Barack Obama gave the following speech
on March 18th, 2008
which has come to be know as:
"a more perfect union"? **
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
U P D A T E . B E L O W (SEE BREAK)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
A great speech which I challenge anyone with a heart to listen to.
And for those who prefer to read
the text: in his own words.
or my peremptory comments here.
Obama is right, now what will others write? Never mind.
[Obama Explains Wright, Will McCain Explain the Far Right? 3-18-08]
As far as The Day After... and speechless:
Five years ago that day the war began.
Honor the dead and fighting, by hard work.
But belated? another speech.
[The Day After...3-19-08]
[BTW: articulated throwing under the bus? No Joke: 11-8-02 not update but a back draft, whiffed at by Ed Schultz today. My further update in the next hour as far as going far enough: a caller wanted to move on from race because of her fears of the dialogue* and its circular nature, but that is why Obama should be heard over and over in order to get through to the herd that are only sheep. Thanks to Cheryl and the process.]
* she is right about the media that feeds the dialogue and the sheep, but the only food is the proper light to face it head on. A ram charger, not to dodge or forget the ewe.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
H A P P Y WholeEday: [3-26-08]
I will be on sabbatical and hope to limit my postings to here.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[UPDATE 3-22-08: Media Moment: Billed...]
** UPDATE 3-24-08: Having updated this intro to the speech,(another link) I will encourage that it be read and reread or reviewed. And further that its title as it will come to be know by, will direct people in just that review of our history.
McSane Speech (Marjorie Cohn) or McSame BuSh (only worse)
The New Wave (see Wave LABEL)
The Ed Schultz Show and thanks to caller Jeff
for an inspiring speech in defense of pews on Where America comes to talk.
A Tribute to McCain: So Plain - - In Spain,
Raining McCain - - A Good Sense of Trickle Down.(And math and English "24/7" in particular 3-4-08?)
McCain gives response "to that heart felt statement"
of his and mine and the old GOP.
And tort reform from Hillary? Not exactly.
QCON: Working group a good idea,
but link of war to economy is key. Reform of system that puts investor profits and executive bailouts over failure of so-called free markets, may be a pincer attack that Obama and Clinton can perform on the trickle-down. Meanwhile as far as pressure to get out of Iraq, remembering who the commander-in-chief is, not that he should get his way, but his way of getting out may be hampered by who he and his crowd are. They could leave a disaster as bad as they believe it will be, because they can or rather because they are unwilling to do what might work. Putting the war on the books is a start. (Thanks to Rachell Maddow and David Bender for this QCON linking in my mind, and Fox for Hillary and The New York Times for Krugman)
[3-25-08: Till further notice all links will be completely read prior to inclusion unless noted. The previous two have now been read, and the linkage made seems supported. As to earlier links, I may be cherry picking, but I don't rip off the branch or chop down the tree, or push the pits.
(Seemingly apropos to the following already posted and read.) ]
[ Bush "comma" 4000, "Say Goodnight, Gracie" "Sadly.."
(hint: scroll over links, read "4000," first) ]
[ McCain: "We're succeeding. I don't care what anybody says.
I've seen the facts on the ground," (Period)?
And a look back: links not necessarily read - (nnr) . ]
(Note: new notation during this segue/sabbatical,
except for retroactive exception of Gracie link )
[Note: error found in post, 6-29-06 - link (nnr). ]
[3-26-08: Only link inserted above referencing Easter ]
[ Responsible Plan presented by Darcy Burner to Take Back America Conference ][also noted at Politickerwa.com ]
[ Five years is long enough: A week and The Day After....]
[3-27-08: Supreme Court Rules Bush Exceeded His Powers]
An odd light on the roots of law which
which need to feed the branches of Government.]
[3-28-08: Federal Judge: Michigan's Presidential Primary Law Unconstitutional -
NPR News: National Pentagon Radio? -
Lhasa Monks Accuse Beijing of Lying Over Unrest -
Process, Process, Process. ??? ]
[Political Intelligence Disclosure Act to open insider market influence? and other
Updates in a look back ]
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Obama head. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Obama head. Sort by date Show all posts
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Monday, December 04, 2006
Running List '08
[2-16-07: links added Richardson,]
[2-11-07: Coarse Filtering]- Richardson
Kucinich
ObamaClark
Edwards
Clinton
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden
(note: I will let the above typos speak for themselves as a filtering of sorts)
- - -
[original listing]Edwards
Clark **
Kucinich
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden {2-1-07}
[2-1-07]
This is only an order based on my obtuse criteria:
Kucinich
Richardson
Obama
Clark
Clinton
Edwards
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden
[added 1-18-07] I will footnote at the bottom but re-arrange the above evolving list, comment will appear in dated order below. Not that my feelings count and I have not investigated all these candidate yet but they are my current priority.
The "running list" will reflect consideration sometime of only one issue in prioritizing them, but they are probably all good. One issue alone could also put things in reverse order, for all I know Vilsack could be best. This is only an explanatory preface, hopefully not an attempt to cover myself. ***
[Original entry]
Vilsack
[added: 1-16-07 ]
Kucinich
Exploratory Committee:
Obama
[added: 1-17-07 ]
Edwards
These are in no particular order, I will comment on that later, but at this time Obama is in his exploratory phase. In the previous election I sent my first email with comments to the Kucinich camp, and continued to forward and Cc: each candidate till I arrived at my choice. Then I reviewed the candidates at Backbone Campaign * to rethink things . My choice was Howard Dean. Well it makes me want to scream as we know how that ended, but now we can scream because we know where we are, and Dean is the head of the DNC. I did not really plan to post this much now, but we have much more of a road to hoe, and I really don't want to jump on a bandwagon, and would really like a 20-mule team of great candidates so that we can sort things out even more, so that we don't have more wars and a president who is finally ready to feign dialogue while demanding a plan from the opposition. This is not a call for a plan or opposition, but to look at what each says and does. I did not really plan to go on this riff either, but just tossing things in the air, Edwards is a candidate I had enthusiasm for based on past considerations. But I look forward to processing all of these great candidates who are so good, I almost refrained from comment so far...
[added 1-18-07] Dodd a candidate long overdue, but too long?
Republicans ? **** and wannabes?
* [added 1-18-07] I will keep this * at the bottom as it will footnote here that this link does not have the presidential candidates yet, or needs to be changed.
** Obama will be left off until he declares, here Clark is inserted for Hope sake. For history sake I note the original five candidates in this order: Edwards, Clark, Kucinich, Vilsack, Dodd
*** I will not alter footnotes, comments will be inserted just above these footnotes, link below and others will be improved with time.
**** MoveOn.Org in this link is labeled a liberal group. I do not consider that it's draw, but was the forefront of pragmatism and progress that heralded the likes of Howard Dean.
[2-11-07: Coarse Filtering]- Richardson
Kucinich
ObamaClark
Edwards
Clinton
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden
(note: I will let the above typos speak for themselves as a filtering of sorts)
- - -
[original listing]Edwards
Clark **
Kucinich
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden {2-1-07}
[2-1-07]
This is only an order based on my obtuse criteria:
Kucinich
Richardson
Obama
Clark
Clinton
Edwards
Vilsack
Dodd
Biden
[added 1-18-07] I will footnote at the bottom but re-arrange the above evolving list, comment will appear in dated order below. Not that my feelings count and I have not investigated all these candidate yet but they are my current priority.
