Rubric's Peek

Not to mislede***, but I lost my original heading:
Recession imminent if ‘fiscal cliff’ of tax hikes, budget cuts not averted, CBO says.

My second shot, "Rubric's Peek" is a pun on a Peak at the way congress put it.
Now that is the ticket, something about B.S.* as in Bowles-Simpson or "balanced solutions"**, not to mention "bumper snickers".  It wasn't quite Sea QuestOr B.S. nor BaneOr C-Quest.


* "Off The Cliff-Notes" was not it.
(Maybe The B.S. Cliff /something.)
** place holder for better "off the cliff"notes.
i.e. not(nor) the link I hoped to find
*** the lede is this paragraph, Rubric's Peek my alternate heading

[I have refrained from overburdening with links, but did find a few that were interesting if not off the cliff. (at least prior to this sentence) And I still haven't found the simple explanation of the Fiscal Cliff, not exactly to ribble a hint: woof!]

Note: G'Ribble is not exactly in the last four links but... akin to a GPS of sorts. 
Note:  the exception proves the rule on links or peeks.

"OFF A CLIFF"

Dumbest Proposal Ever.
by Joe Conasan The New York Observer

HUMPTY DUMPTY! COME ON DOWN!***

A quick glance at the headings put this together. But preemptively[*] I will say that a friend of mine has had a squabble with a builder over a fence or the height of it. There is a drop off on the other side which anyone would be concerned about kids or just anyone slipping or falling into. Well, I don't know about the height of any projects but as Obama has indicated "We are in this together". Maybe my analysis or faith has been too flip-floppy. But it is better to ride the fence down than to slip or fall off on either side. Riding a fence does not mean D-riding the project as irony would have it the Republicans seem to do, by having it both ways and expect things to not be on the fence and by not working on it. This metaphor may not work exactly, as government is not a business and both sides of the fence are not down hill. But maybe they are, just one is away from the fence (the project) the other is toward it. But my real point is that if you get pushed off the fence (the project) nothing will get done and we will all be slipping. But if the fence is the thing not the people, and it is at the top of a hill so to speak, getting pushed off will pop all our bubbles or maybe it is more like Humpty Dumpty

[UPDATE 3-16-09: "OFF A CLIFF"]
[3-16-09: The Fence? Is Obamanomics Conservative or Revolutionary? by Robert Reich, Salon]

[3-18-09 bold added with update].]

[Also (nfry) Obama wants G20 to act on stimulus, reform]

[*] Update 3-16-09: Preemptive in that I had not yet read the referenced "cliff" link below or the "Dumbest"** piece on the Republican obstructionism. And still not having read the "G20" but append it where appropriate in text, I think it is safe to say that when Buffet spoke of Obama, and Obama later spoke, Wall Street listened. Not that they said anything. Talk about clarity, I don't know if I should rock or dine.

** since have
*** 3-27-09 update heading inserted here and pre-post-or-us link inserted at Humpty Dumpty

[11-4-11 follow up move up link

Update: "Off The Cliff"

Maybe we are on a ledge now.
But a few things are clearer including fundamentals, except where what Obama said is anything like what McCain said.
[BONUS UPDATE[*]: Organizing For America And More]

In that vein (of the lead update) I append this economic perspective:

And throw out this idea to be reality checked:
a cap in the derivative process.

It seems that the real problem in the financial crisis was the packaging of investments (derivatives) that made them an increasing gamble and risk and further blew up the bubble. This may have already been addressed with new regulation and management, I am not sure. (It still seems a potential for ponzi or pyramid scheme, which furthers government interdependence. But with a clearer understanding of the Cap and Trade for Carbon emissions, maybe this could work for other issues and would have an impacted in guiding our values back to people rather than profits and away from a reliance on blowing things.

While this may be an example of too creative thinking, and too similar to the way I began this dialogue, I hope someone can grasp any threads which they might pull or weave for us. On the other hand a particular part of the Reich piece points to my need for better understanding of an impact. In the area of education reform and Obamanomics: "It cuts subsidies to banks participating in the student-loan program, which is exactly what Bill Clinton did, and it provides some funds for early childhood education." But I guess this just demonstrates the bottom up and balanced approach that in the context of the college tax credits and pell grant increases are necessary. (therefore not "on the other hand")

For a short allegory (enticing heading aside) on how we are all in this together, I just updated:(see ledge now: under construction) (3-18-09)
Since I have possibly dispelled my own concern regarding the one possible glitch in Obamanomics, I leave with another to dispel or verify. How is it that there can be a concern for imagined trickle-down opportunity being dashed by taxes, when business expenses are not really on the table? Food for thought? Or the recycler?

