RE-Insurgency of Legacy

I gave earlier tips for the Bush Legacy, but now the Washington Post comes out with their's for any hopes of resurgency for Bush. There is a lot to read of the former, at least I read the latter.

My point at the top of it, was pointed out here:

Whether Bush could emulate those examples is an open question. He points to his time as Texas governor, when he worked with Democratic legislators. But since winning the White House, he has only sporadically reached out to the other side. And unlike Reagan or Clinton, he presides over an unpopular war with no end in sight.

One thing not really pointed at was that the Reagan and Clinton presidencies did have some other hurdles to leap: Reagan the Iran-Contra Affair and Clinton an impeachment over an affair, both in their second terms.

[Tack link added today on Bush Legacy]

IRONY PRESIDENT

Just to repeat, if I said it already.  Bush is no Reagan.  Reagan was the Teflon President and Bush is the Irony President.  Meaning his own words are the best rhetoric against him.  What did not stick to Reagan could splash back at Bush. 

The following letter from October 2000 should have been indicative of future actions and raised concerns about what the media was not asking.  See Link for original letter. 

PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS
Bush the 'uniter' would separate us from government

I should have thanked you earlier (Seattle Post Intelligencer) for your intelligent endorsement of Al Gore for president. I already pointed out to the other major Seattle paper the difficulties in making sense when an endorsement decision is made by the publisher and explained by the editorial page editor. My first instinct was to drop the other subscription, but I will watch both for other editorial differences first. One of the best reasons for voting against George W. is found in his own campaign rhetoric: "I am a uniter not a divider" followed by "I trust people, not government." This is supposed to be a government "of the people, by the people and for the people."

George W. has just become the ultimate divider. He wants to divide the people from their government. What makes even less sense is why he even wants to join the government. But we know the answer to that. Something about people being better off with less government. Maybe the richest 1 percent do believe that, but baseball team owner Bush and former Cabinet member Cheney?

Bush Is No Reagan.

The Club For Growth will be showing Reagan at the Berlin Wall and Bush at Ground Zero. Though I would not give too much credit for the Berlin Wall falling to Reagan, some do. But comparing the two should imply that Bush gets some credit for the World Trade Center twin towers falling. Whatever credit is deserved, one represents the end of the cold war, the other the beginning of the terror war. Just how can there be a good comparison? One is the end of something that was already in trouble. The other is the beginning of trouble that sees no end. They are similar in that they selectively choose a perspective. One could see the coming fall of the Soviet Empire, the other could not see that failures or successes are not options but results.

Who Are They Calling Elitist?

By Eric Altermann
[now fully read]
My reply:
Who are the "cultural elite"? I think it is pretty "fair and balanced" to say that it is "people who only think they know better than you". It is also a label brought to you by people who don’t think they need to, and don‘t know they are, but don‘t either. The same people who brought you the "culture warrior". The same people who brought you "trickle down" * . The same people who brought you "lift yourself up by your own bootstraps". The same people who now probably don’t have boot straps, no matter how much they rely on the bottom line. The same people who think the bottom line is all that matters. The same people who don’t see people as the bottom line. The same people who see corporations as people. The same people who put people under the trickle down, rather than in the first line of the constitution. The same people who can’t read the second line of the constitution but can read the second amendment, and don’t worry again about the 1st amendment. Of course unless you are far enough above the line to own a corporation. And then of course it is best to forget about what people are, or what one owns, until of course, it comes to democracy. Then it is stay the course of course, don’t ask the people. But more important is, don’t ask, don't tell...US.

* (nfr) - This is an actual footnote from Wikipedia **:
"A major feature of these policies was the reduction of tax rates on capital gains, corporate income, and higher individual incomes, along with the reduction or elimination of various excise taxes. David Stockman, who as Reagan's budget director championed these cuts but then became skeptical of them, told journalist William Greider that the term "supply-side economics" was used to promote a trickle-down idea.[4]

It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,' so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory. [5] - David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's budget director "

And from the other "fair and balanced" perspective called denial, Thomas Sowell wrote of The "Trickle Down". Economics Straw Man (nfry), and claimed: "No such theory can be found in even the most voluminous and learned books on the history of economics. It is a straw man." Who apparently is not elite enough to be an economist ***, but was allowed into the ranks of politicians, businessmen and budget directors.
** Now, Wikipedia should not be considered the most authoritative source, but it is usually sourced, so don't be elitist. And reading footnotes might put you in that crowd or is it not needing them.
***(The strawman and Stockman (nfry), not Sowell (nfry) .)

