Who Let the Dogs Out?

Original reaction: Not to Second Guess.

This idea coalesced from a Melissa Harris-Perry(*) panel and a Jared Bernstein reaction.
What irritated me was the piling on upon Mitt Romney. The second guessing was how Jared Bernstein discusses the context he was taken out of. As the panel on MH-P continued after her weigh-in on words via Barack Obama the segment on Word Police had nothing to do with my change, but everything to do with it; change and context and victim hoods. Not to mention "quote(s) from Nerdlandia" creeping into the X-change. (The hazzards of live blogging.***) I had no clue in the "footnote" controversy.** Am I falling for the spin, that Raw Money is a victim? Or do I forget my own theory of Share 'n Angle? Not too mention differences of intents[!]
* to be updated
** to be related later[!]
*** the alternative would be more awkward[!]

7-9-12 A Hunch Revisited as Obama prepares* to speak on extending part of Bush tax cuts.
[Segue/break: the "Dogs" above are "aTax dogs"; my subtle skirt of the issue.]

Regarding the president's speech, here are my rough notes:  Jobs.. core mission... rebuilding economy...stalemate...choice two views.  Top down- wrong...typical middle class tax cuts $3600... repeat $3600 Obama midle class tax cuts... for sake of misinformation.  We tried, slowest job growth, falling income, rising deficits... we can't afford more.  [me: we 1/2 tried more or other way].  People are with him, cut small business taxes 18 times, for 97% of them.  We should agree to do what we agree on!  [poor 1%, 2% 3%]  One year extention for under $250K then we can debate the rest and act or wait till after the election.  You are the ones driving the economy.  Learn lessons of the past, build foundation for the future.

* speech here[Note that links for "A Hunch Revisited" were contemporary, not later insertions. Referencing democracy and choices of direction.]

[Andrea Mitchell follow-up here: "fiscal cliff"?** and tug of misinfo!  Deficit distraction or key?]

[Bingo was his dog!  NewsNation "big tent" not to mention simple math from idiots.  I'm sorry, but math is where the numbers lie.  It is math warfare.  But I digress. Well,* not exactly ! ** And pardon my pun but Swiss Romney Knife?]

** bit of a cycle/anachronism here*** regarding insertion of links & today's asterisks.(I may not have the right fiscal cliff clip but neither does the math add up for AM or RNC. Re:Bingo and math of the dog carrier or station waggin')

*** (rather here **) HW B? (SK re/v SE: 5:25 HW Harvy Weinstein)

[OW to Act?]
[Bingo too point OH! (see poor 1%, 2%, 3%: LR RL)]
(Anachronistically where does MB fit in here ? i.e. I can' remember where Luke Russert was nailed down.  But I think it was Martin Bashir who was asking about the 1, 2 or 3% and the previous sequence w/links does hit the nail on the understanding or aTAX jobs.)
[Hardball: David Corn to Smerconish "Sin of making sense". Then Bob's your uncle. It certainly rots at the head. MM Marshalling Message ?]

Speaking of...

Democrats Attack Iraq Security Proposal
By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 24, 2008; Page A09

Not what I was heading for but this:
Some in Party Bristle At Clintons' Attacks
Anti-Obama Ad Heightens Unity Fears
By Alec MacGillis and Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, January 24, 2008; Page A01

The Clinton campaign argued that it was simply quoting Obama. But in the original context, Obama was describing the dominance of Republican ideas in the 1980s and 1990s, without saying he supported them, and asserting that those ideas are of no use today.

Con Text?Link?

[1-25-08: UPDATE AND FOLLOW THROUGH -- Speaking of... "unity fears" (Sometimes even professionals (WaPo) can misslink their lines) But I was speaking of unity fears in my post "Clinton in South Carolina" part of which I will bring up here:

The Democrats can be united. If they are not, they are not really Democrats. Putting a Democrat in the White House is the important thing. But putting the best Democrat in the White House is the most important thing. To do that, we need the votes of not just Democrats. But that does not mean that the candidate cannot be the best Democrat as well.

