Memorial Day

In honor of those who died for our cause.
Just what is our cause? Is it the body of political thought arising from John Locke or Thomas Hobbes? As Thom Hartmann summarizes the alternative, that man is either basically good and merits his freedoms or that man is basically evil and needs restraint. The latter (Hobbes) wrote of this in The Leviathan about the need for a powerful state to restrain what even religion failed to check. Thom's guest, Michael D. Tanner, author of Leviathan on the Right

It is my view that The New Leviathan is actually The Corporation ** (circa Globalization * ). But the bottom line is that the nature of man (and I leave the nature of women aside)is a duality. Now the nature of woman may be the countebalance or lacking component, for are we not talking the balance of good and evil and the scale of justice depending on the notion of competition and cooperation.

Now the above may be too metaphorical. But for more to sort:

The Logic of "Leviathan": Moral and Political Theory of Thomas Hobbes.

Natural Right and History

Note: Being Memorial Day, The Thom Hartmann Show was a "best of". But this post is realtime, yet closes an interesting loop. The Leviathan in my mind was not a monster, but just a creation of man called government, while the corporation is also a creation of man and not supernatural, nor/let alone an individual. What would more honor the dead, than to know what we are fighting for?

* [the corporation / globalization loop and the part we play or don't]

[** May 25th, 2009: Corporations are only the Leviathan in terms of the fear that is implied from something big as the state is to be feared when unchecked. But they are both necessary within limits.]
[10:39 AM The Rhetoric of Leviathan led me to further summarize (rhetorically), what is the connection? "Hard work" as in "War is"... and who does it and what is the nature of the state of economics?]

Schiller, Schelling, Shell Lacking and Schopenhauer*?

(1864-1917) Humanism, How is "exactness" possible*?
(1775-1854) Transcendental Idealism
Newtonian venn?**

* I will do little more than indicate Schopenhauer's relation to Hegel under Runes, let alone Schlick.(The Construction of Theories)
** Hobbes Squaring the Circle pre-Newton/Liebniz.

Ribble? re: nacre?
Hint?

12-27-13 Hobbes (b.s.)^  and Schlick(wiki) links inserted.

^ A(2) ? genre fishing ? ! ?

Pre-Mod L? (1588-1679)(1642-1727)(1646-1716)  So there was some overlap. Hobbes was mocked for trying to square the circle pre-calculus or pre-hyperbolic geometry. ? ! (lost roots ! ? [a, b, c ] ) (spoiler alert => OW do not scroll)

The Nature of the...

Beast,

and I don't mean the daily "blank"*

I mean the media.**

It fails if it fails to get our attention.

And good news*** doesn't sell.

*youtube segue

** no TP

**(Ctrl F logic)

[The three T's? Paine, Hobbes and Doubting.]

[The longest punchline, or copyright violation...before I forget, I better finish the sentence.

BTW: Did Howard Dean make a Freudian slip on The Last Word?]

[BTW 2.0: Going Postal takes on a new light. Just ask American Airlines. Just ask Congress. Speaking of Raw Money Class... and Florida... what about instant runoff voting? Romney is A, Gingrich and Paul are B and C. ]

[2-2-12 link added to bold sentence above. Mint Raw Money(thanks to Norman Goldman) violated possible copyright(thanks to Rachel Maddow) in using "self deportation" of Daniel Deportado. ]

Obama - Clinton?

Dream Team?

vs.

the Nightmare team?
TO BE DETERMINED

[Update: NOT inserted in perspective of 1st link above.
Flip-Flopper-Crafting
Or Bogeyman sighted. Or Hobbes Goblin?
Not to mention Escalus or Escalate
And again possible thanks goes to Rachel Maddow and her stand in, David Bender not that I pull in all of the web they weave but meaning I only caught and pulled a thread, was it something about Camelot?]

A Tail of Caution

Not that I intend to wag the dog,
but doggin' the wags? (fn)

I will let U SC [!]**

On a more mundane line, or mudlane^ nine...
I reference the "hack list" per se not the characters or authors. *

Bazinga!  It's a culture thing !
Knot so Random Guy!

How'zabout Smith Zoning Limits?
ven under draft: (Hobbes~Locke~Newton~Liebniz~  ?Swift)

My mocumentary* was not intent on this Web of Charlotte or EB' n flo ...
I stepped in it. ^

"Never let...
 

...a good caption go to Hegel?
a good crisis go to waste."

* "~"
^  '~'
 ~   = alternate reference/legend 2b evolved
i.e. anachronistic or non linear notations.

**/(fn) irony:
(1) deja vu?  
(2)  alter wing?
(3) alter hacks
(4) nature calls? (FP)

Breitbart Lives!

Not exactly the Starting Point, but Soledad O'Brien "clashes" with Big Journalism** Editor-in-Chief over "critical race theory" and a with-held video.

It almost seems that CNN* is a wannabe FOX or MSNBC.

It is more than swift iron knee that FOX has any concern for material being with-held.

* not to single out or be overly critical of CNN or Soledad O'Brien, but they do seem to be competing for "fair and balanced" between the other two "news" networks. FOX is the veritable "you started it" network. The media was too liberal so they had to have a "fair and balanced" take on their reality. Making room for MSNBC as a counter force. CNN has the real challenge trying not to be either, but still news or journalism in a market environment.

**[aka Raw Money Dot Com or Culture War in context and con text !]

[More perspective or not ? OOPS!]

[It's Alive !]

[in balance here is more]

[3-9-12 Tocqueville lives?*** And so does Calvin and Hobbes?

*** promo(not found) for "Up" balances de Tocqueville's intent.

[BTW: if corporations are people, should they also have...reproductive rights? Please note that I self-edited the last(see cartoon) health reference. (i.e. founding mother of all probes or ultra-sounds?)]

[3-14-12: The Ed Show, The Last Word. Who needs Spin? ]

Calvin...

and Hobbes or
Pee Wee Pulpit?
[Infinity in Retrospect] i. e. "and back again"

Re: Ribble to Read? See Obsolescence.

[To the heart of the matter... see "also"@who knows!]
My direct meaning is that if they read the full context there is nothing to fear but fear itself, but that brings back Roosevelt too clearly for some. Even if they don't like either Teddy or Franklin speaking of Red.