The "running list" will reflect consideration sometime of only one issue in prioritizing them, but they are probably all good. One issue alone could also put things in reverse order, for all I know Vilsack could be best. This is only an explanatory preface, hopefully not an attempt to cover myself. ***
[Original entry]
Vilsack
[added: 1-16-07 ]
Kucinich
Exploratory Committee:
Obama
[added: 1-17-07 ]
Edwards
These are in no particular order, I will comment on that later, but at this time Obama is in his exploratory phase. In the previous election I sent my first email with comments to the Kucinich camp, and continued to forward and Cc: each candidate till I arrived at my choice. Then I reviewed the candidates at Backbone Campaign * to rethink things . My choice was Howard Dean. Well it makes me want to scream as we know how that ended, but now we can scream because we know where we are, and Dean is the head of the DNC. I did not really plan to post this much now, but we have much more of a road to hoe, and I really don't want to jump on a bandwagon, and would really like a 20-mule team of great candidates so that we can sort things out even more, so that we don't have more wars and a president who is finally ready to feign dialogue while demanding a plan from the opposition. This is not a call for a plan or opposition, but to look at what each says and does. I did not really plan to go on this riff either, but just tossing things in the air, Edwards is a candidate I had enthusiasm for based on past considerations. But I look forward to processing all of these great candidates who are so good, I almost refrained from comment so far...
[added 1-18-07] Dodd a candidate long overdue, but too long?
Republicans ? **** and wannabes?
* [added 1-18-07] I will keep this * at the bottom as it will footnote here that this link does not have the presidential candidates yet, or needs to be changed.
** Obama will be left off until he declares, here Clark is inserted for Hope sake. For history sake I note the original five candidates in this order: Edwards, Clark, Kucinich, Vilsack, Dodd
*** I will not alter footnotes, comments will be inserted just above these footnotes, link below and others will be improved with time.
**** MoveOn.Org in this link is labeled a liberal group. I do not consider that it's draw, but was the forefront of pragmatism and progress that heralded the likes of Howard Dean.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Update
Somewhere I may have noted that Herman Cain said he would have a surprise before the South Carolina primaries. I haven't found that reference, but I wonder if this was it.
Speaking of Updates.
Not to mention Martin Bashir and Heads Examined. Tea Party Nation leader endorses candidate who literally* in his own words, needs his head examined. Who wants anybody to be on food stamps? Certainly not the president. The Gingrich claim that Obama is the "food stamp president" while coming close to being... [1-24-12: I chose to break mid-semantics as to the truth of claims. Judson Philips quote: "if you want someone to be on food stamps you really ought have your head examined" yet Gingrich thinks that is what Obama wants.** If you think the NAACP should demand pay checks not food stamps, what does that make you? That is what Gingrich charged them with.]
*1-24-12 in con text m/un-con science links/break
[?]
[To be read: Ryan Lizza The New Yorker, The Obama Memos.]
[1-27-12]
Friday, March 06, 2009
Here We Go Again
GOP Fights Back Over Criticism of Limbaugh
White House Is Accused Of Cynicism, Hypocrisy
by Howard Kurtz
I will save for later, what is probably a very good article or at least closer to what journalism is supposed to be. Which is to not always please me and not always be free of perspective. But the spin and same old tactics seems to be coming from the Republicans. The President had made earlier references to Limbaugh, but a recent one advising the Republicans to stop listening to him was what started the media echo. That was good advice from my perspective and from the perspective of most moderates. Republicans are the ones that have not decided who is their leader and what are their principles. Well, actually the former does not matter because the latter are no different. They need to work on their principles and by focusing on this, they are able to forget them. It is my opinion that it is their principles that are the matter and that they can not recreate themselves. It is not hypocrisy or childish to keep the focus and hardship on them.
In an aside: Chris Matthews is doing them or the country no favor by claiming they have an issue with taxes and keeping your money. All low and most moderate income will see tax reductions or at the point some do, will be compensated by other cost cuts or compensations. Even those that are getting some tax cuts may find other fees increased which only lends to the need for the cuts in the first place. As to Democrats being "all about spending", the Democrats, at least the Obama adminstration, are all about nothing but everything.
In this regard, it seems that if there is anything we can get on the same page on, it is entitlements. We should get back to the safety net concept. That does not mean that certain good ideas are not good for all. But that all entitlements are not needed by some. But in reality, no one wants to give up what they have, so it seems the best field to work it out on is taxes. Similar balance can be taken in regards to international finance, markets and social progress. Maybe a carbon credit for life?
[But back to the Dark Side or Gas Bag (Methane Head No Credit):
Hypocrisy is King!
The Republicans are rallying around Rush while he is eating it up.
He then challenges the President to a debate!
Well the Republican's should put up or shut up.
There is no equivalent to the President.
But the Republicans must decide, is he or is he not the one in charge or would Rush Limbaugh have a debate with Ed Shultz?
Actually the answer is no! Since I believe the challenge is out there. And there have been others (Ron Reagan) he has not accepted. But he should really stick to his own league and maybe Stephen Colbert. Or warm up to Rachel Maddow.]
[Seriously, Rachel Maddow and the link just provided, really put her in a league of her own, but actually the one that Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele should live up to before they even merit the jobs they have, (not to mention the other intelligent Enternewsmeant or Fun'n Edifying Personalities I have noted above, depending on the job they aspire to)but here are some bonus links: Michael Moore * vs. Any Rand, talk about doubling down or matches.]
[And I don't know who got it backwards but Rush did say, he wanted Obama to fail before Obama suggested that Republicans stop listening to Rush. This was Obama taking on the old way with the Republicans, not a direct attack on Rush but his ideas and tactics which Republicans have so hard a time changing, and they need to make it about Rush. [Update: too enough!]
* [Plus Must See TV: FNBC ](For funny? No for real...
...Financial News with a real anchor!)]
White House Is Accused Of Cynicism, Hypocrisy
by Howard Kurtz
I will save for later, what is probably a very good article or at least closer to what journalism is supposed to be. Which is to not always please me and not always be free of perspective. But the spin and same old tactics seems to be coming from the Republicans. The President had made earlier references to Limbaugh, but a recent one advising the Republicans to stop listening to him was what started the media echo. That was good advice from my perspective and from the perspective of most moderates. Republicans are the ones that have not decided who is their leader and what are their principles. Well, actually the former does not matter because the latter are no different. They need to work on their principles and by focusing on this, they are able to forget them. It is my opinion that it is their principles that are the matter and that they can not recreate themselves. It is not hypocrisy or childish to keep the focus and hardship on them.
In an aside: Chris Matthews is doing them or the country no favor by claiming they have an issue with taxes and keeping your money. All low and most moderate income will see tax reductions or at the point some do, will be compensated by other cost cuts or compensations. Even those that are getting some tax cuts may find other fees increased which only lends to the need for the cuts in the first place. As to Democrats being "all about spending", the Democrats, at least the Obama adminstration, are all about nothing but everything.
In this regard, it seems that if there is anything we can get on the same page on, it is entitlements. We should get back to the safety net concept. That does not mean that certain good ideas are not good for all. But that all entitlements are not needed by some. But in reality, no one wants to give up what they have, so it seems the best field to work it out on is taxes. Similar balance can be taken in regards to international finance, markets and social progress. Maybe a carbon credit for life?
[But back to the Dark Side or Gas Bag (Methane Head No Credit):
Hypocrisy is King!
The Republicans are rallying around Rush while he is eating it up.
He then challenges the President to a debate!
Well the Republican's should put up or shut up.
