vOO due: vCR



It's math. In progress.



I have input this date from Think Progess chart.


I won't deWonk, reWonk or futher Wonk, but it might need review.
Translation/legend:  vOO versus Original Obama(budget)
vCR versus Continuing Resolution

[My MSExcel is a rework of Think Progess chart, for thinking sake, as if a visual scan is not enough.]
[I will reviey my cell formulaes but one can alway redo that math.]

So if I may risk putting this into words:

The Senate CR is 18.04% below the Original Obama (budget) that is a compromise. The CR is 1.93% over Ryan's Budget. Is that enough to tell the story of compromise? 

But the (original)Senate Budget was a already 12.05% below OO, which is .(point)66% below the CR. Owe the irony of math and read lines (or shifting bottom lines).  The so-called compromise(CR) is $8 billion over the Senate Budget, $72 billion below the Obama Budget, and $29 billion below the Original Ryan Budget, keeping in mind the general direction of intent.  But grand math wise the Senate CR is $19 billion over Ryan's Budget which I think was compromised(reduced) $128 billion from his original, while the the Senate CR is $217 billion below Obama's Original and $199 billion below actual 2010.  Now that is leverage ... or math. 

Compromise whining aside, CALL FOR A VOTE!

Facebook Town Hall (amended)

[originally tacked on to previous post]
[SEGUE: amendment written after a District Democratic meeting and get together(see footnote.)]

[...I note here an additional gripe from Sam Stein (for continuity sake, Sam Stein is writing about the Fiscal Speech not the Facebook Town Hall]:

Several members of Congress also expressed agitation with the timing. Obama’s speech came after Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) unveiled his own budget plan, giving his own remarks the veneer of a presidential response rather than executive leadership.

Well, excuuuuuse me! But the President came out with his 2012 Budget proposal almost two months before the Ryan budget. But one hanging chad here is that the context of the debt is not just about the good economic times under lower taxes(which is shakey) but that there was excessive borrowing and spending that helped the economy. It was not so much tax and spend Liberals, but war and borrow and spend and bailout Conservatives. Which merits a further comparison from the Facebook Town Hall (transcript) :(President Obama)

Because this recession came at a time when we were already deeply in debt and it made the debt worse, if we don’t have a serious plan to tackle the debt and the deficit, that could actually end up being a bigger drag on the economy than anything else. If the markets start feeling that we’re not serious about the problem, and if you start seeing investors feel uncertain about the future, then they could pull back right at the time when the economy is taking off.

So you’re right that it’s tricky. Folks around here are used to the hills in San Francisco, and you’ve driven -- I don’t know if they still have clutch cars around here. Anybody every driven a clutch car? (Laughter.) I mean, you got to sort of tap and -- well, that’s sort of what we faced in terms of the economy, right? We got to hit the accelerator, but we’ve got to also make sure that we don’t gun it; we can’t let the car slip backwards. And so what we’re trying to do then is put together a debt and deficit plan that doesn’t slash spending so drastically that we can’t still make investments in education, that we can’t still make investments in infrastructure -- all of which would help the economy grow.

Then there is Speaker Boehner:

Boehner, R-Ohio, said the biggest accomplishment of the Republican House this year has been to change the debate on spending -- and the budget compromise sets the stage for even bigger cuts. "It's like driving down the highway and throwing your car into reverse," Boehner said.

Which should complete the "who is in the driver's seat" metaphor.

[Footnote: In late night discussions, I brought up George Lakoff and in response, Systems Thinking was mentioned, and here is an article, which I may have already ran across in other form(Under Supported*). And yes it is similar to my Tetrahedron of Will, not that having dimentions alone denotes similarity.

[Speaking of parallels or tangents, I just missed a bit on Thom Hartmann reviewing Atlas Shrugged**.

* And apologies to my education and not yet having not fully reading the link, but I did study Systems Theory in Organizational Behavior.

