Turning the page (On Humor)?

[For orginal post go here]
- - - - - - - - - - - -
(Seriously)

Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battlefield), (1)
I must look back.

Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front, (2)
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes. (3)

But communications * - is a tricky field. (4)
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry. (5)

So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.

And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue (6)
and used it as a weapon himself?
Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?
OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.

*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[left behind: reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)

[this is the clutter I noted being added]
(1)footnote to other fields
(2)and this and more
(3) see middle link in particular
(4) trickle on
(5) or not (speaking of spelling) intended?
(6) this may be the final embedded version, I must now better filter the McCain speech that triggered this (these)Turning the Page(s); the humor and potential for change.

Turning the Page (2.0)

Turning the page (On Humor)?
[The following is the clean version(original)[*] : meaning I intend to clutter the above link]
(Seriously)
Not being a black man,
not being a white woman,
not being THAT old,
not being a vet
(of the battle field),
I must look back.

Well I may not really
have that much time.
But on the humor front,
has a page been turned?
Have I spoken for others?
Sometimes I have borrowed perspectives,
and tried to put myself in other's shoes.

But communications* is a tricky field.
And just as the above categories
represent perspectives on power,
if this has seemed like a dance,
(or flip-flop if you will)
it could be said, it is hard not to step on toes.
And maybe the best way of not tripping ***
is to bring a little lightness,
to what some see a burden
and others try to proudly carry.

So I tread carefully now to note,
that the campaigns have represented
issues that involve race, gender, age and militancy
and there is hope that they have
vetted the world for the battles to come.

And speaking of vets, McCain** is an example of
blurring these lines, possibly to cross them.
No intended pun on the cross, but on humor
has he vetted himself of the age issue and
used it as a weapon himself? Weapon or tool,
are humor and associations,
instruments that we wish to have left behind?- [*]OK, maybe I saw that coming,
but that is what too many say.

*originally: "humor", changed to "politics", then landed on "communications"
** I wrote this based on hearing portions of the speeches of Obama, Clinton and McCain. I would like to provide the links, but should note that McCain triggered the categorical humor-ism. Will that take me back to Kant?
*** "balancing" changed to "not tripping" to carry a metaphor on more levels
[note that as guideposts to editing, asterisks represent the sequence of changes]
[*] -left behind - reading is much of what gets left behind, and I must confess not being a reader of that much of the material that I might touch on, but a hint or association may be worthy here --or not worthy-- profitable prophets.]
[Inspired Voter has two of the speeches, and is McCain in the foxhole?or dug in?]
[And finally (from where this started) I must excuse myself for my not being able to follow live the night's events and full context of the speeches, but I was myself in the trenches dealing with grass tips politics, and those that are experiencing what others just analyze.)
[*] except for speech links

Not Exactly

Random (not so) links:
Beck Ed:
Bachman Palin Express How's that new normal working for ya?
the Apostle Paul in letters
Cognitive Policy Works?
Obsolescence?

Of hate or humor?
Media Matters?

As a personal recipient of the Palin humor or bumper sticker advice, I have a suggestion: advice does not fit on a bumper sticker and apparently not even in your rallies.

I was at a metered on ramp and a white SUV was aside me, with the character driving smiling and speaking through my slightly open window on a beautiful day. As I smiled and rolled down my window, he said: "How's that hopey changey thing working out for ya?" (To be honest I am not sure that he or I now have it correctly spelled or quoted.) I flashed an even bigger smile and a vigorous thumbs up, and he continuted: "Are you a commmunist or do ya just vote for them?" To which I replied: "Are you kidding or(?)" ...we moved on. But that guy did not know who he was messing with (someone who knows better*)... someone with a sense of humor and a sense that righteousness is a lack of faith. (I just came up with that, as I really had some wise cracks, some even appropriately expletive(Tea "partier")adjusted. Speaking of what's in the bag. I have mysteriously completed a loop as to who or what is working? I will call that my Ribble of Intelligent Design at which I will give the links by number.

{It might take a while to sort out the serious, but I do emphasize the jest or just nature, rather than any unintended vitriol(wiki google branch: ethereal.) or Con Sequences. See Comment.]

Less than raw links:
catharsis
RE:Schadenfreude
Gloom at other's successes.