There is no equivalent to the President.
But the Republicans must decide, is he or is he not the one in charge or would Rush Limbaugh have a debate with Ed Shultz?
Actually the answer is no! Since I believe the challenge is out there. And there have been others (Ron Reagan) he has not accepted. But he should really stick to his own league and maybe Stephen Colbert. Or warm up to Rachel Maddow.]
[Seriously, Rachel Maddow and the link just provided, really put her in a league of her own, but actually the one that Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele should live up to before they even merit the jobs they have, (not to mention the other intelligent Enternewsmeant or Fun'n Edifying Personalities I have noted above, depending on the job they aspire to)but here are some bonus links: Michael Moore * vs. Any Rand, talk about doubling down or matches.]
[And I don't know who got it backwards but Rush did say, he wanted Obama to fail before Obama suggested that Republicans stop listening to Rush. This was Obama taking on the old way with the Republicans, not a direct attack on Rush but his ideas and tactics which Republicans have so hard a time changing, and they need to make it about Rush. [Update: too enough!]
* [Plus Must See TV: FNBC ](For funny? No for real...
...Financial News with a real anchor!)]
Saturday, September 01, 2012
FOOTNOTES: SEPTEMBER 2012
SEE: SEGUE OF INTENIONS...(below)
9-28-12 [un(fn) since 9-21]
Butt bottoms up!
but: Yes-Butt Head in the Wrong Direction?
to: http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2008/04/who-are-they-calling-elitist.html*
not: http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2009/06/cap-and-trade.html
one: (b.s.) trickle + down
do: (b.s.) voodoo + economics
538: (scroll
compare: over)*
what Think Progress 96%
math (trouble with the curve)
d (w'rithmatic)
(*) satire + mockery
(b.s.): pun + (sic)
(**) total eclipse of the
*under construction
9-21-12 REFRAIN is a Heckuva Paradocs[!]
9-21-12 Ding, Ding, Ding (rough RE-draft)
[see Devo Mitt's BO*Son below]
9-21-12 Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding!
[Pulled from Circulation(Reverted to Draft) for Re-frame]
It is a hecuva job to footnote this. The Dings are about the fight and the perspectives.
4 Now I will just begin UC(under construction)
! Punderous Ponderings
? The Choice (4mat anomoly? )
C not but Al Gore Rhythms (retro ^)
[talk about (fn) nightmare of GPS]
[retro ^ = anachronism/time wrap/warp?]
etc Theology
Re Trinity
Material Off-Cuff
edited Charlotte 2012! [^ C ?]
track (label charts[PAGES])
to (blog search E.B.)
The Hope
darn knit(C ? Rythms ^)
Why OWS is Bigger than Left Vs. Right!
Only Economists Need Apply
hard (b.s Charlotte's Web)
---
risked (INET)
un (obtusity)
prophetic (dimentionalism)
---
Oh Obama Revives Social Security Idea: Raise Payroll Tax Cap To Replenish Fund
Point Professor Warren's Lesson
3 (prophetic/refrain) (NOT)
Ding: A return to economic sanity.
--\-- 4UC (line #3)
[devo]: Mitt's BO*Son (i.e. flip-flop of
--/--
A A return to economic sanity ?[*]
B Self Bernanke Myth (Fed Speak)
C Deflation Jon Stewart (Satire nor Economics)
D (60 Minutes) context
Lede^^: Tacky, tact, tack
Crack: Economy or Economics
"I don't want to be subjective...(but)^^^
^^ 47% Myth
^^^ Fight of the Century (Good Wrap: Bad Econ)
[*] This footnote segues between Ding and A. leaving out the middle and emblematic of Mitt and his flip-flop of economics.(@A) It is Keynesian not Supply or Demand. The Fight of the Century(@but) is a mockery of a satire on economics and the Deflation of Bernanke by Jon Stewart(@C) is a satire of a mockery of economics. .
9-19-12 Re:Focus
TIME Romney Refocuses as Obama Decries ‘Victim’ Claim
NFRY=(not fully read yet)
Is Klein on anyones side?[!]
[!]= ;-) If you don't know, scroll(and go click)yourself!
Hint: Goat Mountain ?
9-18-12 ...promote the general...
9-18-12
MB: No Apologies Tour? [UNDER (DE?)CONSTRUCTION]
Correction Leding Entitlement Group?
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49065421 Ryan
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076540
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076662 full leder
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076662
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076663 the cycle
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076582
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49073645 the place
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49074910 Andrea http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49074064 NOW
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/middle-east-&-n.-africa/49075550/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/south-&-central-asia/49075904/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/decision-2012/49075790/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-cycle/49077139/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-cycle/49076662/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065518/#49065518
Hardball and math death.
Bottom line update top lines and MB.
and who home runs?
9-18-12 Trouble with the Curve?
...promote the general...
9-17-12 One Heckuva Day. The Dickens...(peace meal [!])
Obama the Uniter!
9-14-12 Politics is local?
sausage: Ground
Romney/Ryan/Rand: Game
beef : ? *
footnotes: Not
out foxed the
Seattle PI usual
global text MO.**
** "well"
not: Rhetorical Been Laden In-Chief?!
exactly: Fed/Bernanke/Seattle PI
9-13-12 Rhetorical Been Laden[*] In-Chief [asterisk added (9-14) for English emphasis]
This [fn] under-construction and challenging. [comment embedded here (see English emphasis) as well]
SEGUE OF INTENTIONS GOING FORWARD:
FOOTNOTES (see label) BY MONTH. (under construction)
SCROLLING DOWN DATE OF INSERT WILL NOT BE INCLUDED UNLESS THERE IS AN UPDATE TO NOTE.
9-13-12 Links [update change]
Having instituted new footnote process here.[*]dupe applicable
9-13-12 Refrain post frain?[*]
satire: Mitt + BO*son
mockery: Fall-Awful on Mitt's Face!
later: frain
4 huff posts
Dangerous Narratives
Whose Maker
Obama Role
The Bounce?
NFRY
* BaneOr
Out Foxed?
Rubric's Peek
"Feel the Love"?
Not to Follow-Up...
String Cheese Theory?
First Downgrade in US History!
Ideology
anachronism foray
Un-State of the Union
Conservative Foray (4A)
intended CAD
CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)
CAD (Culturally Aided Design)
CAD (To be or not 3d)
State of Politics
[Edits occurring post footnote @ some*** are not included in this footnote process as hinted at: *** exception to the rule(bottom line) [Footnotes** Change] appropriately
i.e. yet to footnote but what the google[anachronism unintended] or is it? ]
*** also not included here
[*]asterisks will appear bracketed by date, but unbracketed are from original post: * anachronism intended will appear in bold, followed by the contents of the b.s. [**]
[**] the exception to the rule [***]
[***] i.e. what the google you scroll over or click for link
ALSO post asterisk *** bracketeds not included here.
9-12-12 Fall-Awful on Mitt's Face!
Footnoes under construction...
September 11th
heading*[^^]
[latest]
9-11-12 Forward?
the only link to outside source: (9-12) Politics
9-7-12 Other Mysterious Ways...
Heavy (GWB) on Huffington Post and b.s. (vous due[sic])
[selected links are footnoted]
There (HP) Climate Change not a Hoax
is (HP) Artists Against Fracking (Ono/Lennon)
W*(b.s.) Google Works
rithmatic (TLR)Four More Years
and (ibid) Mitts BO*son
After Math. (HP) BP/Isaac .