I Told You So.

NO... a lot of Frackin' People told us so.
[See CAUTION below]
In particular Aristotle and his physics not supplanted till Newton.

Just where am I coming from and where am I going? Good question, but for the moment I accidently clicked on a number of years ago and hit upon examples of the ongoing interpretation. [Interpretations and rules of power.(Or Not)]

[BTW: I have a few labels to catch up on, but I will make another connection. Prior to the earthquake, with the passing of David Broder, it occurred to me that one should not feel a loss, based on which side of the political spectrum(or geography) one is on. Not that it does not matter to many people. After the earthquake it is still all about how it effects us, not about how it impacts those that were closer to the problem.* But it is not wrong to politically learn from tragedy, or just plain expect be the cause. Not that I connect the cause, but there are laws, and always time for pause.]

* not to minimize nor distract from the Japan suffering, but it is very ironic that Ronald Reagan a product of GE, had his nine most dangerous words ("I'm from the government and I'm here to help.") and then his namesake USS Ronald Reagan has to navigate the perils of radiation from a product of GE.
[CAUTION: Some these links may be sensitive or insensitive** depending on you're own perspective, but I will add that some may be sufficient just to scroll over or click on for a hint of mine, and look forward to parsing or bolding some for better focus.]

** Lewis Black On Broadway? Frackin' or Bleepin' not employed, it will be the real deal(meaning not deleteds).

Obama: most popular 100 days since Reagan

In context it is cherry picking, for since Eisenhower, Reagan and Obama are only average at 63% in the Gallup Poll. However the degree of difficulty as to the dives they face as to comparable handi-caps, of Lincoln and FDR are off track bets. The parimutuel may be political and polarized. (sarcastic cynicism) But now for a more detailed data dump for your own skew. And talk about fun with math.

[Meanwhile: less popular The Need to Roll Back Presidential Power Grabs by Arlen Specter is a win and place for the show.]
[Another one up on Bush: beat his record on getting a Republican to defect.]

Alter Under Construction

not to* mention** Altar.
It's the change thing.

* NWRoots
** Follow ups
[7-18-11 Bleep 'n Compromise posted and up dates
[7-19-11 America under De-construction: Not exactly Triangulation or is it ?]
[Robbing Peter to Pay Paul? Or the revisit the ditch metaphor?]
[7-20-11 - New Metaphor - Voodoo Or Stock Car: Not exactly new, but the analogy for the complaints from both sides of the political spectrum is that they want the roof on before the walls are built. But then there is the D-Ri've punned or they've punned, which I have Re-vised, where the economy is in the ditch and some have the solution of running it into a ditch again to fix it. Not to get too sunk in metaphors, rising tide or not, there are D-R i've O(a)rs of the economy no matter the vehicle or passengers.]
[From the desktop: Thom Hartmann and Ravi Batra 'n WME]
[On the other hand, in context:

Redistribution has a "from" side (taxation) and a "to" side (spending). On the "from" side, the notion that government should use taxation to increase rather than decrease equality is hardly Marxist. In "The Wealth of Nations," Adam Smith begins his section on taxation with the following maxim: "The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities." To ask otherwise, Smith writes, would be obviously unfair.]

[Loose thought- Cut, Cap and Balance- vs. The Badger 14 Re: fleeing their jobs. Pappa mmm Mow Mow, speaking of olds mobile oar 'n balance.]
[Quick Sand of Sorts: Rove, Ailes, Nordquist, Eyman- see Four Horsemen of the Trick-L Down.]
[The Change Thing? - Sanders on Ratigan? Debt Restructuring - Pour Analogy: If the US were a household and the GDP were its income, its overall debt would be close to but still less than one year's income. Note: this is a poor analogy, but fair in the light of the alter. SEGUE: A caller to AM1090 pointed out a better analogy. The debt does not take into account the true assets of our country. Mt. Rushmore / The Grand Canyon / The shiny seas.]