** Ayn Rand

Commander-in-Chief Obama

[UPDATE 3-24-09: President Barack Obama on the Federal Budget: Four Principles ]
[Speaking of Battles: The real authoritarian v. populist.
The Battle Over the A.I.G. Bonuses: Class War in the Media ]

I never really did follow up on viewing or reading the bottom link at my Off The Cliff post, but used it as an allegorical leap. But here is a good point someone found regarding the Buffet comment.
From which I snip the point:

"What is required is a commander in chief that's looked at like a commander in chief in a time of war," Buffett said.

Commander-in-Chief? Where have we heard that before?
My point was the economics of the War on Terror where I said:

The honesty of the new budget and accounting now includes the war on terror which was not on the books. So rather than declare, a win or lose the economy bifurcation, the new accounting must include the soft power ingredients which do not come free. I have not seen where this is said, but it should and probably has been or will be.

Now the bottom line is what is pre-emptive.And should be a uniter not a divider.

* and since what confused me about the Buffet report was his call for clarity, I have edited my grammar for that purpose here.

Budget Bandits?

Thanks to YouTube I became aware of the Budget Bandits in an ad by Ending Spending Inc.
Speaking of Strings and Leaps or Knot.

Yesterday President Obama evolved his personal position on marriage equality.
[Speaking ***^ of Flip Flop? QED! 
And I don't mean cue Ed, nor buy George or Bill-E-Club !
But D E^^ Vo ! ?]


On Monday I tied the knot of sorts.
[Not such a large leap?!] Knot! Really it is.


The above YouTube is Thom Hartmann* discussing President Obama's position with a caller.
[update of sorts][That's Rich!]
It is more than ironic that there is such a string related** ad associated with his YouTube.

* first link is segment of this link
** speaking of debt
*** originally asterisked here

.

[Martin Bashir ... digs in!]

[Bingo: Republicans oppose state's rights!]

[Tic Tac Toe!]@

@speaking of game changer

5-11-12 for later ?

5-15-12 Update. 

Budget Agreement

Obama Signs Budget Agreement

Budget Brew Ha Ha

Bill Maher on Rachel Maddow
Earlier context.
And regarding the need for a new (De Calf) party for the fiercely independent, note that this is not an endorsement of a new party, only more people at the table. Norman Goldman in contrast to Harry Reid represents the problem with too much Calf in Nation or the nature of being heard-ed.

[The closest thing* to a "Bring 'em on!"
Partisan** Afterwords.]

*President Obama's Fiscal Policy Speech
** Demagogue is as demagogue doesn't know.

[I am wondering why Martin Bashir and Cenk Uygur are missing on the MSNBCTV page, but Dylan Ratigan had the latter on, and the former took Beck to the woodshed on being a Christian fraud.

[More Ratigan, Bashir. But where(4-14-11) isUygur]

Assessments: Rachel Maddow- A Victory for Math
Ed Schultz- A Day of Reckoning
Lawrence O'Donnell-

Thursday April 14, 2011
More on the Martin Bashir reaction to Beck.
More on President Obama's speech.
Joan Walsh- What it means to be a Democrat.

Irony versus Hypocrisy

Smackdown: Shuster Nails Ari Fleischer over GOP Hypocrisy
Shuster gives as good as he takes, but the irony is that Fleischer is there arguing over the childishness of Obama when Rush is not elected by the people, and neither is he. So the Catch 44 is that if Obama is wrong for painting the Republicans with a Rush Brush, then MSNBC is wrong for presenting unelected spokespeople for the Republicans, however it is the nature of the media to try to present both sides, and the nature of the Republicans to use Joe the Plumbers.
Speaking of plumbers and whose job it is...
Several links having filtered through my email box unprofessionally*
bridge the spectrum and filling the bill.

I will not unembed the threads but leap to the next field so to speak.