Un-bolded Under-construction, peace meal [!].
9-7-12 Google Works...
9-5-12 Four More Years!
9-4-12 Charlotte 2012!
Out Foxed?
9-2-12 For Pete Sake!
9-28-12 [un(fn) since 9-21]
Butt bottoms up!
but: Yes-Butt Head in the Wrong Direction?
to: http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2008/04/who-are-they-calling-elitist.html*
not: http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/2009/06/cap-and-trade.html
one: (b.s.) trickle + down
do: (b.s.) voodoo + economics
538: (scroll
compare: over)*
what Think Progress 96%
math (trouble with the curve)
d (w'rithmatic)
(*) satire + mockery
(b.s.): pun + (sic)
(**) total eclipse of the
*under construction
9-21-12 REFRAIN is a Heckuva Paradocs[!]
9-21-12 Ding, Ding, Ding (rough RE-draft)
[see Devo Mitt's BO*Son below]
9-21-12 Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding!
[Pulled from Circulation(Reverted to Draft) for Re-frame]
It is a hecuva job to footnote this. The Dings are about the fight and the perspectives.
4 Now I will just begin UC(under construction)
! Punderous Ponderings
? The Choice (4mat anomoly? )
C not but Al Gore Rhythms (retro ^)
[talk about (fn) nightmare of GPS]
[retro ^ = anachronism/time wrap/warp?]
etc Theology
Re Trinity
Material Off-Cuff
edited Charlotte 2012! [^ C ?]
track (label charts[PAGES])
to (blog search E.B.)
The Hope
darn knit(C ? Rythms ^)
Why OWS is Bigger than Left Vs. Right!
Only Economists Need Apply
hard (b.s Charlotte's Web)
---
risked (INET)
un (obtusity)
prophetic (dimentionalism)
---
Oh Obama Revives Social Security Idea: Raise Payroll Tax Cap To Replenish Fund
Point Professor Warren's Lesson
3 (prophetic/refrain) (NOT)
Ding: A return to economic sanity.
--\-- 4UC (line #3)
[devo]: Mitt's BO*Son (i.e. flip-flop of
--/--
A A return to economic sanity ?[*]
B Self Bernanke Myth (Fed Speak)
C Deflation Jon Stewart (Satire nor Economics)
D (60 Minutes) context
Lede^^: Tacky, tact, tack
Crack: Economy or Economics
"I don't want to be subjective...(but)^^^
^^ 47% Myth
^^^ Fight of the Century (Good Wrap: Bad Econ)
[*] This footnote segues between Ding and A. leaving out the middle and emblematic of Mitt and his flip-flop of economics.(@A) It is Keynesian not Supply or Demand. The Fight of the Century(@but) is a mockery of a satire on economics and the Deflation of Bernanke by Jon Stewart(@C) is a satire of a mockery of economics. .
9-19-12 Re:Focus
TIME Romney Refocuses as Obama Decries ‘Victim’ Claim
NFRY=(not fully read yet)
Is Klein on anyones side?[!]
[!]= ;-) If you don't know, scroll(and go click)yourself!
Hint: Goat Mountain ?
9-18-12 ...promote the general...
9-18-12
MB: No Apologies Tour? [UNDER (DE?)CONSTRUCTION]
Correction Leding Entitlement Group?
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49065421 Ryan
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076540
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076662 full leder
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076662
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076663 the cycle
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49076582
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49073645 the place
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49074910 Andrea http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065421/#49074064 NOW
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/middle-east-&-n.-africa/49075550/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/south-&-central-asia/49075904/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/decision-2012/49075790/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-cycle/49077139/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-cycle/49076662/
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/martin-bashir/49065518/#49065518
Hardball and math death.
Bottom line update top lines and MB.
and who home runs?
9-18-12 Trouble with the Curve?
...promote the general...
9-17-12 One Heckuva Day. The Dickens...(peace meal [!])
Obama the Uniter!
9-14-12 Politics is local?
sausage: Ground
Romney/Ryan/Rand: Game
beef : ? *
footnotes: Not
out foxed the
Seattle PI usual
global text MO.**
** "well"
not: Rhetorical Been Laden In-Chief?!
exactly: Fed/Bernanke/Seattle PI
9-13-12 Rhetorical Been Laden[*] In-Chief [asterisk added (9-14) for English emphasis]
This [fn] under-construction and challenging. [comment embedded here (see English emphasis) as well]
SEGUE OF INTENTIONS GOING FORWARD:
FOOTNOTES (see label) BY MONTH. (under construction)
SCROLLING DOWN DATE OF INSERT WILL NOT BE INCLUDED UNLESS THERE IS AN UPDATE TO NOTE.
9-13-12 Links [update change]
Having instituted new footnote process here.[*]dupe applicable
9-13-12 Refrain post frain?[*]
satire: Mitt + BO*son
mockery: Fall-Awful on Mitt's Face!
later: frain
4 huff posts
Dangerous Narratives
Whose Maker
Obama Role
The Bounce?
NFRY
* BaneOr
Out Foxed?
Rubric's Peek
"Feel the Love"?
Not to Follow-Up...
String Cheese Theory?
First Downgrade in US History!
Ideology
anachronism foray
Un-State of the Union
Conservative Foray (4A)
intended CAD
CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)
CAD (Culturally Aided Design)
CAD (To be or not 3d)
State of Politics
[Edits occurring post footnote @ some*** are not included in this footnote process as hinted at: *** exception to the rule(bottom line) [Footnotes** Change] appropriately
i.e. yet to footnote but what the google[anachronism unintended] or is it? ]
*** also not included here
[*]asterisks will appear bracketed by date, but unbracketed are from original post: * anachronism intended will appear in bold, followed by the contents of the b.s. [**]
[**] the exception to the rule [***]
[***] i.e. what the google you scroll over or click for link
ALSO post asterisk *** bracketeds not included here.
9-12-12 Fall-Awful on Mitt's Face!
Footnoes under construction...
September 11th
heading*[^^]
[latest]
9-11-12 Forward?
the only link to outside source: (9-12) Politics
9-7-12 Other Mysterious Ways...
Heavy (GWB) on Huffington Post and b.s. (vous due[sic])
[selected links are footnoted]
There (HP) Climate Change not a Hoax
is (HP) Artists Against Fracking (Ono/Lennon)
W*(b.s.) Google Works
rithmatic (TLR)Four More Years
and (ibid) Mitts BO*son
After Math. (HP) BP/Isaac .
Un-bolded Under-construction, peace meal [!].
9-7-12 Google Works...
9-5-12 Four More Years!
9-4-12 Charlotte 2012!
Out Foxed?
9-2-12 For Pete Sake!
Saturday, March 26, 2016
TRY-ANGLE NATION
Disclosure: Just elected Hillary Clinton Delegate for my precinct.
It was a gut decision for a truce between my head and my heart, not that I can triangulate that.
Well... maybe it was gut-Clinton, head-Undecided, and heart-Sanders.
Trump and Clinton Match-up?
*"BS~FD/make me" (0)
"BS~Borg" (A., B. Culture War , C., D. Obama With Drama , E., F., G., H.)
(BS)=blog search (scroll over any hyper-links)
3-27-16
I had woken up to that thought after reading only part way through a Philosophy Now article last night. [The "Ugliest of Things"?]