Raw links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Thessalonians
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Thessalonians+3&version=NIV
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_was_Paul_in_the_Bible
http://www.gotquestions.org/twelve-apostles-disciples-12.html
http://sunandshield.wordpress.com/2007/08/04/is-the-apostle-paul-one-of-the-12-disciples/

* in the particular case I am a minority (OK, I did not take the poll, but it is hard to believe it is representative of the truth. That would mean a thumbs up for the media, and I don't know what for congress.) But that is really cherry picking.

[Speaking of Bridge or post lonesome roads or sections of a train?.]

Arrow of Time

or Symmetry of Inheritance?
Thanks to Keith Olbermann and
FOX News for the
Trifecta of Bad Times.
An end to an error, and the flip-flop of freedom as not a force but a purpose that requires work. There will be no end to humor or force for humility, as it is no longer funny that Comedy Central has more News and more balance. With inspiration I acknowledge the difficulty in laying down the tools of sarcasm and satire, but I will try to remember more than just the hope in this day of transition.

And maybe Biden can even aspire with a nod to Sarah Palin
and even Dick Cheney, to work with congress.
As far as leadership, and OBAMA
the time has come for change.

[Approximate closing of this post: 10:20 BG (before google)]
[update: 10:45 no end to humor or force for humility (links added and seemingly proof of some sense or other)]
[Please note that I DID NOT find it funny that Chief Justice Roberts could not get the oath straight.]
[I originally misreported it as Trifecta of Bad News]

[Update 1-21-09] to be sure see above: There will be no end to humor or force for humility...links to video of original Obama oath and actual oath.
[Update 1-26-09: Colbert catches it.]

Go Purple!

Red and Blue America
Must Go Purple!
What about green?

Here is a useful (although marginally) group of charts for super delegates and the overall picture of hope for Democrats. The "original intent" for this post was to direct you to an Obama purple ad that had the red and blue states going purple, speaking of McAd. But here is another a bit more technical.

Speaking of colors and humor not getting in the way. Here is my original:(letter to the editor, May 26th 2002)

Horsey's cartoon goes overboard on voters

At the risk of being obvious, I would like to comment on David Horsey's "Red & Blue America" (May 19). For the sake of humor, it went overboard in its characterizations of those who voted for George W. Bush or Al Gore. I hope it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other.

I hope the humor can be less dividing than the colors pinned on Gore and Bush. It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without green being a factor in making us see red.

(This demonstrates how a careful read and one word can jinx or preempt a meaning or change. And again "it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other." and not torture meaning like the editor did to my piece by changing green to color, "not that there is anything wrong with that", but it does narrow the course and change the meaning.)

Re-Con-Texting Cain and Able

To start out with, I am behind the times a bit here and had gotten my earliest news through the filter of Air American Radio, [KPTK-1090-Seattle] and the likes of Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, and Al Franken. Randi Rhodes fits in there somewhere but I just may have missed her in the last few days.

So let me start at the end, as far as most recent sources first.
"Cain" a reference in a Keith Olbermann take.
Then back to Able(not a Bible reference) but as Kerry the able veteran.

Last email cut-and-paste first: This topic "...is one of the fronts that the current battle is being waged, we are taking them from the flank. I don't know the military terms, is that right? Maybe we are just giving them the shovel to keep digging."

Previous post script, as readers and friends may "...well know, I have quite a bit of experience reacting to or trying to make sense out of humor. There is a fine line between truth and the humor and it often hurts. But the reaction to this humor seems to be hiding the truth behind the troops, which is routine for this administration. 'Most people' have enough trouble making sense out of Bush, let alone the truth. When they are one and the same, 'Bush' and 'let alone the truth' it is a greater danger. All this focus on Kerry's choice of words, if the media and the Democrats had had such a machine against the Republicans, we would all be in less danger."

See link: end of this post, to be continued.

Who gets it?

Not the helium but the humor.
Rep. Grayson has a sense of humor and deals with serious issues on Bill Maher's RealTime.

[Back in the Box:(my comment forestalled by login difficulties)

I believe (Jiu Jitsu in Afghanistan) does fit into his "despise"(d) "left-right boxes"(metaphor) more than the writer understands. And also less into the martial arts metaphor than he also understands. To me, there is difficulty equating(or rather comparing) war with diplomacy and yet there is also an intelligence factor that differs. To mix boxes (or analogies might be better), you have Rumsfeldian intelligence and then there is what is really out there * . War obviously relies more on secrecy, while diplomacy relies more on openness, however you will still have those that play a war game, whether in or out of the box or whether they are with us or against us.