To make a finer point fuzzy -- No matter what a candidate says, does not mean the voter will follow. -- Either with their vote to another candidate, or in their understanding of why they follow anything. In this last link, I was searching in the way back machine in the upper left corner for meaning (*)... or some such word I had used in the past, but I must paraphrase myself, "People may follow whether they know what you mean or not." and there are results whether we know what they will be or like them or not.

(*) "people will follow" was the needed search for meaning applied to Bush.]

It's Obama's Turn

[Keep the Change(scroll down)]

Of course.
Stay the course.
The private* sector is fine
verse US economic turn around.
[Hardball Metaphor.  Making the case.***]

* E. G. Private Equity Government
(The nuts and bolts?  If Romney cannot understand that the economy has turned around, then what will happen when he turns it around.)
[Ouch ! ]
[Politics Nation ? ]
[Whip Republicans with Reagan and Clinton!]
Thom Hartmann?
Word of tomorrow?  Pernicious.**
[Coffee Table This! The Fifth Element.]

6-10-12 Keep the Change!
Yes this is a bumper sticker for Obama!  Though the links may be a bumper sticker for Clinton or nuance.  Not that I have fully read them yet, I will try to stay the course, not to mention other threads.

6-11-12
Inconvenient Try-Angle !
NOW w/ Corny Copy Ah. "Mind the Gaffe(added 6-13)": "food fight"



Verse us Tony TruthyahKnow.

** anachronism approved:  "Perspective" was Norman Goldman's word of the day(Thursday). "Scale" was my suggestion(for Friday), and "pernicious" was my word for Monday.

6-12-12
Curb Your Enthusiasm !
[Duct Tape?  Goose Pate!]
[(Middle - Name / N SC ?)]
[ Bubble Up]

6-13-12
Jeb Bush: Walk Back ?
(Hardball)
*** link(s) added
McCain sabotage.
NOW "Picking up the Tab".

6-14-12
Keep the Change!
"Different Visions" NOW!
Past is prologue or (unpassed)Middle - Name.(Scroll-up)

Happy Birthday to us!
The Dickens We Say!
Better to look back than go back!
Preemptive Comment this AM:  Obama battles for Fiscal Reality!
Geitner is speaking on Andrea Mitchell Reports.
Andrea Mitchell pulls Geitner's leg on Romney, but he doesn't bite.

Romney wants to get it done.  He doesn't want to look back, he wants to Re-Right!  If we look back we will see his Re-Write. 
Overhang of Obamacare? 
It's coming back?
[Not to mention "No New Taxes"!  Old taxes will do fine.]
Segue: Presidents Speech to be inserted later.
[Thom Hartmann Couples Counseling/Next President will take credit for "breaking up" better economy.] Talk is cheap?

Google Works...

in Mysterious Ways!
Or YouTube [!]

Now... the rest of the Harvey, for Pete sake (and Mary).^^

What transpired this morning was opening my blog from my desktop and reading "Mysterious "(scroll over or click on).  A Ty Cobb reference was embedded in my post.  He was also embedded(earlier) in a family photo as a frame liner or stuffing in the form of a Seattle papers sports section.  His batting average was around .410 at the time.  The photo is of my grandfather on skid row. (I walk past it every day as I come down the stairs for breakfast.) But it was not our dad's Skid Road.  It was a logging camp taken by an historic*** photographer with my granfather proudly centered.    

Literal Flip-flop?**
Not to tangent.*
[sorry for the anachronistic asterisks]

Obama is Ty Cobb in the following context:

The saying "All is fair in love and war" comes to mind. A google search brought up reference to Ty Cobb’s ability to stretch the rules and was used in reference to modern business tactics. Business aside, though that is the world he^ came from, it is interesting that some^ would make more rules (whether for couples or nations) when they in particular have trouble with following those that exist.

(but on the level field of dreams.)

We are the borg, not the cable guy or Picards.