[7-21-11 Fair and Balanced, and Leaning Back: "Cry me a river" Michael Steele leans back at Joan Walsh's Obama/Reagan comparison(Fair link - 3:20) on MSNBC's Hardball, but the reality is that Obama as a Senator and as a President fits the bill of the history. As a Senator his vote against the debt ceiling raise, was an attempt to address the deficit, just as what forced the compromise Reagan made to get his. Meanwhile the people are with President Obama as well as Cenk Uygur.]
[7-22-11 Obama 2012]

Thank G-D for GW!

Speaking of Cherry Tree.

[note: must update* hatchet BS]

[Note lack of link to GWB in current campaign, yet...]

(hint: the bottom line is the important link in the last link)

* this link's 1st two links are expired, yet are currently mysteriously prophetic**. (See "hatchet" for MSNBC proxy for what Xfinity currently links to.)

** I truly cannot be sure what those missing links were, but here are more recent possibilities.

[update: found proxies]

[Although George W. Bush is no George Washington, we may have him to thank for bursting our bubble economy***.]

*** Stiglitz

[mana from / the field : OK, these are lame leaps. Forbes predicts that Obamacare will not be overturned. See "Money" line 4. / See Thom @ "*" there and continued re:ALEC and BS.]

[BTW: Toure's Turn^: The New Jim Crow fits right into this Good Old Progress. For reference we have the War on Drugs, started when? When we were winning it in the early Reagan Administration. Happy Good Friday!^^ ]

^ yet to link

^^unexpected link

(And MS on Hardball is real zinger.^^^)

[Politics Nation: Raw Money Clash, it is not Harvard that is the problem but the Faculty Lounge.]

^^^ Winter/Spring Trending Fall Flexibility and the Big Zipper.

{Rachel Maddow shoots up War on Drugs: Republican declares Ronald Reagan unpatriotic[!]}

RONALD REAGAN: (R.I.P) RESPECTIVE IN PEACE

Much must and will be said about the passing of a great leader, President Ronald Reagan. His tragic illness in his last years is especially unfitting for a man loved by many. History will be written and rewritten. Now is not the time for trying to counter balance all the hope and inspiration he gave to many but to keep an open mind about bringing them to reality. His friends and critics alike should appreciate his skills and character, which were a most powerful weapon. [SEE LINK-- AMERICAN DREAMER: NEWSWEEK]

Nobel Oblige

Prize and Prejudice Countdown with Steve Clemons [#4 The Nobel Savage]
The Myth of "America" truthout.com
Hope and Change
A New Climate
Training for Choice

Update: 8 Most Outrageous Attacks on Obama's Nobel Peace Prize
Borax Prize ***
[Embedded in my nomination* (Prize; which was a shot in the dark) was an "either or" diatribe by Charles Krauthammer. Decline is a Choice appropriately concluding with the words of Demosthenes:
...when asked what was to be done about the decline of Athens. His reply? "I will give what I believe is the fairest and truest answer: Don't do what you are doing now."
Given the hegemony or decline choice there must be no denial that Obama is not doing what we have been doing. But that is not the choice.]

* I have rendered in bold, read links. And nominated the Borax Prize as the Un-Nobel Prize {comment pending review, or hit a snag}

[Update: Put in con text. Obama lambasts major faiths.**
And surmize. Our Reagan. ]

** a pun on con_text
*** 10-14-09 Renamed: Borax Award

McCain camp sexist.

Sarcasm? (see video)
No- perfect rhetoric.
[If you can't stand the heat...]
I don't know about Sam Stein's comment, but Ed Schultz's callers thought Campbell Brown was being sarcastic? Could be, but that only misses who it is aimed at. Ed and I take it serious. Maybe I missed where Ed is lost, but the Palin selection is no Joke. The point is that sexism is their defense for their offense. It is great that she is a woman. But if she were a man, her policies would be the point where we would have issues. Meanwhile she (the Maverick) is being trained in the same old politics. Oops, now I have trampled into agism. But referenced back to training and issues should bring to mind Reagan not to mention Nixon handlers, by way of Bush and Rove.