** or are all dichotomies false?
*** the punch line
"You can't _ _ _ _ _ your way out of problems with the same parties that got you into them."
to paraphrase the Obama problem and the nature of our government. Here "parties" is used in general terms, but with due respect for the three branches of government and the GOP, let alone the spirit of progress or hope to Trump nature. I am talking about the first article on War, and the Bush campaign that was a bull in a pottery barn.(~) (Speaking of policemen, nation builders and break it)
(~)(<) Lessons of War , Cost of Course [(~)]
Cost of Course [!], Hail to the Troops! [!]
Owe what a muddle we web. i.e. these (F'n) need review.
3-31-16
Expletive not intended, Foot Notes is the italic intent.
Mean While... (M'w,huh,ha)
Medved(msnbc) (~) the last conservative president was H. W. Bush (i.e. don't count Neo-cons)
Kasich (msnbc) Trump puts the con in conservative. (^) Also speaks of policing and intelligence, I was waiting for nation building.
Kinder Gardener: Do I have buyers remorse?
Well, I haven't bought anything. And we aren't a pottery barn. (oops unsegue)^
(return) Is the caucus system broken? Not for Bernie. Is the primary better? Only for Hillary?
It was a gut decision for a truce between my head and my heart, not that I can triangulate that.
Well... maybe it was gut-Clinton, head-Undecided, and heart-Sanders.
With this in mind to be potentially sorted later:
Make It So[!]
Why Young People Are Right About Hillary ClintonTrump and Clinton Match-up?
*"BS~FD/make me" (0)
"BS~Borg" (A., B. Culture War , C., D. Obama With Drama , E., F., G., H.)
(BS)=blog search (scroll over any hyper-links)
3-27-16
War and Peace is a false dichotomy**.
That was my heading(sub-heading for this addition) before technical difficulties wiped it out.I had woken up to that thought after reading only part way through a Philosophy Now article last night. [The "Ugliest of Things"?]
** or are all dichotomies false?
*** the punch line
"You can't _ _ _ _ _ your way out of problems with the same parties that got you into them."
to paraphrase the Obama problem and the nature of our government. Here "parties" is used in general terms, but with due respect for the three branches of government and the GOP, let alone the spirit of progress or hope to Trump nature. I am talking about the first article on War, and the Bush campaign that was a bull in a pottery barn.(~) (Speaking of policemen, nation builders and break it)
(~)(<) Lessons of War , Cost of Course [(~)]
Cost of Course [!], Hail to the Troops! [!]
Owe what a muddle we web. i.e. these (F'n) need review.
3-31-16
Expletive not intended, Foot Notes is the italic intent.
Mean While... (M'w,huh,ha)
Medved(msnbc) (~) the last conservative president was H. W. Bush (i.e. don't count Neo-cons)
Kasich (msnbc) Trump puts the con in conservative. (^) Also speaks of policing and intelligence, I was waiting for nation building.
Kinder Gardener: Do I have buyers remorse?
Well, I haven't bought anything. And we aren't a pottery barn. (oops unsegue)^
(return) Is the caucus system broken? Not for Bernie. Is the primary better? Only for Hillary?
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
New Hampshire Defeat?
Or Win for progressives?[or change *]
This is my flash analysis prefaced by the note that I have only had a quick glance to go on. I have not even opened the link but looking at only the top three in each race. Literally:
Results at a glance The Seattle Times
Hillary Clinton (D)39%
Barack Obama (D)36%
John Edwards (D)17%
96% reporting
John McCain (R)37%
Mitt Romney (R)32%
Mike Huckabee (R)11%
96% reporting
My point is that without getting into the technicality that New Hampshire is a primary compared to the Iowa caucuses and the game metaphor that this is like a World Series, not like the NFL championships where they play "loser out"; for a second there I thought I almost lost it in paraphrasing, in that neither of these cases are one on one, (dot, dot, dot... pause) anyway -- the point: I guess I got to the point in my second line, and you can do the math.
And if you can't I will be glad to continue in that, I am presuming that it is not winner take all in New Hampshire and that Obama and Edwards voters add up to 53% of the assigned delegates. If I am wrong, well you know what they say about what happens if you presume. Just like assume, you make a pres out of u and me. OK that goes over better on the screen than it does aloud, but you get the gist. Or Rather, we get to be the butt of the joke.
[Updated References:
a.) the data which I removed from an OpEdNews posting was in the teaser portion of the Seattle Times which I did not grab a hotlink from, because I felt it would continue to be updated.
b.) the following morning I did open the link I provided and found the entire results and followed up on my punditry but doing a Google on [New Hampshire delegates determined] and found
The New York Times Election Guide "Delegates determined after all votes are in."
c.) my intention for those that need hints, was to make a pun on the process not the candidates or the parties, given that it is more of a horse race. *
d.) not that metaphors or data are copyrighted, but I did want a shot at following OpEdNews.com
guidelines, so dropping the actual data and links was convenient. Although the bottom link is now added, but as yet unread.
e.)finally The Stephanie Miller Show played Barack using a basketball metaphor but I do not know if an earlier article had made it to my filter or head space, I do recall using "post-up" in my stand-up work...out. ]
[ * 1-10-08: two changes - - "progressives" to "change" meaning Obama appears to be progressive, but Edwards seems to be the leader in that area and "horse race" to NASCAR "Title Chase Challenge" as it has more contests than the Triple Crown.]
This is my flash analysis prefaced by the note that I have only had a quick glance to go on. I have not even opened the link but looking at only the top three in each race. Literally:
Results at a glance The Seattle Times
Hillary Clinton (D)39%
Barack Obama (D)36%
John Edwards (D)17%
96% reporting
John McCain (R)37%
Mitt Romney (R)32%
Mike Huckabee (R)11%
96% reporting
My point is that without getting into the technicality that New Hampshire is a primary compared to the Iowa caucuses and the game metaphor that this is like a World Series, not like the NFL championships where they play "loser out"; for a second there I thought I almost lost it in paraphrasing, in that neither of these cases are one on one, (dot, dot, dot... pause) anyway -- the point: I guess I got to the point in my second line, and you can do the math.
And if you can't I will be glad to continue in that, I am presuming that it is not winner take all in New Hampshire and that Obama and Edwards voters add up to 53% of the assigned delegates. If I am wrong, well you know what they say about what happens if you presume. Just like assume, you make a pres out of u and me. OK that goes over better on the screen than it does aloud, but you get the gist. Or Rather, we get to be the butt of the joke.
[Updated References:
a.) the data which I removed from an OpEdNews posting was in the teaser portion of the Seattle Times which I did not grab a hotlink from, because I felt it would continue to be updated.
b.) the following morning I did open the link I provided and found the entire results and followed up on my punditry but doing a Google on [New Hampshire delegates determined] and found
The New York Times Election Guide "Delegates determined after all votes are in."
c.) my intention for those that need hints, was to make a pun on the process not the candidates or the parties, given that it is more of a horse race. *
d.) not that metaphors or data are copyrighted, but I did want a shot at following OpEdNews.com
guidelines, so dropping the actual data and links was convenient. Although the bottom link is now added, but as yet unread.
e.)finally The Stephanie Miller Show played Barack using a basketball metaphor but I do not know if an earlier article had made it to my filter or head space, I do recall using "post-up" in my stand-up work...out. ]
[ * 1-10-08: two changes - - "progressives" to "change" meaning Obama appears to be progressive, but Edwards seems to be the leader in that area and "horse race" to NASCAR "Title Chase Challenge" as it has more contests than the Triple Crown.]
Sunday, July 08, 2012
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 ?]
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 ?]