* Is of sorts a tangent, as in a recent encounter with "Proust"
** link 2 "Ways" black and white
*** the one on my wall has not been found online, but found the 3rd link under the historic*** YouTube.
^ Bush league

[In context? Not to pun.]
^^ [Post edited for Pete..."sake (and Mary)"]

FOOTNOTE:  The third link is high-lighted.  The balance is how we get there.  The Mysterious Picards the content of context.

Red Labeling!

Maybe I need to point out the irony in A Wonderful Conversation.
Baiting Obama [*]demonstrates the tactic of fear mongering.
The Republicans who label themselves the Grand Old Party really are the Red Labelers by relying on Good Old Phobias of labels.

They utilize guilt by association, but run guilty of no association. It is really fear of any meaning. FDR in his first inaugural said:

...first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.

I will point out that this was in the depth of the depression, and he points out:

In such a spirit on my part and on yours we face our common difficulties. They concern, thank God, only material things.

Now it is said about FDR, that little was know of his plans. So do not take that as any swap at or comparison to the current candidates, Democratic at least. And of course Republican plans have been shown to mean little anyway. Bush in this blog, and McCain in his Flip-Flopper-Krafting, it is plain as the red on their faces. And the only thing green is the buck which is past and the envy behind their angry red labels.

[There is nothing humorous about the situation, except that humor does present an approach which should be investigated as a cover for anger. I presented a perspective that Swift Boaters have sunk the good name of a branch of the military-- Swift Boat Veterans-- (not so directly), in The New Wave, but Andy Borowitz (thanks to Thom Hartmann) takes it to the delta.]
[*] Henceforth the bold links will be the featured article I will be sure to read fully.

"The irony..."

(in turning pages)

...is that Americans have been experiencing a lot of change in their lives attributable to these historic events, and some of those changes have distressed many American families-- job loss, failing schools, prohibitively expensive health care, pensions at risk, entitlement programs approaching bankruptcy, rising gas and food prices, to name a few. But your government often acts as if it is completely unaware of the changes and hardships in your lives. And when government does take notice, often it only makes matters worse. For too long, we have let history outrun our government's ability to keep up with it. * The right change will stop impeding Americans from doing what they have always done: overcome every obstacle to our progress, turn challenges into opportunities, and by our own industry, imagination and courage make a better country and a safer world than we inherited.

(in three paragraphs ...we... can agree) but he continues.

The wrong change looks not to the future but to the past for solutions that have failed us before and will surely fail us again. I have a few years on my opponent, so I am surprised that a young man has bought in to so many failed ideas. Like others before him, he seems to think government is the answer to every problem; that government should take our resources and make our decisions for us. That type of change doesn't trust Americans to know what is right or what is in their own best interests. It's the attitude of politicians who are sure of themselves but have little faith in the wisdom, decency and common sense of free people. That attitude created the unresponsive bureaucracies of big government in the first place. And that's not change we can believe in.

It is not fair of me to pick on "a few" words that bring up age, since it is valid as well, that Obama is young, but not that he has bought in to what is old, but maybe what works. And McCain has bought in to change, but who has bought in to him? It is good that attitude is brought up as well as faith, not to mention the people. But it is not these words that must be brought up, but the forces of history that must be held up to scrutiny and evaluation.

* "for too long" we have let Bushisms outrun our media filters(them and us). Have they been vetted enough to not get used to this? [...this run around? and I just caught a mis-embedded link, bottom lined**, that fits. The Bush exit strategy may be a good example of a Catch-44. Where is McCain? [Let me make perfectly clear,*** the above block quotes are direct from McCain's speech and three paragraphs in the gap are commendable] Where will the Democrats be? And where have they and Republicans been in "your government". I was going to say the bold was on me, but it also on you and on them (?).

** previous post bottom link
*** bonus hint

[final comment: "The irony" is that McCain's words start a paragraph here as well as a serious tone, while it is ironic that I saw any humor (not) in age earlier.]