Forget about Truman and his "get out of the kitchen" metaphor: they can't even stand the sarcasm, let alone the media.
[get out of the sarcasm...]
[But it remains to be seen when she does face the media, will she be prepared or just polished and the media still the battered significant other.]

On the Other Plan(s)

[Originally I was amending or running on the last link.]
...on the other hand: while I am not advocating Independents or Single Payer, they just might be the way things need to go. As the Reverend Al Sharpton said this morning, it would be unseemly for the President to be an advocate for any separate interests, as I paraphrase him, and as others would call it leadership in reference to the parade. This was linked anachronistically. Note the tetra of DRIP, (now that was manipulated: Democratic Republican Independent Progress), not to mention the Bloomin' ** Fringe. And an earlier thought about this field, Creationist Recreation Applied Properly, no CRAP. Speaking of anachronism, if someone turned water into wine, who turned whine*** into trickle down? Answer? Just a Laffer. No disrespect to the good nature and good deeds of Reagan and Nixon or vice verse us, but they have certainly been proved to be relative.]

** EPA = Expletive Properly Applied.
*** Needlessly(sic)

Underlying this thinking is a reaction to those that think we think we know better, and those that think they are we. I directly refer to the rhetoric of the Right and the fact that they are the minority for a reason, continually evidenced by their behavior as well as the fact that polls change and they had better.* Wow, I think that was anti-sic or at least freely punctuated, but who the Fringe knows or is it the Shadow or Charlie McCarthy(**)ism?
* Bold summary and link(correction: reference) to other asterisk not to mention runonwordplay.
[belated ** talk about prophetic gathering of moss I am not sure I know yet.]
[Well...not exactly, but close enough for Hurts work or Wads-worth.]

True Ledership

No, that is not Leadership, it is the pinnacle of the process.

[9-29-11 Under review re: lede*** (does not require a follow-up as the link morphed) But I am trying to find the lost link This one.]

A lede*** requires a follow-up. Like the constitution has its first three articles or branches of the government, the tetrahedron has its base as a triangle and another dimension, and what is the point? That is political. There are the Legislative, Executive and the Judiciary braches. But what is the point? Or rather the base*?

We the people...

of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

* Oh the humanity
[Another problem? Or anti-pragmatics? The narrative will evolve and involve: Highways or the Low(or No) way. Not to hop the Scotch or translations but...Lock Low Mond?]
["In a perfect world the president ought to wish"...[*]NOT! link(for quote) to be** provided later The Place for Politics.]

** Note: not that I have viewed all the links, but many provide the contrast between progress and anything butT-headism.
[Speaking of Process under-LedeRship.]

*** ledership is not always easy to link: Gunn takes Shot at Alley's Weight.

[Speaking Bane Or Analogies: if spending is the coke, then the debt that Reagan and Bush racked up are illegal debts that need not be paid. Explain that to the defense, healthecare and financial industries(the wealthy) that they need not be paid. In fact, that may actually help regarding the ledership and 2012, if the people realize who the dealers of debt are.]

Delta Dawn


Whose your Daddy?

Rolling Stone. The T[?] (Or the t[!])

[Sum of the some game: War is hard work and progress even more tricky, but a few want(scratch that need) a quick fix.]

[*] [9-21-11 Update: It is regretable that I cannot find the MSNBC segment for the quote above, but as for follow up, pandemonium may be embedded somewhere(not).]

Speaking of...

"global" ** and one for the books, who writes this stuff.
(And I was going to note anachronism ***)

[NOTE: Double use of double asterisks. UPDATE: OBAMA IN BERLIN ]

** Having read the speech Obama took it to the wall ("Look at Berlin"), while McCain took it to the Haus.("a political speech")?

[Speaking of Clearly Look at the video and then the AP writers words and where is "the office of presidency"? Not to mention FOX news and above. The media not getting it right and in fact helping edit McCain's English may be a slight point but then belies most of McCain's slights which are or is his campaign, let alone Obama's much tougher speeches.

** I bumped this section up to a new post hence the [**] is held on to.
*** see bump but also the preemptive intelligence and comparisons to Reagan

Other tracks.

Business Week and Russert and the Media.
My comment there:

Not being a regular consumer of his work, I did not have him on a pedestal, but given the nature of the business he was probably the best they could afford. And given the nature of the world, even harder to find one without more of an edge. Maybe as the comments on Kiley have shown.