This is more than self-fulfilling loopiness.]

* potential inconcatenation** of intelligence and fear mongering or not being as out of the box or martial artistic as thought

** or is it deconcatenation***, but math and logic aside?

*** or unstrung Tao of Zen (in google we coin... a new word and failed)
[Third times a charm? Unconcatenation not.

Broken News.

Imus is history on MSNBC?
That reminds me of a joke I came up with about those that fail to learn from history, repeating it. President Bush should have repeated English and math as well. OK!
Is humor the topic? Well Imus claimed his context as close to an excuse after being relatively up front in his apology.

I almost feel sorry for Imus, seeing what he has going down the drain. But that is the difference in perspectives. There is free speech and personal conduct, but that does not mean it has a right or need to be distributed and at a profit no less. And there is a difference between having an opinion and using it to describe individuals compared to describing one's perspective on history and raising questions that could and should be addressed.

Maybe advertisers will consider more carefully their own opinion on what controversial means. It seems that advertisers may be slightly disingenuous or just woke up to the idea that there may a problem profiting from controversy, not that there is anything wrong with that.

I will close with this commentary/humor: It seems that "the left" is often guilty by association, while "the right" is excused by lack of association with much reality or just passing the buck.

Lemon or Orange?

Or Green*? Why vote?
Ralph Nader asks: Why say yes to the party of no? The answer is, one shouldn't.

*"At the risk of being obvious..." began my letter to the editor, but I guess I went underboard.

Horsey's cartoon goes overboard on voters
At the risk of being obvious, I would like to comment on David Horsey's "Red & Blue America" (May 19). For the sake of humor, it went overboard in its characterizations of those who voted for George W. Bush or Al Gore. I hope it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other.
I hope the humor can be less dividing than the colors pinned on Gore and Bush. It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without Green or any other color being a factor in making us see red.**
[Please note the bold "Green or any other" was struck by the editor, apparently not obvious enough that Nader was the Green party, (and green)the almighty buck and envy. And these days if you need a Tea Party pallet, just smear the colors and brown with hints of purple works nicely.]

** if you want more anger and debt don't vote
[Speaking of info wars]

Third Times A Charm?

Or one too many mulligans?
(the rough, the fairway or the green)

David Horsey: "without green being a factor in making us see red."

Horsey's cartoon goes overboard on voters

At the risk of being obvious, I would like to comment on David Horsey's "Red & Blue America" (May 19). For the sake of humor, it went overboard in its characterizations of those who voted for George W. Bush or Al Gore. I hope it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other.

I hope the humor can be less dividing than the colors pinned on Gore and Bush. It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without green being a factor in making us see red.

[Personal Note:  See bold and italics bold. For apparently the italicized irony, "green" was replaced by "colors" by the editors.]  Not to condi send but, Nader was a factor along with chads.


More on Boehner and jobs later. i.e. the success and pop(ularity) of congress

The other ground game...

<*>

I am for some reason unable to put my usual* into this lately.
Not to quote Martha Stewart but it might be a good thing, or I just have other things.

I have two submissions saved in draft:
IMHO ^
Turn Around(F'N 3.0)
Time Stamp: 8:19 10-9-12

*  Don't you mean refreshingly in accord with "your perception" of reality?  OUCH.  I did not mean to hit so close to the bone of reality or nuance, just making a preemptive comment based on a reading of the first few sentences, where the logic seems... interestingly framed to say the least.  And while I might read more, I might not have more to say.  It just seems to fit a playbook of sorts that may or not be written but is my "perception" of familiar tactics.  BTW:  Sorry "F" "bailed"^^^ so-to-speak,but I will not feel the need to fill his loss.  

OCCUPY FACT-CHECKERS**
Yeah... that's the ticket.*** 

** well... the anachronism of my asterisks is my usual (as well as links inserted)
***  To the Obama campaign: an unembedding of diplomacy and humor, stay the course (Ctrl "F" 'n zingers.)   Far be it from me^^ to tell people not to be them, but I don't think Joe Biden will go overboard with humor, I think he will be taking things serious.  Make it about congress, and bi-partisanship, and the dynamics of cooperation and compromise, without being too patronizing.  Substance seems to be the football that the Republicans Lucy to our Charlie Brown.  
    