Friday, December 16, 2011
Reel Ledership
Unknown candidate more favorable than Obama.
Obama leading over known persons.
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
2000th post.
(Counting 90 in draft, that is.)
Unfortunately, the blog format has evolved, and needs getting used to.
In fact, it seemed to evolve mid-post, as I managed to get in a bottom link here, but cannot not locate that process going forward or even in edit format.
THIS just as I had declared MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, I mean, ACCOMPLISHED[!]
And just as I had reached a pinnacleof a point, (That was redundant, or was it?) {one of the the new features}
the irony* of Mission Accomplished, let alone leadership. (David Sirota and the Star Chamber)
NOW with** ALEX WAGNER,
But earlier with Jansing & Co.
And earlier with Ed Schultz and Nancy Pelosi.
BUT HERE IS part of the Mission CON *** TEXT,
and UNDERSTANDING "Who-w-Aww!"
* nails it:"Battle Him of the Republic".
let "alone" "leadership"
** or rather not yet with Alex Wagner
(and before I forget, it is the "pretty please" hyperbola of Romney, and the childish cycle.)
*** see CON 5 minutes on.
[Note Labels and comments(2),'n Odd need.]
[The Alex Wagner link HERE.]
[Speaking of Dawn Key Ody]
[LatePossible Link inserted, let alone Try Angle.]
[Final note in reverence to Christopher Hitchens, and reference to Bashir and Ratigan. (oops)]
[accidental tangent found error in "Final" link/search/pun]
Mean[!]while: Ratigan has a panel on "Straight Talk" where Mission Accomplished applies to the popularity of congress. With Republicans in charge of the House and having record filibusters,(meaning a minority has the responsibility in the Senate), their schtick is gridlock, not progress or compromise, let alone all truism. These are my prose not the panel's or guest's, but it can certainly be said that for the Republican goal of making sure there is a one term president by passing the buck, it could be mission accomplished. But that hits the nail on the head with my lede (and the source) of Reel Ledership[!].
9-13-13 Jansen and Co label corrected(added).
Obama leading over known persons.
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
2000th post.
(Counting 90 in draft, that is.)
Unfortunately, the blog format has evolved, and needs getting used to.
In fact, it seemed to evolve mid-post, as I managed to get in a bottom link here, but cannot not locate that process going forward or even in edit format.
THIS just as I had declared MISSION
And just as I had reached a pinnacle
the irony* of Mission Accomplished, let alone leadership. (David Sirota and the Star Chamber)
NOW with** ALEX WAGNER,
But earlier with Jansing & Co.
And earlier with Ed Schultz and Nancy Pelosi.
BUT HERE IS part of the Mission CON *** TEXT,
and UNDERSTANDING "Who-w-Aww!"
* nails it:"Battle Him of the Republic".
let "alone" "leadership"
** or rather not yet with Alex Wagner
(and before I forget, it is the "pretty please" hyperbola of Romney, and the childish cycle.)
*** see CON 5 minutes on.
[Note Labels and comments(2),'n Odd need.]
[The Alex Wagner link HERE.]
[Speaking of Dawn Key Ody]
[Late
[Final note in reverence to Christopher Hitchens, and reference to Bashir and Ratigan. (oops)]
[accidental tangent found error in "Final" link/search/pun]
Mean[!]while: Ratigan has a panel on "Straight Talk" where Mission Accomplished applies to the popularity of congress. With Republicans in charge of the House and having record filibusters,(meaning a minority has the responsibility in the Senate), their schtick is gridlock, not progress or compromise, let alone all truism. These are my prose not the panel's or guest's, but it can certainly be said that for the Republican goal of making sure there is a one term president by passing the buck, it could be mission accomplished. But that hits the nail on the head with my lede (and the source) of Reel Ledership[!].
9-13-13 Jansen and Co label corrected(added).
Monday, May 09, 2011
The Interview
Strongly Parsed:- (President Obama's final comment on 60 Minutes)
Updates: Head Fake or Syntax? Or childish banter. SIN: Shift, Ignore and Name call?
And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.I could not parse more, nor do I imply con text. I mean that we can take this sentence as context enough(and with which I agree), yet we can and should question other's parsing and context for justice. [Pour Ridge Metaphor]
Updates: Head Fake or Syntax? Or childish banter. SIN: Shift, Ignore and Name call?
Thursday, March 31, 2016
Two-wrongs don't mean a Left[!]
Too reads do not mean a dialogue.
Mid-read(NFRY): (i.e. live footnoting)
Survival of the fittest verses(~) corporate species and arms races[!]
Battle of the Narratives? (Corporate offspring, peacocks and elk.)
(head or tails not treated equally, but...)[somewhat akin to gander or goose?]
[fundamental try-vergence]...(grain v ladder)[LOL read v regulations]
Survival of the Narratives?
4-3-16 to read:
The Atlantic: Obama Doctrine
4-4-16
Hedges/Hudson on Neo-Liberal Economics.
[related (b.s.): Spencer... demo/mice...DecomPart * Meantalizing]
*Moline's Platonics / Darwinian Physics
Mid-read(NFRY): (i.e. live footnoting)
Survival of the fittest verses(~) corporate species and arms races[!]
Battle of the Narratives? (Corporate offspring, peacocks and elk.)
(head or tails not treated equally, but...)[somewhat akin to gander or goose?]
[fundamental try-vergence]...(grain v ladder)[LOL read v regulations]
Survival of the Narratives?
4-3-16 to read:
The Atlantic: Obama Doctrine
4-4-16
Hedges/Hudson on Neo-Liberal Economics.
[related (b.s.): Spencer... demo/mice...DecomPart * Meantalizing]
*Moline's Platonics / Darwinian Physics
Friday, June 15, 2012
Contempt for Courage
President Obama is taking Congress(**B) and* Romney on head-on.
Republicans are all about the politics of opposition. Democrats are all about the politics of getting things done.(*B) But there are limits, and they are in the constitution and the three branches of government. Now that is not a very satisfying thing. Congress makes the laws, and the president must follow them, and they will not change until they are broken. Republicans will take the country down while the president has all the tools at his disposal to make sure they don't succeed. Of course it is under the guise of a disagreement, but is a disguise that the people must see through.
A look back** is called for because that is where not keeping the change will take us. Has there not been enough change? Well just asking the question reminds me of the last administrations Secretary of Defense and his questioning and answering*** himself. I really don't want to go there.
But the recent Fed mention of the loss of wealth in the last 20 years, parallels the dine and dash that has been a Republican solution that has not been removed from the table. Democrats have fought wars and built the middle-class, while Republicans have cut checks and unbalanced the nation.
Is the President doing as much as some would like? As it becomes more clear that Republicans will not, now is the time that he must.
[Hardball "Two Americas" Walsh / Feerey - Romney is not on the ballot? The Act Act.]
* 6-16-12 link moved back one word(bold added)(Also [Hardball] links)
("Romney" to "and")
** Ctrl F "bite"
*** Ctrl F "Rumsfeld"
(*B) Go jump in the Lakoff(i.e. Ctrl F Lakoff)(oops)
(**B) two links added @"taking Congress"& @Romney reinsert new link
(***B) NFRY & vice verse us (or chicken or egg*c)
[UP w/ Chris Hayes(***B) Stand Your Ground and De-Policing.]