My suggestion to MSNBC is to fill several pairs of shoes in memory of Russert's work. Not as in trying to fill his shoes, but to uphold his several jobs. It will still be difficult. [Maybe David Bender if not Rachel Maddow could fill one or more of those pairs, but not necessarily that they or GE* would want them to fit.]
[[[Ed Schultz would be a fit for some shoes here, but I think he enjoys the job he's got too much and could actually be in the running for the whole show. And of course Keith Olbermann would be great, if he was not so great at his present job.]]]

- - - - -

Meanwhile I have been writing in other formats, message board and email. And will get to the following (nfry), later.
- - - - -
When McCain Drops by Steve Rosenbaum
US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes
Broken Laws, Broken LivesPhysicians for Human Rights
Michael Reagan Should be charged for terrorism
or they are right, our freedoms are what gives us terrorists.
How could a wrong be so right? NOT!

She talks about the real America. Will she be heard?
In no particular order:
Kucinich: Impeachment Not "Off the Table"

I hope to be back to these links, but wish that they did not tie in so well, that more will be following. But I will summarize my feeling that McCain may be just a place holder in a strategy where there is too much to loose not to give it more than he's got, and that plays into the way I see them always playing it.

Meanwhile Obama has "flip-flopped"[**] on the Public Campaign Finance System but faces it in a more honest a principled manner than the media can follow or wishes to follow. While McCain may just be a distraction for a sleeper candidate, they cannot come up with one that should not be asked what he or she would do about holding history accountable.

* GE profits are a picture that may not fit full disclosure journalism, economics or environment, but then I acknowledge I don't fit or have the full picture either. Meaning I have taken digs at them, and it does not mean that profits are above principles or question, but that it is another story.

** The Catch-22 for them not us, but we*** can't help it. "Flip-flop" is a charge that was created by those that fear nuance or the work required to do their jobs or an attempt to do too many jobs or diminish those that see your own flip-flops, which maybe is all they can see, since this has created a loop. [[I did not intend to throw the book at a term, but then we are all about the Catch-44. And then there is the actual records. Not that I want to go there, but that may be one of the reasons we are here, with McCain a candidate, not his record, but the difficulty in facing it all, and the actions/reactions that brings.]]

*** "we" does depend on a job sometimes and who "them" is, not to mention the word.(While there may be some typo's or gramatical sloppiness in this post, this line have been double and triple checked mentally, not technologically.)

Tails Aside

I mean Tales...or mythification.
My wife and I were taking a walk before the Apple Cup (The Husky-Cougar match-up)and ran across a house divided, speaking of tents, big or united. The game was not really on my mind that morning when I whipped up the tale of Cats and Dogs, but as we walked by this house, the wind must have blown, and their flag seemed to speak for the future. Huskies won 35-28 with 44 seconds left. It was a bad week for cats which will hopefully lead to a good week or more for 44.
[12-8-10 And Remember the Wave and the base is of. And Obama is no Cheer Leader, nor Third Way, but maybe of the Fifth Dimension.] The Ribble(Pun) here is that my thought ran to the cheerleaders Reagan and Bush, but it is interesting to note two more, FDR and Eisenhower.

WWW Wisconsin Lesson?

Wisconsin Walker Walk-out not Winner.
Focus on Mittle?  Jansing & Co.
Radical over-reach was the money message
Romney can't run. 
Wisconsin issues are national temp late. 
Money mess age matters.
It's the stupid economics.
Tag team of dialogue* is message for the mess age.
Morgon Freeman on physics lesson. 
Chris Jansing on journalism/economics lesson? 

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120604/US.Wisconsin.Recall/?cid=hero_media_sea
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120606/US.Battleground.Wisconsin/?cid=hero_media_sea
http://news.yahoo.com/whatever-walkers-fate-obama-leads-romney-wisco-213721900--abc-news-politics.html

Clinton is not Obama's Trump.
Is Jansing CBS's Rose?

*Obama's joker?  Not!
Clinton is America's stand-up scholar.
Not so sure about Jansing's guests being voice of God!

Speaking of missing links, technical difficulties lost more than a few Re: Lean Forward.
The Place for Politics is (a missing link**) and the place for Share-Un-Angle and Ronald Reagan Jr.