P.S. For a more deeply embedded compendium of sorts, where I picked on Chris Matthews (In an aside) and picked up on Jon Stewart(FNBC). And as far a fundamentals of McCain and Obama it is in the media that the difference lies as much as earmarks when it comes to comparing apples and oranges or pork and ham where we have a rotisserie of meaning and values and what is being skewered or brings stock aid to mind.

[And this addendum: Go Stephanie Miller! Thanks for being on CNN to balance Tucker'd out. And it is more than just funny, but that I have only stumbled on this now, and it is deeper and more on message than just video or Unsatire as the world evolves.]

[*] CORRECTION: These are not bonus links. At least the first is right on target at the fundamental difference: focus, fix and the press.

[Update 3-20-09: I never really did read Off The Cliff but used it as an allegorical leap, but here is a good point which it may have taken me some time to get to in the link I had.]

Para-model

I will begin at the end, or rather the present.
Less than two paragraphs in:
What's Left of the Left. Why do I begin at that moment? Allow me to begin again at this moment.
What is Left of the Left?
(the lede of the link)(4)***
Is this a geometric or quantitative heading?
What is not right about the left?
Or how much of the left is still there?

Now if I may do a Hansel and Gretel impersonation...my point is that I have worked out my path off-blog. i.e. left some pebbles to attempt to trace my path.
The reality is that I got the article from** MSNBC*, (current lede) Actually I got the link not the article. So I am still working it out, but will now save my Para-model.doc with this.

* actual clip here later
**anachronistic conundrum(or appropriate con un drum)[Cain beating the media.(1)]
*** post save doc: golf term "four"/Mulligan?

[Now I must note that I will square [bracket(#)] and or continue after reading more.]
[I should now note that I have left open a blog I was editing, which has now been inserted in my Para-model.doc ala my Hansel and Gretal MO. Apparently the pebbles were bread crumbs, but in reading What is Left of the Left, noticing that I have read only one of seven pages, I must MoveOn for the time being.]
[Now... actually just moments after the last bracket I will make a point.(see **(1) On what the heck is Cain doing? He is working the model of the media, in a fourth branch sort of way. He is getting attention, and I will sort out that fourth dimension. And I must note I am impressed with Joe the Plumber and Rupert the Survivor as candidates of a third kind. Not to call them, "Out There". But I think there is something to the polarity and needing more perspectives than our parties and branches provide. And this is reflected in a mechanics and dynamics, that is not just two dimensional. But Steven Jobs did point out to Rupert Murdoch that it can be either constructive or destructive. It is not about left or right, up or down, or forward or back again. It is about making progress or not. Everything else is how, and by and for whom? Does any of this embedded here or in my saved doc, explain: that the more radical a comment the more coverage it gets? It might depend on if one is Leaning Forward or Fair and Balanced. Now, I know that there is some perspectivism here, but Fair and Balanced does not mean two dimensional. Now it just depends on if I am talking about the Media or Faux News.]
[My apologies for my Quantum Leap over the Big Cheese, I feel my bread crumbs may be safe in draft see image.]


[Andrea Mitchell: Why has the president waited? Because he wanted congress to do their job! That was my preemptive answer to the preemptive question. Meaning, I was expecting the question and anticipated the answer, which just may be in the unfinished heading: What is Left of the Left.(No question mark or exclaimation mark?)]
[Speaking of Hands or Thumbs: L-curve anyone?]


[My para-model.doc is a bibliograpy of sorts(pun intended). Some Late Entries.: not to mention blog searches for con+scious, con+science, anarchy, tyranny, and thumb and buffet.]
[For the record Searches @thumb= Star Chamber/Big Cheese/Para-Model/Obama Doctrine/Who are they calling?. @buffet= Para-model/Big Cheese/From GOP to NOP/Brackets and Debt Clock/N-oddly Enough/All Politics is Local/Commander in Chief/Off the Cliff/Irony versus Hypocrisy. By this I am recording what the Al Gore Rythms find, just in case something changes.]
[This is bleapin' freaky considering my heading and intention here: The last of my late entries, and the last thing(or link) in my para-model.doc is this and (THIS)is the first thing Ed Schultz is talking about when I turn on his show. QED? Not to mention the rest of his show, which is yet to run(he is going on about Romney in Ohio? and a clear plan, and Democrats losing the message war, then Bernie Sanders and the NYtimes poll?), but is actually digitally delayed for local radio.]

Still going? QED?]

Divide to conquer?

Or back fire*?

This is a geometrical analysis of the partisan nature of politics.  We are familiar with the terms Fiscal and Social Conservative. But then there is the un-like Ike wing** and the Atlas Shrugged foundation or ^ fountain.  Here I may have already divided, to fight on.  I will try to keep the links and notations down. 