Hint: v.c.(not very crispy)
*c literally
Republicans are all about the politics of opposition. Democrats are all about the politics of getting things done.(*B) But there are limits, and they are in the constitution and the three branches of government. Now that is not a very satisfying thing. Congress makes the laws, and the president must follow them, and they will not change until they are broken. Republicans will take the country down while the president has all the tools at his disposal to make sure they don't succeed. Of course it is under the guise of a disagreement, but is a disguise that the people must see through.
A look back** is called for because that is where not keeping the change will take us. Has there not been enough change? Well just asking the question reminds me of the last administrations Secretary of Defense and his questioning and answering*** himself. I really don't want to go there.
But the recent Fed mention of the loss of wealth in the last 20 years, parallels the dine and dash that has been a Republican solution that has not been removed from the table. Democrats have fought wars and built the middle-class, while Republicans have cut checks and unbalanced the nation.
Is the President doing as much as some would like? As it becomes more clear that Republicans will not, now is the time that he must.
[Hardball "Two Americas" Walsh / Feerey - Romney is not on the ballot? The Act Act.]
* 6-16-12 link moved back one word(bold added)(Also [Hardball] links)
("Romney" to "and")
** Ctrl F "bite"
*** Ctrl F "Rumsfeld"
(*B) Go jump in the Lakoff(i.e. Ctrl F Lakoff)(oops)
(**B) two links added @"taking Congress"& @Romney reinsert new link
(***B) NFRY & vice verse us (or chicken or egg*c)
[UP w/ Chris Hayes(***B) Stand Your Ground and De-Policing.]
Hint: v.c.(not very crispy)
*c literally
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
All in?
I think David Letteman said: "Something is fishy."
And a caller to Rachel Maddow(hosted by David Bender) may have hit the dead fish on the head. McCain wants to avoid having Sarah Palin have a debate. That may be where the media may have taken the bait though. But the public probably won't bite.
The real so called lure in this strategy is that McCain wants to put the economy over his campaign. Well despite recent tugging at the Paulson Plunder, his plans only nibble at a solution, while the economy really is spinning his campaign out of control. OK, fishy metaphors aside, I can't get away from it stinking. The Dead On Arrival plan was a no brainer, not to pass, and the only way to spin this is that the administration has set him up to seem a hero, while congress will look bad for not biting. My suggestion: bite back. Let McCain retreat to work on his plan with the administration, while Democrats and Obama work on a plan with and for the American people.
There are only two choices: Congress doesn't act and the economy is in a fix. Or congress acts and McCain can take credit or cast blame for getting or not getting what he wants. It will be negotiated or not, with or without McCain.
In the end, McCain is the loser because it goes directly against his argument that government is not there to fix things. But in the end, he might be able to prove that they are not. That will make the people the loser, and not really change you can believe in.
And a caller to Rachel Maddow(hosted by David Bender) may have hit the dead fish on the head. McCain wants to avoid having Sarah Palin have a debate. That may be where the media may have taken the bait though. But the public probably won't bite.
The real so called lure in this strategy is that McCain wants to put the economy over his campaign. Well despite recent tugging at the Paulson Plunder, his plans only nibble at a solution, while the economy really is spinning his campaign out of control. OK, fishy metaphors aside, I can't get away from it stinking. The Dead On Arrival plan was a no brainer, not to pass, and the only way to spin this is that the administration has set him up to seem a hero, while congress will look bad for not biting. My suggestion: bite back. Let McCain retreat to work on his plan with the administration, while Democrats and Obama work on a plan with and for the American people.
There are only two choices: Congress doesn't act and the economy is in a fix. Or congress acts and McCain can take credit or cast blame for getting or not getting what he wants. It will be negotiated or not, with or without McCain.
In the end, McCain is the loser because it goes directly against his argument that government is not there to fix things. But in the end, he might be able to prove that they are not. That will make the people the loser, and not really change you can believe in.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Dog Days, Raven Nights?
Books to Read
Labels to Write*
[Under Construction]
Table of Contents
Phase II
Navigation: Chapter One
Sub-Chapter Labels.
Note Bold Link: Not Nature vs Nurture, but verse us.
Meanwhile:
Congratulations Andrew Villeneuve on a very inspriring program last night.
"Featuring Jay Inslee, Timothy Ford, Peter Steinbrueck, Scott Macklin, and Reuven Carlyle, with Bob Ferguson as Master of Ceremonies"
Rough Ramble:
"Try Corner Hat Trick": Note Search Box or you google. Top Left Corner of Blog
The Tetrahedron? Structure, Process, Needs, Purpose
*subtitle: Grammar Grouches, Language Laws, and the Politics of Identity."For one thing linguists see valid ways of speaking all over, while lay people tend toward language chauvinism." Not that I am a third way.
Speaking of links and down under*** or frackin'** news.
** aka Churned
*** boomerang (BTW what is Australian for Head in Sand)
[Last link(s) embedded in *** un(bracketed) Hint: Jung Rang]
[Now I feel I need a road map for this post, but I will close with the two authors of two books I picked up last night: Lawrence Lessig and Stephen Colbert(now to find the other link)]
[Thom Hartmann: Economist Dr. Ravi Batra Regular guest?
[Sam Stein (HuffPo) Digital Team Returns to Obama 2012]
[OK, now I am off the charts, but I was search for a graph that would chart economic growth with deficit spending. My theory is that not only the trickle down did not work(for jobs), but it would have been worse if they had not continued to deficit spend, let alone not had wars. Not to mention, in the example(slide 14) charting the economy versus fund manager incomes.]
Labels to Write*
[Under Construction]
Table of Contents
Phase II
Navigation: Chapter One
Sub-Chapter Labels.
Note Bold Link: Not Nature vs Nurture, but verse us.
Meanwhile:
Congratulations Andrew Villeneuve on a very inspriring program last night.
"Featuring Jay Inslee, Timothy Ford, Peter Steinbrueck, Scott Macklin, and Reuven Carlyle, with Bob Ferguson as Master of Ceremonies"
Rough Ramble:
"Try Corner Hat Trick": Note Search Box or you google. Top Left Corner of Blog
The Tetrahedron? Structure, Process, Needs, Purpose
*subtitle: Grammar Grouches, Language Laws, and the Politics of Identity."For one thing linguists see valid ways of speaking all over, while lay people tend toward language chauvinism." Not that I am a third way.
Speaking of links and down under*** or frackin'** news.
** aka Churned
*** boomerang (BTW what is Australian for Head in Sand)
[Last link(s) embedded in *** un(bracketed) Hint: Jung Rang]
[Now I feel I need a road map for this post, but I will close with the two authors of two books I picked up last night: Lawrence Lessig and Stephen Colbert(now to find the other link)]
[Thom Hartmann: Economist Dr. Ravi Batra Regular guest?
[Sam Stein (HuffPo) Digital Team Returns to Obama 2012]
[OK, now I am off the charts, but I was search for a graph that would chart economic growth with deficit spending. My theory is that not only the trickle down did not work(for jobs), but it would have been worse if they had not continued to deficit spend, let alone not had wars. Not to mention, in the example(slide 14) charting the economy versus fund manager incomes.]
Monday, March 30, 2009
Hang down your head Paul Krugman!
On Meet the Press Jonathan Mann is the bright spot and I do not mean to dis Paul Krugman but the idea that they were talking about owning the economy is my point.
Obama will not own the economy unless...
Oh, heck I fell in the trap.
But hang down your heads, Will and Dowd.
But the time horizon is a factor. It took almost 8 years for the economy to be the issue. It has been over 25 that Reaganomics has been the problem, not to mention, over twice that since FDR and Charlie McCarthyism *have been in the background.