** hour between*** Chuck and Chris
Owe the Iron Knee?

[Martin Bashir and goose or gander.]
[Romney answer Rachel Maddow maybe?]

*** found 6-7-12(not exactly)

The Randslide?

I believe I must credit Sarah Palin for using this term. But Rand Paul must credit Rachel Maddow for giving him an even hand.

The Pre-Midterm Mandate: The Ed Effect Sometimes the Democrats ask too little.* I second Ed. And Stephanie Miller. Not to mention TeaParty of the Left?

There is a theory out there that slips my mind now, but if I have not recrafted it, mine is that the Republicans run down government and Democrats have an up hill battle.** Actually I just sharpened it a bit. But economically*** it is a serious theory, if you look at each of the past Democratic Presidents since Eisenhower. Each administration has had a lot to recover from, and have been progressively less timid in addressing the slide, yet increasingly needful of change. Careful change.

* my amendment to Sestak paraphrasing President Kennedy.
** and I don't mean the slippery tubbers(Cf)i.e. link and Ctrl F "tub"
*** Oh and my General(Mills) Eisenhower pun aside,(but not the inversion of the check mark), my theory actually covers the existence of the Democratic Party. I will simply say that since Vietnam there has only been Carter and Clinton while the Carter was not out of the shadow of debt he faced the energy crisis, Clinton failed to transcend the Reagan revolution. I think it hinges on the failure to understand Keynesian economics and the evolution of empires or power period.
[see comments presently three]

Obama the Uniter!

It is about the politics.  I am not finished searching for a reference* I recently heard George W. Bush make, but it was in retrospect about his handling of politics and how he did not worry about it**.  Apparently it was someone elses job.  But what is the politics(?) is my point.^  Bush claimed himself the uniter. Obama is the uniter of politics.  As in there is the partisan divide, and there is nothing wrong with making that clear, but there is the political process which Romney is also not all about, let alone making it clear.   

*what me worry?  Applies to GWB, Reagan, Mitt and facts
** Rove was believe somehow involved, and probably Cheney
*** I might be getting warmR but I have not embedded this asterisk yet.

^ more what Mittastrophe?

hmmm?

New Thinking on the Economy
by Dean Baker,
co-Director of the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

also Beat the Press

[This points to an interesting problem or ROR:
(see labels for explaination)

The government is not getting its money's worth when buying bad assets. Anyone who understands how the economy works and the market works should not wonder. That is how it works. That is the point of buying bad assets, whether one wonders whether it should be done or not. If someone else would buy them the same would apply. The housing bubble* is a similar mechanism within the greater mechanism that is the financial problem.

How the economy works is different than how economics works. The economy is the thing. Economics is an equation. They both need tweaking and can work the way they are designed, but will tweak someone. Unfortunately an equation in economics will work only to the extent that everything (that is needed or wanted) is included in it. The economy works regardless but almost everything is included, except they are tweaking when they do the economics. And speaking of bubbles, they leak.

It might be easier to agree what not to do, than what to do, as long as failure is an option. But failure is not an option; it is a choice. This may seem like lost words, but failure is a potential outcome. And it can no more be simply allowed**, than freedom. Maybe this is Philosophy 701, but the Washington Post is not up to Journalism 201, let alone the economy.]

* housing equals assets except for the financial blowing of the economics.

** meaning failure should be prevented, and freedom promoted(are these not good points to work on?)

[Speaking of link(and equations): the stimulating if not shaky journalism below.(nfry)]

[only glanced at but likely recommended read: and see comments and embedded Krugman. For now: They'll be back.]

[That was Shwartznegger but later Ron Reagan covers similar territory with a guest who earlier slammed the stimulus. That was in December, so it was not the current plan. Which should be called what is: ARARA for Jobs! or just the begining or what is a quick and practical start. But does have a good chart on "Bang for the Buck", which depending on the math(see comments), could make a 1 trillion dollar difference in effectiveness.] [Post comment comment: of course this is as ridiculous a hypothesis as Plato's Republic, but for the sake of dialogue, a totally bipartisan package, could be seen to have potential for zero stimulus, as dollar for dollar is not really a bang.]