A more selective approach browsing the TED forum, a spin on the technology of politics and religion by Noah Feldman presents a preemptive perspective on hope. Having viewed less than two minutes, I noted before logging out, the following:(Unmodified but for one dash)
The third leg if not noted here is Economics and the Point is Justice or the fulcrum the Law. Values and their management is the key. Balancing the tetrahedron of flip-flop so to speak. The hour glass of consumption or conservation. Economics Politics Religion Law for the People - Executive, Legislative, Judiciary for the people and the point of balance.

I had my own preemptive concerns which need to be upgraded [3-6-09]and revisited, but how does this connect to the above?(a pun on hierarchy?) Facing choices and nemeses, not to mention the connection to things being in their place, whether fields or technologies and who uses what or whom and for what. Further search may dig up a reference to direct cause ofor[***] systems.

But prepost I read: Staving Off a Great Depression by Dean Baker The Guardian UK and where does this fit? In the fear or faith options; or fight or flight, excuse or blame sections. But I propose that the numbers game be given international scope[Update **].
[UPDATE 3-20-09: The following section remains in its original form but for bold. See BINGO which follows to where it relates to the nature of preemption.]
The honesty of the new budget and accounting now includes the war on terror which was not on the books. So rather than the declare a win or lose the economy bifurcation, the new accounting must include the soft power ingredients that do not come free. I have not seen where this is said, but it should and probably has been or will be.
[BINGO! or rather none other than Warren Buffet gets it.]

*i.e. by friendly nemesies however undivinely.

** Update International Scope and a new link at revisited: "Panarin insisted he didn't wish for a U.S. collapse, but he predicted Russia and China would emerge from the economic turmoil stronger and said the two nations should work together, even to create a new currency to replace the U.S. dollar." This guy may be the Rush of Russia but he could be on the same page as Putin, while I feel that economics may be the bailiwick of the Rumpole. "She who must be obeyed" and changed.

*** ofor: metaphysical synergistic concatenation

Romney Mumbles Economy

"It's coming back."  Cincinatti
verse us
Obama turns it around...in Cleveland.

[Comments filed yesterday:  Norman Goldman  President had congress**?  Mitt Robney,
If it is possible to be wrong in two dimensions, Raw Money might be able.  At least he is wrong twice in one claim in regards to Obama and the economic turn around.  But while two wrongs don’t make a right. Two rights do make a turn around, but not two lefts.  Well it is a matter of degrees.  (‘scuse me Mitt RobbedMe*) 

Anyway, back to the two wrongs, A.) the President can’t turn the economy around, congress passes all legislation.  B.) the economy has turned around.  C.) turning it around again will be the wrong direction.  D.) There is plenty of turn left.

There is plenty of dispute about how and how much to turn.  There is even plenty of dispute as to how much it was turned.  But there is no disputing that the economy has been turned around and it is still being turned.]

As for "Talk is cheap"? ** Just ask Wisconsin and the V.A., not to mention the middle-class and home equity.  Bubble-up is more economical than trickle-down.   

* Wed. & Thurs. openings
** not frackin' really

[Of course it was mumbled(aka nuanced), it was anachronistic, dependent on looking back.]
http://www.electmitt2012.org/ Quote: "Mitt Romney is focused on implementing a set of conservative principles to reinforce the America we once knew."

Mitt might just be me, but I find it hard to find the Cincinnati speech in full text or video.
Romney Pac Charlie Brown ads running on or from Congressional Budget acts.  Choice or Referendum?  Compare or Retreat.
Martin Bashir
Lawrence O'Donnell

Wrong Track Romney

Mixed Metaphor Mangler Mitt *: Debt Picture 101

The Big Dig or Jig [?]

The Track? (not exactly ... [!])

* Facebook comment:  
     See Clip, Romney: "I'm here to collect." That sounds like an entitlement that is on the wrong track. The economy has turned around**, and that is not to say that it has been Obama's economy. How can Republicans complain about the budget operating on continuing resolutions while giving Obama the credit for the economy.
     Speaking of tracks, the government can not be operated like a business. Where is the profit? Not to mention the cost of some of the outrageous expectations that previous administrations have burdened the future with in the unfunded mandates, Terror/Afghan/Iraq war, and Bush tax cuts.