^ posted(and links added) post-time-stamp
^^ latest M'bed (The irony is steep.)
^^^ FB link removed @*

I haven't done the math..

or the English...
But there is something difficult about this humor The Solution to the Budget Deficit: The Peter G. Peterson Intergenerational Fairness Tax Credit
and this (Eye of Be)Holder... justice.

Maybe some have but I would estimate that a grade level or three or degree or more would be required to understand the economics and the context of Dean Baker and Eric Holder.

BTW: Just because something is written so, does not mean, so it is received. For there is a difference between a grade level and a grade, just as there is a difference between a rise and a slippery slope. I don't know if humor is easier to understand than economics or justice, but it might not tell you who is getting it.

Dottering..."- "Drawn and Quartered"?

Is it below the belt to pick on McCain and his age?
Is not the GOP, The Grand Old Party?
Nevertheless, such humor is offensive.
But is not so much humor?
Not to excuse, but here is
Rick Perlstein on McBushonomics
with a reminder that "drawn and quartered" is an unfortunate choice,
but figurative is the better choice than literal,
even if we can't know if literal is actual.
[...with McCain. (nfry)

..."and thanks for asking, ha!"] I guess his nervous laughter is just that he could not stop himself, much as Bush really appreciates it when he is asked a good question.

[4-27-08: quotation marks added, as these are not my words]

Pre-empting Crimes

Remember: Humor is a tool and so is the dictionary.
While Bill Clinton hinged his excuses on "what the definition of 'is' is". The current administration has pre-empted excuses by hinging humor and the dictionary on "what the definition of everything is".

Abuse of power is the issue. While Clinton was investigated and found to have hinged his evasion of his abuse of an intern, Nixon was investigated and found to have covered up his abuses on the national level, and Bush pre-empted abuses on the international level. But now what Bush has done to get us "over there" will congress investigate too much "over here"?

If the above is too hard to follow, then try this:
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act: S. 1959 Here is the TEXT

While the above is the senate bill by the same name here is the House version which passed: H.R. 1955

While I did read the latter, the former will be discussed on The Thom Hartmann Show. [See Update]
AM1090 Seattle 9 AM to noon

`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS.
`In this subtitle:

`(1) COMMISSION- The term `Commission' means the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism established under section 899C.

`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.

I hate to alert any potential terrorists but do not these definitions pertain to The Project for the New American Century ? It may be a section that united the vote for this bill, while an understanding of it, would certainly mean to change it.

[Earlier Posted Comment here:
Earlier radicals there:
Jefferson-

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.Goldwater-

[Same Day Update: After posting the above I found this on Slate Bad Ideas]

[Update The Thom Hartmann Show: 11/29/07 ]
[11-29-07: TruthOut]

GOP-GAP

NOT!
Whether it the Grand Old Party or the Grand Oil Party there is no GAP filled by Governor Palin. OK, some executive experience. And she's human, they had to say.

OK, maybe we are both stretching things a bit. But this is serious. She did a fine job presenting a fine speech and a fine life story, after Reverend Rhetoric ** presented his fine rendering.

All in all it was a fine show that was very inspiring to the base who have faith in something beyond facts.

Governor Palin[*] has an inspiring way about her. It is the energy and her certainty that is her strength. Unfortunately, her selection seems to be aimed at the Plexiglas ceiling. There may be cracks in it, but when you are on top, you can say anything and still be standing on it. My original panic was that Biden's fire and humor would be tempered against a woman. But given her own fire and humor, and my original panic being sexist, he should give her all he's got. They are already complaining about the media, and unless she expects some affirmative action or pity, she should be able to stand on her own.

[*][9-4-08: Heck, even the above link has fallen for the flip-flop on the press ***. Granted the press was in McCain's corner or they were off the plane and missing the barbecues. (I have no confirmed reports of either.) But the flip-flop that the "mother lacked the soaring oratory skills of Obama", to the "calm, TV-friendly tones reminiscent of Ronald Reagan", belies her joke about "the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull" and her "beat and a smirk" lipstick.(I took liberties to finely edit this.)]

