Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Progress is harder work. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Progress is harder work. Sort by date Show all posts

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Speaking of timing

Or counting (or FOX)and follow-up(I could swear there are 6 legs unless it is on the other hand*.)
{italics not fully read yet but it is the point of departure}
{the point of arrival is not always originally intended, or that is the question.}
{note on labels, Navigation is regarding the blog, Navigation II is regarding our course changes. Maybe I should add Navigation III(a combo?).}
(Oh, and a leed change is also a challenge...to read)
* Third Way is point of tangent
[Maybe Thom Hartmann(AM1090) is coming to a realization, which I just missed(taking a call) regarding the power of Obama and his base and secondary potential thread. My points here are: Obama's base is not the liberal left. The Right's loss is the Left's loss, but the middle's gain.(I just coined** that.) My original metaphor*** was, as Republicans lose voters, they become more concentrated, while as Democrats gain voters they are diluted. ]
** critics please pick a better word for this new paraphrase of my original concept, other than coined, is in not that it is not making money for me, but I am just not sure that you coin a phrase. "turned" may suffice.
*** actually a metaphor would have a concept like Lemonade or Kool-aid as an ingredient, which apparently I have previously avoided saying directly at least.
[Still needing to read the italics link, Thom Hartmann and callers are still frustrated, and discuss the Marxist concept that things have to fail first. I am uncertain that is technically a valid name for it, but my point is that dynamically it will not work that way on two counts. It would take people who want it to fail(whatever it is) and it would take people giving up on changing it. That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again.]
[Post-Pre-emptive Comment: or rather footnote regarding bubbles and cliffs and easing the wall down. Post Hartmann comment: one of my tangents was inspired by the concept of not enough mentionalism, a pun on the dimension of perspectives and whether there are two parties, or three or four or whether the labels matter. But the more the merrier or at least the more the discussion and the bigger the table.]
[Post Building on Change update: "That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again." Bold added above, but link back provided as promised here.]
[Just in...Breaking or rather Re-Creating the mold: and I am only up to the word "defecit" in Steve Clemons question but I am having a feeling it relates to my just bolded and repeated quote in last bracket, and to wrap this up before it is too diffuse I seems to build upon earlier comments if not leeds.]

Friday, September 14, 2012

Politics is local?

Ground Game ? *

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://open.salon.com/blog/ted_frier/2012/09/12/losing_gop_in_denial_over_own_failures
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/10/why_i_left_the_gop/

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/12/mitt%E2%80%99s_shameful_libya_statement/
http://theweek.com/article/index/233148/the-death-of-an-american-in-libya

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/cairo_embassys_statement_what_went_wrong/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press/vp/48959856/#48959768 ***

Not the usual MO.** 

[ http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/09/13/house-race-koster-opts-for-the-full-romney/ ]

*Scroll over is sufficient until [fn] and post /under-construction(also redux labels) R done.
** "well" not exactly [!]

*** dropped link [!]

[Unfinished read, refinished read.(perspectivism) Politics over war.  Obama has made progress in foreign policy, but Republicans want to take it back.  The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Iran(an evolution) are the examples of diplomacy(d) over preemption.  It all sprung from the 2000 election debacle, resistance to Clinton policy and the failure on September 11th with the supposed post-9-11 world.  But it is spelled out in the perspective that we cannot expect to teach democracy or politics over there, without practicing it over here(^).  I will refrain from further tangents or links on this post, but I will note that the two reads just mentioned also reflect a bit of a balancing act that is not nearly as cut and dry as it might be written.  One of the key differences in the big picture that makes the previous administration a stand out failure in American History is the combination of the voodoo(b) economics(arithmatic/fuzzy math+fuzzy English) with the neo-con perspective of American Exceptionalism (which is not) exemplified by choosing a war without paying for it.  The success that is so difficult is because politics is local except for them^(f).  This is demonstrated by the current Radical Republican opposition(c) to the Arab Spring,^^^ which removed dictators and is allowing(a) for democracy that might not turn out to be to our liking.  Bush said war is hard work, but just because you want to fight, does not mean that progress and peace(with diplomacy and politics) are not harder work, and more profitable.  That is part of true exceptionalism.

^refrain from a bumber snicker]

9-15-12
(a) FOX wrong about Libya says McCain.
(b) Foreign policy is Bane of Politics: bankruptcy bailout business not an option in either.
(c)  Loose lips? Republican Threat to National Security
(d) not! but whiney!