[who cares !  Some do. . . ]***

** misc. economic metrics

*** could not locate The Place for Politics that had a chart outlining what it takes in the primaries and caucuses for a Republican to win, not necessarily what determines who the nominee will actually be.  

[Facebook tangent.]

[Post Iowa Caucus it is a battle between Romney and Santorum @25%, with Ron Paul 21%, Newt Gingrich 13%, and Perry with 10%, not to mention Bachman 5%, and Huntsman 1%.  Note that Ron Paul gave a spirited "we are all Austrian", on to New Hampshire speech, while Newt had his "ticket punched".]

> charts <
< previous post >

Ledership [!]

Yes Ledership!
No(sic)!
[!]= irony/sarcasm (sometimes [])

Therefore:
Republican Budget Extremist and Cruel
Obama Won't Extend Bush Tax Cuts Again: Pledge To House Dems

Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover
(Bill Moyers Interviews Andrew Bacevich)*,
sometimes not (God is not a Christian).

*I have only cherry picked this piece,(nfry): "Our finest warriors are often our most reluctant warmongers." While this is the only link I have not fully read(I hope to digest[] it later), I will say that in context, I do not need to fully agree, with his take on leadership vs. followers.

i.e. the first two links are on leadership, and you can judge it by the lede

Inconvenient Jobs Conflict?

Breaking news! or Fixed News?

President Obama requests a joint session of congress to present his jobs plan, the same night as the next[**] Rebublican debate.

Is the timing problematic?[*]

Footnotes:
Committee for Responsible Federal Budget
New America Foundation
Chuck Todd : Andrea Mitchell

MSNBC
Digital Danger!

[*] 9-1-11 See "more".
[Also note links(4) added to first 3 footnotes]
[Oh what a web, some weave or un-weave.]

[**] "first" corrected: "next"

The Point...

of the model?
Obama is not the point!

We are.  **

Knot to make a point or play with triads...*

OK, I pun on not, but do not mean this is not a knot.  Nor knot a not.



*To further d'triadics[?] (Mod-L) Knowlegdge, NowLedge, GNOwLedge?
Speaking of T(...)ing. 

Gn? ABC
A big F'nD! ^

^  Ctrl F "deal"
Hard to Believe
GBM
{A tip of the CAP}

** OW: 1st Sequester Label. 2nd Budget Label

LINKS ONLY[to read]

Under Construction:

or Osmosis[!]**

TO READ:
Our Future- Score Card Budget Talks***
10-30-13, aca-dust-up
10-31-13 entitlement tables v. lock box

.
HAVE READ:
10-30-13


.
THIRD CAT. [!]
:-|  ? *
to file?
10-31-13 to share https://www.facebook.com/#!/talkingpointsmemo/posts/10151947346580399
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/obama-confronts-if-you-like-your-health-plan-you-can-keep-it-backlash
.
 [ Or Knot: 10-31-13  ]     .




* [OK, the third might be moot.  But on the off hand chance that I not leave it in draft... ] (FP1)
[The devil 'n the detail?  Must move post read. ]
** may revert to PAGE or see *10-28-13
*** Aware of Irony of Asterisks.
[10-31-13 More than irony. A new age? Sea Knot. ]

Genre Clash

or Mutation?

FOK'rs (Friends of Keith'rs) were noted on the...STEPHANIE MILLER SHOW, along with a rumor from above. Un...like the fabled "unexpressed thought".*





* not to make fun of dog killers, only the forum of Tucker's in second video
[and I did not mean to rhyme]
[and for "some people", genre refers to the medium(& mutation) of the mess age.]
[for others...]
[ and back to the future...express]***

*** this is an overpass to the "turn" spike [With the parsing of the great genre in Keith, the rise of the Young Turks, Matthews is the Oddball in my book. Too cute by half, but not these haves.