[I watched most of what I watched on C-Span, and bounced in and out of MSNBC, but did catch a bit of grousing about the timing of the speeches, not allowing for the media filtering. While I did not watch equal amounts of the two conventions or networks, they were probably right that the speeches were more tightly timed, but it seemed that MSNBC had filtered and missed several of the Dem ones anyway. So I could not tell if MSNBC gave equal time or equal filtering for both convention's speeches. Imagine, the convention speeches were getting in the way of the pundits "filtering". I noticed with the first convention the flip-flop, but they actually brought it up. Deleted reference to "moose gun" here. Audience: Aahhhh. Sarcasm there, but to the point, I don't know if the media is falling for or intentionally validating, the whining that comes from the Good Old Patronizing Party, but I think the brilliant selection of Palin was to preempt and to stay the course.]

** [these are chronologically added and I use the word Rhetoric as a compliment. Huckabee had a zinger of his own and Biden "Whoa"good show, fine "lines" and "heckuva" job.]--[I must add between the lines or just plain more lines: it is about leadership, not just being an executive, and intelligence, but more about who and how it is filtered.]

*** bold added and where I may have gotten fine but was filtered through MSNBC.

Simon says 2 point or...?

2 the N'th of infinity.




Simulphile:
A: The Hill on Benghazi-gate.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f .
g .*
h .
i .

j .

...

Z:  Stench to the N'th.

* preemptive asterisk speaking of ...
(Work in progress A-G-Z, not to Simonize but to file for later.)

To pre-paraphrase or Simon-eyes.  Will Romney have a debate winning joke? 
Will the Republicans in congress do to foreign policy what they have to the economy? 
Choose partisanship uber politics?**

[Footnotes under construction, meanwhile rolling blog search:  Bully Pour-Mitt, or ...  (7-4 to 6-6 )]

**[10-2-12] Thanks to my Bane or Tan Gents, I almost forgot the punchline. Will an attempt at humor have us laughing with Romney or at Romney?  Of course might be directed at Obama but will it be with us or against us?  I can't rule out self-depricating humor but I don't think that will really help him given his etch-a-sketch leaks.  But Walking like an Egyptian Bush will not really do any of us any good. 

NOW: Exception to the Rule?  Fox / Hedge-hog metaphor? (Nate Silver) Not to parse(hyphenate) a pun on hedgehog, nor out FOX the chicken-hawks.  

[I'm not sure I would suggest to the President pinning the V(for victim) on the Robbin'Hoods, but pinning the C (for compromise) on the Dawn Keys might work with almost anything regarding economics.  So try to nail the tale on the pool cue or magic 8 ball.] 
(fn)  [post footnote: Andrea Mitchell Reports Robert Gibbs on the math.]

Notes from Al-Qaeda

"The Base" a translation: "Al-Qaeda"
Actually these are just notes from June 1, 2007

The Base: Al-Qaeda
The Bottom Line: The people.
Fundamentalists: Neo-Cons

Connections? People need to be the bottom line not money. The point needs to be progress not money. Money is a tool that is needed for survival. It is not the point of it all. The same goes for power. The point of the base which Bush brought together is their view from the top, to heck with the people getting there. The same goes for their thinking, starting at the end and expecting to get somewhere else.

Note: that now I have just found a post from someone with the same title. The Base

NOTES FROM TODAY:
People Matter

A paradigm is a worldview. This is a base world view that covers everything. First there is Physics which covers the reality as we know it, and don’t know it. Then there is Psychology which is the reality as we don’t know it, unless we think about it and then we still don’t know but feel something. Then there is Philosophy which covers the reality as we know it and would be nothing without us. [8-6-07: The Physics, Psychology, and Philosophy seem to be in evolutionary order, and in existence, feeling and thinking seemed to be the order of interactions. Society or Reality as these three interact seem to be embodied in the culture that is created, which can be for or against... Justice.]

These are the primary fields which form the fourth field which depends on time and the dynamics of the other three which each depend on the other three. The only other dimension in my mind is the direction these vectors can take which are either progress or back again which is a quality of the forces on each vector. But we cannot go home again. Even the second two vectors require our presence, so the direction seems to be aimed by and for us. Which puts people and progress as the primary matters of concern, or the alternative is only the return.

Now if this is a little over your head or seems loopy, you get a little more than you know. If this seems obvious you know a little more than you think. But if you could care less, that matters too.

Now for the less obvious. Just because I read, The Base , does not mean I read all of Asimov's The Foundation Series but there are connections: numbers and Psycho-History. Numbers matter and he's got them wrong; the writer of The Base, not The Foundation Series.

