Replacement Refs or Not...

If it were a debate* we would have stopped it. 
Not to pun on Xfinity, but while the Comcast links*** will expire.**,
it's the congress John!  Bring it on, Joe!  The President needs to hold a Sit Down.

Before I get down to the task of preserving<*> those links whether read or not, I will explain the Rogue John and Wax Leak of the asterisks.  Although the lesson learned from "Simon says"^^ might be to actually read links more thoroughly, the lesson from the Debate may be more complex but parallel of sorts.  By "rogue",<*> I mean that former Presidential Candidate McCain(first link) confesses an expectation for him lowering the expectations of Paul Ryan, while  disrespecting the Vice President and framing an expectation for gaffs.  Then in regard to the " ball of wax " that Palin leaks, it connects the "boys" to the other "race" speech.^^^  (There, that's the GPS-uncross-Rhodes.)

And a far as my Tan Gents(Dr. Trumps), being a Seahawk fan has nothing to do with my take on the moderator.  Well, who knows?  But Mr. Lerrer has been critcized for not moderating or having a good performance, but I think that given the style over substance versus substance with style, these are not legitimate debates.  And within the political system (such as it is) it was not his job to interfere with the players being themselves in order to let them make the proper contrast.  Again having only heard most of the debate on the radio, I thought that the President walked away with it, but that was under the condition that facts matter.  Neither he nor Lehrer could have done a better job in the case that they don't. 

BTW^: Speaking of "boys", we have heard cracks about the Harvard "professor" and I suspect he has had to deal with a few wise-guys or gulls[!]

*if the link were fact checked...ditto.
(McCain goes rogue.)(Palin leaks ball of wax .)
** not that I have read them yet or the recommend them.
***The point of this lede and the heading...

^ apologies to literary geeks for my style over elements.(But that was Core Knell.) 
^^ added in edit mode
^^^ to be expanded later(but see lede and stupid...I mean congress and John, Joe & Ryan. i.e. the context of the politics of "relief' legislation.)
[In the spirit of medium...? ]
[Not to parse too acutely, but it is the medium and the mess age.]
(Bu' dump 'ump [!] ... )
Re:Ouch?(see FLASHNOTE)
Post-Subjectivism?  Might it be, rational subjectivism?

<*> 10-7-12(See FLASHNOTE: under construction)
<*> 10-9-12  slight edit ( "r.... ",)

The Other Debates

Substance over*** Style? 
Here I go again,
preemptive over* reading**. 

* preceding two links are top embeds in prior two links
** links all inserted before reading ** or any others(including last insert ***)
*** retro GPS of sorts(C-lede/heading)

[Ouch! Mid^ -PI solar^^ flare... ***]

^ scroll over(not exactly^^^)
^^ having read ***...
Inslee is no Biden or Obama, McKenna is no Romney or Ryan. ^^(Re...)
But on the issue of conflict of interest, the conflict is ironic.



^^^ F'n notes:  Show me the money, Goodbye Yellow Brick Road ? !

^^(Re...) Don't call me..(Re...cycling^^)
...except for the Congressional connection(Biden/Inslee/Ryan and party differences).  Note that it is quite different to be a Republican governor in a Democratic controlled state(Romney), than a bipartisan Democratic president in a more evenly controlled but partisanly divided congress.  Republicans have been against what they might have been for if they had been in control(less so maybe locally given this context).  The debt being the Toll Keen under the bridge.   C-Mythmatic. Not to mention the road we hoe or Rove. The irony is even more dimentional in the local situation in that, Inslee as governor (re:legislative branch) would be more Obama(re:leg.br.) than McKenna as governor would be either Romney as executive.(re:either state or national leg.br.)  See Romney touting his term in Massachusettes with an 86% Democratic legislature. (It doesn't take much to sit down and cooperate.)  This is no excuse for thinking that divided government means more partisanship rather than cooperation and compromising as Democratic principles. (Further editing if NOT *,^'s may be needed[!]#$%)

[Re: Cycling notations (*,^,#'s) F'n Apologies Tour, not there yet. (quid pre**quo?) Stop that ? Ouch. ]

[ WeGotEd: Sherrod Brown / Uncle Joe/ Uncle Sam/ G.I. Joe / Gastro-Intestinal Joe! Roger Out! ]
[ Alter Net ... Substance/Style, Objective/Subjective, Reality/Matters(slash)dimentionalism what the heck is the point? ]

[Editors Note:(me that is)...the entirety of this post was finished before this. Bolded above from "The debt"...to..."Rove". They can't handle the Biden.  The key crack @little troll friends.  So...(I will have to review to see reference to Rove, but here is a rant or ramble(NOT) his nickname is "Turd Blossom"!]
[Randi Rhodes] 
[Paul Ryan Told 24 Myths in 40 Minutes]

10-16-12 Biden/Ryan Debate added.

WHAT NERVE!

We know he has nerve, but does he have a conscience. When he was running the first time, his conscience not the law was his guide, and he is still on the same course. The Einstein and King George III juxtaposition about following one’s conscience no matter the state is another interesting twist on uncurious George being worried about his own nerve. He is the state and he has only nerve. While he serves others I might add.

On the immigration tangent, if labor is only a substance to be used by those with the power to do so, then it is a drug where the users and abusers should be reigned in. This may mean a new perspective on the health of individuals and the community as well. Retrogressing to my earlier less footnoted or linked style of commentary, I will try to catch up on these later.

Before closing this post I was going to provide only one link, but ran across a news item where only the title sent me on a tangent to a comment:
What the heck is wrong with having a locally adjusted tax credit for the cost of living, by state. That would involve a deduction for the basic costs of living and then a flat rate based on the cost of doing business and government. More details may be the devil, but not necessarily any worse than requiring health care or pushing healthcare savings plans.

NOTE: The "more details" were not that bad in this case as they were more or less just a I imagined and went off on.