[Afternoon update, from my Oddball book, aka Edutainment and speculation, from Ed Schultz the President Obama's 5 year "in non-security, discretionary spending" budget freeze: actually the speculation is mine that many things can be on the table as security and many others are not as discretionary. But it may be a Peter, Paul and Robin' hood scenario. AKA a spin on our past presidents. But seriously or rather flippantly, the book is also about false equivalents. Rachel is no Jon Stewart, Olbermann is no Glenn Beck, Matthews is no "fair and balanced", and Ed Schultz is no Rush, though he does get flush at times. It is about the dialogue, even if it is grand sitting at times.]
[And an earlier crack at the table...aka footnotes of pre-ignition.**]

** and this is an achronistic asterisk i.e. just have to make sure that there are three, and to note that the Mutation link and all that follows was based on only seeing the first few minutes of The Daily Show. [Achronistic is timely in a third way as the third asterisk is placed earlier and regards another post. Not this one though. (At least in toto and one sitting.)]
[Parting asterisks of "past presidents" I like Teddy. Oh Bear Man?]

[1-28-11 Update]

Fair and Balanced...

Math and English A mace 'n maze.
The Pentagon Labyrinth
Legends of the Round Robin.
Robin' the Hood to balance Peter, Paul and Hail Mary.


ENOUGH! Defense, Military, Security and the "War Machine" are not even the same thing, let alone the same pocket, but they all do matter.
Chamber of Poe: quoth the legion.

[2-15-11 Related Comment on Journalism : Michael Lind makes some very good points about the likes of the Right not deserving as much attention, Rachel Maddow tries to make up for that with Senator McKaskill, but Lawrence O'Donnell illuminates the problem of having reasonable journalistic approaches. On the other hand, Sarah Palin is right that the President is responsible for telling America more, not that some understand the process of getting things on the table. ]
[Also on The Ed Show: Representative Bane Or, not ledership! I would like to defend Dick Cheney though, as I believe that the boos were for the heckler not the former V.P. If Republicans don't want to talk about the Reagan debt, then Obama can leave it off the budget table for them.]

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas to the Democrats
and Happy Boxing Day to the Republicans,
not to be PC or leave any others out.
Or other coping havens of hope.

[President Obama Hails Reform/Salon]
[Here they are! The Bills side by side. Detroit Free Press]

[Note that the above two links were read and inserted after the rest of this post, except ** and ***, not to mention David Sirota ]
My comment:

It would seem to me that Congress should be able to "get 'er done" without the 60 votes. Either as some suggest by "going nuclear" (I am against Nuclear Power but) by blowing up the filibuster or somehow utilizing a reconciliation or conference process to do it. Failing that, there are probably enough progressives to kill the bill, but that may not be necessary[or advised**]. Removing the mandate, just might put this in the category of a budget issue under reconciliation, but failing to remove the mandate, might just put this on the track for constitutional review and modification, where it is imagined that a public option just might be the only option. It just might be wise for the Republicans not to push the constitutional issue and settle for a public option now, possibly with a 10-15% buyin margin on Medicare. In the alternative, giving states an option to have a public* plan, and freeing those to sell out of state, might be another crack in the (just say no)[***] armor.

[TruthOut/McClatchy -- Steve Clemons/Huffington}

* one Representative mentioned that the option would have a name other than public, and that could just be non-profit or within the caps imposed.

[In a bit of Re-Mythication, I might say: From hurding cats to a real cat fight, this is no sausage or hot diggity dog eat dog world. Or from Real Mythication to Real Miffication in regards to others, it is better than FAUX News.]

[** semantics are more than a quibble between liberals and progressives, but between principles and progress (side note: some claim that "progressive" is just a label to avoid the "liberal" charge but both are needed, while labels should not give cover for inaction or misconceptions.]
[***(late insert) also: or just say now]

RETRO NOTE: The Ed Show. Not to mention Miff Maddow.
[1-7-09 Hit Ping Pong (see Shhhh!) on the table.]