From what was earlier work on The Third Way, akin to the moving the center off the absolute, the moderate left seems to be moving the country.(See 1st link).  But is more than about geometrics of the left and the right and there being a middle.  If conservatives have branches(BTW the gov meant has three^^^); the FC and the SC (owe the irony oar^^), is there a third or more? 

A "friend" is counting on either a Tea Party, Conservative or Republican landslide this year.  But I am concerned with how branches work and how if there were already two, how Godwin[!] might play[?] Which is a sarcasm[!]slash[?]tangent on the hazzards of branching.

* not to target
** un-like Ike (USC)
Tin Foil Herman
R.S.V.P.
Mmmm MOW, MOW

^ oar shrug heads?(sc)
^^ paddle Fiscal Cliff and (YOU)Scroll Click or NEO-CONservative bent

[!] punctuation mark for irony/sarcasm/rhetorical***

*** anachronistic inserts [Francis Fukuyama was in the crowd that plowed the field and half regrets it.]
^^^ 3-body fig Newtons.or Phig Physics

BTW: USC is one of my alma maters.  UW the other.  But here I play on the initialism of "You Scroll Click" and Al Gore Rhythms and anomalies of the (b.s.) blog search[!]   

Final Note: Under wiki of Divide And Conquer ? [!] (or pyth helmet ?)

Go Hawks !

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.

A Penchant for Leaning

Meaning squared*, or cubed**.

* words with frenemies
(not original in tent (off the cliff and ledership/following/tides)

Not to mention a day that will live in infamy. A day of REnown.
[What is the antonym of penchant? The slippery slope of indifference.]

** (x,y,z)
}*{ (C or Sea "words") not exactly Baldwin
Note: sequence of asterisks and references }within{ asterisks

Post comment: Speaking of Triggers(Reich/Boehner & The Place for Politics) Ad Hominem is kind, Lyin'ization is the reality.



[Speaking of Daddy(papa]
[Care2-Raw Story-Move to Amend/ 12-6 Thom Hartmann]
[Lewis Black on Trump.

12-8-11
[Don't Think of an Elephant/DawnKeyOT As for the conventions of the GOP 2012: it may go down the un-Gingrich, un-Romney, un-Koch Brothers or Rove. "Make or break moment for the middle-class." President Obama]
[Jansing and Wassermann-Schultz, Wagner and Steele***(Counter attack, count down, Trump panel.)]
[Capitol Punishment?, Founding Resources ]

*** Is Steele on the edge of the pit e full? Speaking of ledership and X-mass lists & F=ma.

[Sunrise, sunset? Ctrl F tides... and gyro scopes? Note the irony that Germany and France are involved in saving Italy and Greece. Note the balance of the un-bubble-up of the GOP. And the "Reich", "Place" are not the Right Link, but here is the Coffee Party. Which Teddy?]

Notes on anachronism, labelism, seg way, Com Pro Mises[!] (dot, dot, dot...Dylan ? )
[Churned Media]
[Rough Reader/Swift Rider)<-Links Retro-actively inserted. But here is the deal. Also inserting sunrise, sunset, or so not found yet.]
[Speaking of apPEASmeant, see Ed Schultz and Senator B.S.(It seems that both Romney and Perry really want to, but something Trumps them debating on Newsmax.)]
[Last Word / First Word or not, at Rest.]

And BINGO was his dog...

This dog will hunt.
But that was a link before I hit the jackpot.*
B I NGO

"Europe is not U.S. when it comes to austerity, infrastructure or other investments." The jackpot is that when it comes to comparing austerity, one must recognize the starting point. Also it is not the "entitlements" but the investing, or more accurately, the not investing or arrangement of payment. But it is a bit of a double-edged-sword that is not just about cuts. Austerity is not the only answer, but paying for it is. Europe may have more to pay for, but that is not just on the negative side of the ledger, as they have more social programs and infrastructure on the books and actual works. I might not be painting the clearest of pictures, but I am trying to show that Europe is a different picture than U.S.

* Don't get me started on David Brooks. BUT THIS IS THE HEAD WATER.
(i.e. drop in the falls)
** Ironically, David Brooks starts*** out making some interesting points, but speaking of pictures... he is an Escher in Wonderland, speaking of trickle-down.
*** "social constructs" are fine, but the formula needs work, not to mention ethics in ethos

[OK, this was much ado about Brooks(ouch). Speaking of Cliff, n o t e s]
II (a,b,c,d,e,f)
III(a,b)
Ouch 2.0[or XIV(ethos)]
VI (a,b,c)

XII (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m,n,o,p,q,r )
XIII (a)
[XIII(a) = XIV]
[See XII(q)bonus]
[The Dickens you say? Spin off of Twist. Scroll and Ctrl F, please.]
[On the other hand.
Then again.]

Hold your head up Paul Krugman!

