who Celebrate. (re-search*) , H.math^^ - 1. Too Random... , 2., 3.Bury the lede?, 4. ROW MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)] . *(under the case of not fully read yet, but back to math... why now 16?  too cubed by two? Speculation that the 5th perspective is from apart too pun? The three-body problem regards intitial circumstances from within or without. R 1st 3 models different than recently added.  The pow#r of i(V)?