(^) ibid re^frain [see (d)]

9-17-12 (e) not embedded  i.e. that's right, there is no (e)
Seriously [!] folks ?
[^^ Apologies for sarcasm, but there is a diversity of reliability in the perspectives/sources provided.]
[NOW^^^ w/Alex Wagner w/Martin Basher on America Abroad.^^ But natural track of changing the strategy for Romney of change or status quo. i.e. hijacking change and boogieman status quo. Cam-Pain not working, Obama not running.]
[There is an (f) ]
^^ viscous cycle of anachronism
^^^ then Martin Bashir (NeoMitt)(Mittastrophe of asterisked?)

Sunday, December 07, 2008

Deja Voodoo?

Fuzzy Math + Fuzzy English = 1 Heckuva Job
[This is an old quip of mine updated** with new links embedded.]

A COROLLARY:
Litigated Math + Mitigated Language = the inverse of the slippery slope.

Just what does that mean? Well it means that it is a lot harder to make progress than to run things down. It means we must be as careful backing out of the ditch, as we were careless getting the driver that got us there. (Sorry to mix rhetoric and metaphor here, but it is an uphill battle *that will take all hands on deck.0

*this is a Laffer speaking of hills, I suggest that you search for the boat in Reagan's words not to mention Lincoln's stroke of labor.

[And where do I get the voodoo? Well is just isn't magic. But the key as Bill Frist said is "when done right". It also seems to depend on the side of the curve one is on before changes are made, not to mention the application of the terms incentive and work when it comes to capital.]

[Update: 12-8-08 King County Re-Org and the inspiration from the Tax Reform debacle there.

** I attempt to represent this as a formula or parody of math, but the links I have inserted were not necessarily known to me at the time I formulated an earlier version, just the history as we lived it, in the form of Reaganomics and early Bushisms.]

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Slam Dunk to the Circular File!

U.S. Spy Agencies Criticized On Iran
GOP-Led Panel Faults Intelligence

Based on the above sub-title of the article alone a conclusion that it should be filed under another slam dunk of something was merited. A slam dunk of intelligence period and in all forms.

But a key paragraph proves that:

The report relies exclusively on publicly available documents. Its authors did not interview intelligence officials. Still, it warns the intelligence community to avoid the mistakes made regarding weapons of mass destruction before the Iraq war, noting that Iran could easily be engaged in "a denial and deception campaign to exaggerate progress on its nuclear program as Saddam Hussein apparently did concerning his WMD programs."

How could any fair and balanced person analyse let alone criticize or come to a conclusion "exclusively on publicly available documents" and "not interview intelligence officials"? Only by having a conclusion that you do not want any facts to get in the way of or for intelligence not to be in the picture.

This is not to say that there are many who do not know, but if one knew, then what? That is farther out of the frame. Just because they fear not to act, because they don't know, does not mean, to act, will not be harder work.

Saturday, September 10, 2005

PART OF A DRAFT FOR AN INVESTIGATION

The flood of investigations that have not gone anywhere, call for new leadership at the top.

Short of that I recommend a bi-partsan team with full powers consisting of Jimmy Carter and Colin Powell.

Short of that the last hope is that congress do it's job and the press work even harder.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina it is clear that Congress needs to take seriously the role of the federal government in meeting the needs of its people. I am urging you as my representative in Washington to:

1. Fund the health care, housing, nutrition, employment and education needs of the victims of Hurricane Katrina;

2. abandon all plans to extend or grant additional tax breaks to wealthy individuals and corporations; and

3. abandon the budget reconciliation plan to cut health care and nutrition programs for low-income families.

I HAVE AMENDED THIS TO ADD MY OWN CONCERN REGARDING THE NOMINATION OF JUDGE ROBERTS:

From the Editorial in the September 19th issue of THE NATION
as summarized here:

1. His conflict of interest while interviewing for his nomination.

2. His claim he would recuse himself when it came to "conflict with his private religious views.

3. His participation in the Republican remake of federalism,

4. and the release of his Solicitor General papers when he was "detailed specifically to handle the most politically sensitive materials".

JUST POINT ONE(conflict of interest during the process) should disqualify Roberts.

And to go on:
POINT 2 (recusal should really be questioned in his confirmation process)
a. He already violated that principle.
b. He must delineat his views or caseS on which he would recuse himself in the future.

POINT 3 is counter indicative of the latter and confirmation of the former
while Point 4 is further documentation being hidden.

IF THESE ARE NOT EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES (Under the terms of the Judicial Compromise of the Gang of 14) that there are three unfinished inquiries that need further independence and progress, (Downing Street, Plame Outing and Phase II on the Use of Pre-War Intelligence) but now a fourth continuing disaster and fiasco that (Bush will investigate Brownies Heckuva Job at FEMA)...

THEN I GUESS AS SOMEONE PUT IT --
Hurricane Katrina was only a
"NEAR CATASTROPHE".