Reform Is Needed. Reform Is in the Air. We Can't Afford to Fail.Truthout.org by: Joseph Stiglitz | Visit article original @ The Guardian UK

Geithner's Plan Will Tax Main Street to Make Wall Street Richer by Dean Baker Truthout.org or Huffington Post

Paul Krugman rounds out or triangles out the table. I will only make one comment in that the bottom line is the people, and since the trickle down has caused an economic bubble if not civilization to go up in smoke and mirrors, that the burden is there on that bottom line, while the money is in the clouds. OK, now I'm rolling. But seriously, I am not sure if we are caught between salting the clouds and salting a mine, but Humpty Dumpty * needs help. Are these the Three Musketeers?
[*] Pre-Post-or-us? links embedded: A Plea to Congress ! Between the charges ? "Off a Cliff" And do we have d'Artagnan on The Fence?

Egg/Road/Sky*

or crossing the chicken...^

 

The Tikkun(MayJune'09)

knot Rubicon.

* a triad
^ a try ad ?


W. (a)Pre-post-or-us? , (b)  "OFF A CLIFF" , (c) Humpty Dumpty... , (d) Tear Down That Wall! , (e.)High8US , (f)  Bottom Line? , (g)  Revolutionary Hospitals (and Back Again) , (h) On the wall verses on the table. , (i) On the wall verses on the table. (j)Humpty Dumpty (k) Hold your head up Paul Krugman!  (l) A Plea to Congress  (m) Between the charges   [USC:dumpty]
X. (a) Humpty Dumpty... , (b) "they trust themselves" , (c)  The Clash  (d)  The Most Dangerous Game ,
=====
Y. (i) Odyssey Dawn , (ii)  Crossing the Rubicon (iii) CON TEXT / CON SCIENCE ABOUT THE PROCESS!
Z.  Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications.

BTW: I wonder Y the only link that is not a~ (sc)anomaly is (iii)?  Not because I let YouSC. Not to mention the spin on W(m) 
Snap! Big JC on Ed! (*^.)**

** [New Page](.) [Carpe Diem!](d/e) [D or R][Mixed News: colors and letters]  / PC of Mini-Me ?
{note to test that anomaly of (b.s.)/(sc)}   

FOOTNOTE JUNE 2013 PAGE TWO

6-5-13: too b.s. really? (1/11, 2 /11, 3 /11, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 /11, 11 /11)
Gemini : Two Points / 18, Para-model, Brackets and the Debt Clock, Commander-in-Chief Obama, 5/ , 6, Two Wrongs Make a Right?,  Un-Social Darwinism., 9 /, 10 of / , 11 /, 12 / , 13/From GOP to NOP, 14 /, N-oddly Enough... , 16 / , "OFF A CLIFF", 18 / 18.
Cricket:,   Clinton(Bill) is full of B.S. of 9, 2/9,  The Real B. S. of the F. C. /9, Rubric's Peek/9,  Now the Un-Voodoo Math/9, The History of B.S./9, CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)/9, 8  /, Straw Elephant /9 .
Jiminy Buffet?

6-24-13 hmmm? Under(sc) not to pun on UW or my academics. But under the (b.s. ) may be the balanced solution. But embedded here on the NOW(correction AM), is that Russia may currently hold Snowden.  Another Irony?  That China and Russia not keep Snowden.

6-25-13 More in eff able parsing (Nailed it[!], Index 9-21-11, And Bailout...) (fn3)

"Off a cliff"...?

Chris Matthews on Michele Bachmann.
Speaking of ledership, I don't know where the words "Off a cliff" [*] came from but maybe the push that Matthews is implying, and which I might turn on him. Not to mention a "slippery slope" metaphor of rhetoric. Is it a mix of exaggeration and inaccuracy? Or just speaking in tongue, or the language that some might hear better?
But maybe we could see "balloon head" as a "Sputnik moment" ?

[*] I really thought I heard it prior to post, but maybe it was more mis-hearing

[Speaking of Neitzche: or Lex Lootor]

FP4 SEPT 2014

Original Heading(9-15-14): [SOFA(FP?)]

1. <  Book by it's cover, memo by it's title: historical?
2.  A. Following results., B.  Turning Tables, C. Freakin',  D. Hiatus / Review,  E. Black Friday: Convergence Day

~(3,4)
3. Following results.
~5/
4. A. Brackets and the Debt Clock , B. The Real B. S. of the F. C., C. Who Let the Dogs Out?, D. It's Obama's Turn, E. Pass the Trillion.,
5. A. Being a Blank "is Hard Work"., B. Two Points, C. "OFF A CLIFF", D. Smirking Gun[!]

*1-5 not eggs act lee
Work in Progress , Egg/Road/Sky* , Speculative Physics
~9-16-14 ~further notation/re#'s