Bring It On!

Speaking of preemptive...it was only a thought.  But one missed by this author who takes President Obama to task in The End of the Post-9/11 World.  That being, with the obstructionism (update 6-4) the Republicans bring to the economy, what could they bring to national defense or foreign policy?  Actually the missing thought is the NDAA and how hard it is to change laws given the success he had on Gitmo and his budget and jobs act, and it seems the author missed it too. The only question should be who will be in the legislature to change our laws, and who will be the executive until they do. 

IT IS ON....
the table.

[ Speaking of "speaking of"... hanging* in the balance. ]

* in his own words(WH?)

[Speaking of War on Characterizations.(NewsNation) Deval Bane.]

[UPDATE on forks ?  ? ? ]

[Speaking of share 'n angle, Martin Bashir w/Alter 'n Christie on two Americas.

If Bain=Solyndra then Edwards=Wisconsin.  Not! DR out.(Not to mention Pap on Thom Hartmann.)

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, MRS W. Woe Wae! War Against Ethics.]

[6-1-12 Long Story Short? Du'oh!(?)!]

6-3-12  Calm Post Or Tan Gent ?

Punch Line !

6-4-12 Related Carbon Cycle ?

[Hanging Update ! Not to mention S**B C ?]

**acronym anomoly (for pun sake)

(crossing threshold not sterling qualification)

[Two Bills against the Mitt-L?]

Obama Leaks

Some might say he reeks,
but I say that there is more to the issue than liquids or gases.
Pump out the rhyme. This is just a leed into two points which I cannot tell where they came from.
1. the debt does not matter
2. social security does not matter to the debt
3. GE I did not know I was going to stick with the meta4, but of course both matter. And the underlying points I want to make, which I cannot source particularly is that the President's plan when accepted will establish one and two. In other words, the kind of debt matters(tax cuts v. investments) and an opening of the "lock box" that makes congress accountable for social security regardless of debt. Neither are easy to say, leak of the leeds** or reek of the leads, but taxes do matter to everyone, but so do budget calculations and the big picture whether you are a person, corporation, state or fed/global.

[And please note that I have not really made much of the Wikileaks controversy, as I do not support the methods and reasons for its existence. While we do need to have better journalism and government, I am not sure it will help in the scheme of things. Rupert Murdock as a source of inspiration, now supports my feelings in this area, as well as the reference or links of reasoning to scientific journalism.* While my crack at GE hints at the $marminess of some journalism, I will cover that with this mud. The mud in this case is the subjective skills that are responsibly noted which makes raw leaks only facts not truth. Raw data(information) is not just objective but subjective itself.]

*12-9-10(comma added)Rupert Murdock does not support my feelings, him as an inspiration supports my feelings to the contrary, as well as an erroneous scientific take. And last link brackets (information is not just in the form of numbers, but even they are subject to context and formulas).

** [1-17-12 C-(sic): ledes is the intended spelling in this typo]

The Hope'd4 Campaign

Or U-Turn Around.

The Romney campaign was trickling down beyond the pail, when Congressional Budget Chair Paul Ryan was selected as the VP candidate.  The watch word is turn around.  If it can't turn around its own rhetoric, wait... I am lost in a logical cul de sac.  Lies, I mean.  It needs to turn around its lies or it cannot turn around the country.  I recognize the irony of not being able to turn around its lies or they would not have a campaign against President Obama.  Much has been made by Romney about broken promises by the president, about not turning around the country.  Politics comes in three shades.  There is the politics of getting things done, there is the politics of partisan ideals, and there is the politics of winning a race.  I like the geometry of it.  But there is the darker shade of pail.  The outright not being able to run on the record. 

[update]
[Hardball: That's the Ticket, Not Saving VP Ryan. (E. W. ) Romney was for the Ryan Plan before he was against the Ryan Plan.  Is it a share 'n angle?  As VP Biden takes on Ryan, he will run from his past to confuse the Romney plan.  ]