Condescending note: the difference between the president and congress and their polling numbers is that congress has more than one view point, and the president has only one. He may have it on many matters, but if things are black and white, all you have to do is flip flop and choose, between the the 32% (now 29%) who support Bush and the many Candidates who will run from him but not his policies are the balance of power the 68% who if they were united would probably go down in history. The miserable ratings of congress are because there are so many alternatives to Bush's stay the course, and that numbers are divided and low because they are not resisting him enough let alone sort out their options. alternatives.

And another earlier note revisited.
David Horsey wrote a piece in May of 2002, on Red and Blue America: my reply was apparently over someones head as a main point was blurred. The green was removed for color in the bottom line. In other words, the editor replaced one word (green) with another (color).

Horsey's cartoon goes overboard on voters

At the risk of being obvious, I would like to comment on David Horsey's "Red & Blue America" (May 19). For the sake of humor, it went overboard in its characterizations of those who voted for George W. Bush or Al Gore. I hope it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other.

I hope the humor can be less dividing than the colors pinned on Gore and Bush. It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without color being a factor in making us see red.

So at the risk of being obvious again, I will give you my original bottom line.
"It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without green being a factor in making us see red.

Bold added, and at the risk of further condescension, green means money and third parties in general, not that they should not unite rather than divide. OK, I could not even keep the condescension up.

OK, I am not sure about that last double negative or even if it is, but...
The point is the difficulty in uniting, when we insist on black and white, or even red, white and blue, not to mention what we neglect, but the consequences are the result.

We have met the enemy and he is us. Well we should check the roots of this, but it seems we are the solution as well.

What are the Frackin' Odds...

it's the frackin' spin!(?)

Well actually the original intent was the timing thing.

What are the odds, if you listen to Stephanie Miller and you google, you will find. Now...actually* before I take too many tangents I will simply fade...
(but with the intent to later find three points indicate a circle.)

...but it was not a tangent, it was the punchline of the google crack above.
Rather than explain the tangent or run the odds**, I will just note the connection point of contact in Exceptionalism.

* this was an odd thing and find. Below the you listen, and you google are what I believe few knew if it is true. That when Obama was blamed for saying there were 57 states and that that was Islamic, that there were actually 57 jurisdictions in the electoral process including uncommitteds?

**run is a pun on Runes and odds is a play on THE Pythagoras WAY.
[It is awkard to reflect the actual timeline but I did finish this post, and not POST it till I remembered to POST The Tetrahedron? post.]
[And wish to note that I am very concerned about Japan, but is there ever a time to let one's guard or humor down? But all humor is not created equal, let alone meaning.]

[BTW: Is there any meaning in Frackin' being a play on words, math, and related to energy? I will let you search for that, but it is not the ribble. Nor was it my intent.]

Negative ads and apologies

Please do not mistake my humor for gloating, but it is a tool of communications. The difference between Republican and Democratic ads or communications is that Democrats have so much more material. Candidates can talk about themselves and their opponents, but there is so much more negative when Democrats do this in a balanced way, but Republicans have to start with their opponents to take it off the talk about themselves. Nuance is not necessarily any more beneficial in humor than politics, but at least it minimizes my apologies.

Here I will only apologize for my haste and nuance in the last few posts, after the few prior being more well developed. The connection is that I pledge will not change them, but add to them a bit and note when I do so.
* * *

WHEN DOES THE JOKER CROSS THE LINE?

WHAT LINE?

In the Nation section of the King County Journal, 5-5-04 (AP, by Ron Fournier). “Bush uses humor to soften Kerry criticism.”

“The President must speak clearly and mean what he says.” Bush said.

But speaking clearly does not clearly mean anything if it is not clear you know what you mean. It is not even clear if this was supposed to be humor. I have heard him answer questions very clearly and in fact repeat answers even more clearly thinking it had even more meaning that way. See why he had to appear with Cheney before the 9-11 commission.

Even in cases he knows what he means the clear words have alternate interpretations. He was a uniter not a divider, so he united the Democrats and the Arab world. Separately of course, I must be clear there is no linkage. Though there is more linkage between the U.S. and Saudi leaders. He trusts the people not the government. He did not say whom he would trust when he is in the government and not the people. Let us hope he will get clearer. I at least know I may come across obtuse, ironic and/or nuanced, which he is none of.