(OH and I will not link Charlie Wilson and another Joe)
BUT THEY ARE THE SHADOWS!
Will is proctor hoc post [*] or we have the Charlie/Joe fallacy.
Re:links Owning the Shadows
and more?
* Socionomics of hope? And the vicious cycle.
[The reference in the title goes no deeper than the reference to a song.(period) (note)...(not) that it is a song of the century but it may be about our economic and cultural heritage...] [or the potential of a carbon based world in a dollar debased economy or justice period.]
[How can you not smile **and be curious Mann?
** Thanks to Jon Stewart and Yes We Can!
[the bottom line? the Greenspan put may need a flip-flop to the Krugman take or is it really about our take>]
[And I thought that would be the last spin but who needs a hair cut and who will*** be the barber?]
*** need segment link to bailout discussion
[*] 8-13-09 link adjusted to correct spelling but still a missing Charly
Obama will not own the economy unless...
Oh, heck I fell in the trap.
But hang down your heads, Will and Dowd.
But the time horizon is a factor. It took almost 8 years for the economy to be the issue. It has been over 25 that Reaganomics has been the problem, not to mention, over twice that since FDR and Charlie McCarthyism *have been in the background.
(OH and I will not link Charlie Wilson and another Joe)
BUT THEY ARE THE SHADOWS!
Will is proctor hoc post [*] or we have the Charlie/Joe fallacy.
Re:links Owning the Shadows
and more?
* Socionomics of hope? And the vicious cycle.
[The reference in the title goes no deeper than the reference to a song.(period) (note)...(not) that it is a song of the century but it may be about our economic and cultural heritage...] [or the potential of a carbon based world in a dollar debased economy or justice period.]
[How can you not smile **and be curious Mann?
** Thanks to Jon Stewart and Yes We Can!
[the bottom line? the Greenspan put may need a flip-flop to the Krugman take or is it really about our take>]
[And I thought that would be the last spin but who needs a hair cut and who will*** be the barber?]
*** need segment link to bailout discussion
[*] 8-13-09 link adjusted to correct spelling but still a missing Charly
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
What the Beck?
[Under-De(con)struction.]
OK, this actually works in the perspective of the way some use words.
As in De for Dem and destruction, and Con for conservative and construction. Heck even conservation. Oops. I think we get the flip-flop. Lack of perspective is the subject, and preemption the aim of their construction. This is a work in progress. I'm still chalking it up.
My friend Thrasymachus* is embedded in the above (con) link...
while our seemingly seemly nemesis might be lost in Flatland.
I have recently revamped my PBMP tetrahedron, to the Tetrahedron of Will or TOW. It all began with my reading of Plato's Republic, going on 40 years ago, and my presentation not in a Platonic solid form but in a Platonic pillar model. Justice being the point, with appetites, emotions, and intellect being the base. I cannot vouch for these as being my original tripod to the triangular pillar, but I more recently reconstructed this balanced purpose on the legs of Physics, Psychology and Philosophy coming together to evolve Justice, much as our constitution rests or rather works with the balance of three branches and rests or works on the people.
Words are sometimes only ideals, but in reality I must say they are always ideals, but in some they are missing the concept of perspective, if not even a dimension(or pun, just dimentioning it), and whether you seem left or right or middle the reality is not even in line or online with a spectrum. The Third Way might not even be enough of a perspective, but it is better than Linear Beck or my way or the highway. [It was purported to be the Clinton way in that the aim was a balance between the goals of the left and right of the political spectrum(Ideally to move the middle nontheless) but I might say that the Obama way is more balanced, and may point to answers that are not always just a balance between two extremes or even two parties, and many people understand that, even though we feel that our way might be better it is hard to let go of our ideals.
[I believe I have now finished construction of this post, but have yet to finish reading the first link, and my "What the Beck" referred to my own preemption or condescending reference in the previous post.]
* Thrasymachus: a character in The Republic, and nickname for a Neo-Con I know, who might more accurately be called a Beck Head, or Eon-Libertarian (which I just pegged). [I won't peg any meaning on the Eon part, only to say I(not quite) flipped Neo.]
[Disclaimer: My first use of the term phrase "What the Beck?" was just yesterday, and until I just googled it, I had no knowledge it was a YouTube Channel, and I only used it as a segue to MoveOn to other issues. A search also found the Daily Beast and Op-Ed references and I might have picked on the Countdown but not the Intelligent Design, but the Gee Oh Me Try is similar but I can't dig up that one.]
[UPDATE 3-17-10: The "seemingly" link does not quite buffer completely, and has moderate moments but lacks perspective and balance let alone appreciation of others or perspective**. It can certainly be understood why everything seems off balance, but it is another to have an intention to balance it or respect dynamics, human or natural.]
** pulled from second link in the context of Thrasymachus
OK, this actually works in the perspective of the way some use words.
As in De for Dem and destruction, and Con for conservative and construction. Heck even conservation. Oops. I think we get the flip-flop. Lack of perspective is the subject, and preemption the aim of their construction. This is a work in progress. I'm still chalking it up.
My friend Thrasymachus* is embedded in the above (con) link...
while our seemingly seemly nemesis might be lost in Flatland.
I have recently revamped my PBMP tetrahedron, to the Tetrahedron of Will or TOW. It all began with my reading of Plato's Republic, going on 40 years ago, and my presentation not in a Platonic solid form but in a Platonic pillar model. Justice being the point, with appetites, emotions, and intellect being the base. I cannot vouch for these as being my original tripod to the triangular pillar, but I more recently reconstructed this balanced purpose on the legs of Physics, Psychology and Philosophy coming together to evolve Justice, much as our constitution rests or rather works with the balance of three branches and rests or works on the people.
Words are sometimes only ideals, but in reality I must say they are always ideals, but in some they are missing the concept of perspective, if not even a dimension(or pun, just dimentioning it), and whether you seem left or right or middle the reality is not even in line or online with a spectrum. The Third Way might not even be enough of a perspective, but it is better than Linear Beck or my way or the highway. [It was purported to be the Clinton way in that the aim was a balance between the goals of the left and right of the political spectrum(Ideally to move the middle nontheless) but I might say that the Obama way is more balanced, and may point to answers that are not always just a balance between two extremes or even two parties, and many people understand that, even though we feel that our way might be better it is hard to let go of our ideals.
[I believe I have now finished construction of this post, but have yet to finish reading the first link, and my "What the Beck" referred to my own preemption or condescending reference in the previous post.]
* Thrasymachus: a character in The Republic, and nickname for a Neo-Con I know, who might more accurately be called a Beck Head, or Eon-Libertarian (which I just pegged). [I won't peg any meaning on the Eon part, only to say I(not quite) flipped Neo.]
[Disclaimer: My first use of the term phrase "What the Beck?" was just yesterday, and until I just googled it, I had no knowledge it was a YouTube Channel, and I only used it as a segue to MoveOn to other issues. A search also found the Daily Beast and Op-Ed references and I might have picked on the Countdown but not the Intelligent Design, but the Gee Oh Me Try is similar but I can't dig up that one.]
[UPDATE 3-17-10: The "seemingly" link does not quite buffer completely, and has moderate moments but lacks perspective and balance let alone appreciation of others or perspective**. It can certainly be understood why everything seems off balance, but it is another to have an intention to balance it or respect dynamics, human or natural.]
** pulled from second link in the context of Thrasymachus
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)