Showing posts sorted by relevance for query bracket. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query bracket. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Brackets and the Debt Clock

[9-26-11 UPDATE: Tax Plan and "Fiscal Terrorism" A slight rearrangement and edit for clarity below. ]

[In might be easier if the links and asterisks are referenced later.***]

The whole issue of cuts over revenues * _ must be sorted out on two fronts. There is the issue of the so-called "progressive" tax code. Then there is the issue of the history of the tax code(see* pun), and how it impacts the debt clock.

The first regards the "Buffet Rule". There are the actual tax bracket rates(10% to 35%), and then there is the effective tax rate, which is further complicated(reduced) by captial gains tax rates(15%). Let us also be reminded that even the richest pay the same rates for their first brackets worth of income,(ZERO), let alone each bracket's worth of income. But since the capital gains tax is most of the income of the bulk of the rich, the effective tax rate will not be the actual sum of each bracket's worth. I will not bother to do some math here, but I hope it is clear. Basically the effective tax rate for the rich are not effective as "progressive" by a look at their brackets. They effectively get a lower tax rate, because capital gains are taxed less than the middle to top income brackets.

Second, there is the matter of the "Debt Clock", which should have its own brackets of sorts. The Bush wars, as well as his Medicare(fix), not to mention his tax cuts are off the clock so-to-speak. Not to mention the economic down turn which should probably reset the clock. If I was able to clarify the first issue, I don't mean to make up for it by complicating the second. But the "spending under borrowing" is more than a pun, it is an economic effect. For now I just mean to address the clock issue. Where I imagine that there could be some way to show previous administration's as well as the current administration's** debt clocks.

Now, I hope that I can get away with not providing more detail. But it is not so simple, as I almost closed the issue. It would not be simply an historical replay of their debt clocks, but a sorting of the debt from their budgets. So we would have several clocks at different brackets in time. This is the matter, where the devil is in the details. This almost becomes a matter for mathematical physicists in regard to the dynamics of budgets and time, in that each bracket in time has potential future impact where political economists would sit in for the mathematical physicists.

But, I hope that it can be imagined that each bracket in time, have two clocks. Their own budget and the debt that was not theirs. I will leave it for real economists or accountants to sort out whether there needs to be more than two, as I don't know if it is just my imagination, or the reality of the difficulty in sorting this out. In this regard, I mean the difficulty of sorting a budget's impact over time. But maybe it can be imagined from the effective impact that war and medicare can have on people and how dynamic that is over time, let alone the setting of tax rates. In fact, that is addressed by one or two instances alone. The Bush tax cuts were temporary. The Bush wars and the Medicare fix were not paid for.



[Please note that the links and image were inserted after completion of this blog post. They include, in order: The New York Times, FOX NEWS, No-Labels, and the Center for American Progress [9-26-11: OurFuture.org], where it was not my intent to lower the level of discourse nor bring more nuanced metaphor to light. But please note my No-Labels comment, in regard to the referees and what is on the table. Not to pun on a game buffet, but the neither the cuts sandwich nor the sand wedged in links were referenced for the writing of this post. But it may be suitable that brackets and clocks are used in games. This is a not so nuanced reference to the sports analogy of politics.]

*which alone needs some economic sorting: I mean "spending under borrowing", to pun a bit.
** oops, a whole new clock issue, why not bracket it by congresses?
*** not to mention by myself

[9-23-11 Update 'nuff s' Ed?] Iron Chef!

[9-29-11 update on timing, see comment 2. Speaking of timing,(darn) lost it for a moment.]

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

By Polar

wise crackers re:cycled?

Re:dimentionalism and polls*, beyond them and us. 
I will take the brunt of the crackers crack, and crumble the pun on the wise words of Simon or who says... what?

Post Bracket Eds(below): Somewhere there has been a leak of a congressional sense that more needs to done in Syria.  Are the wrest** leaning back as the west stands ground?  

*Not to trans\pose Ed and Aye. Formerly(ed. note) =columns.
(FP2)[on the tick tock ? (kn-0t)]
[Closing Bracket Eds?]
** con-volution of lean and means: Re. cheer leaders (stand up/stair down)

9-11-13 Pre-Post Or Us. (I/eye) The Byrd is the Word ! (the tick tock) or teddy?
Harmony and Irony? Duh Bares ? [!]
[The Last Word yesterday in regards to Polar Culture. My original intent was in regards to columns of cracks; mine and others, but also the polarities of the process that brings progress.  Not to mention a crack @ the cold war. Related anachronistic theory: Good Cop/Bad Cop?(Congress/Obama), (Russian Foreign Minister/Putin) or by/bye? Let alone Re:Cycle(today). (The Fog of War and Tactical Voices.) ]

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

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?]

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Ideology

The perspective one has of society's creation and one's role in it.***

Not* Exactly[!]

[Ideology and Iowa are a lot like the eye of the needle or camel.(no pun)]

[Perspective: to be processed later more or less...[!]
Speaking of ant or fable TV. Democrats cannot afford to have distractions or liars, just because "the Right" does it. Speaking of irrelative**: ant:Anthony, Ed:Rush,(or Beck Or Reck) Whiner:BaneOr, silver lining:golden rule, objective/subjective ]

* iOWa, iRreleFont? Rachel Maddow discusses the "small i" people. But then, eye had not seen her comments.

** something about relative in regards to the differences in ideologies and personalities on spectrum ofor loopiness on the left or right.

***[Media(sources) a side: wMD: I may go on or take hiatus but the bottomline is the top line is mine. i.e. I have only begun the Mike Cormack book, and I am not quoting it. Ibid this bracket.(Thanks to truthout.org for this last crack, not the book]

[!]Hi Ate Us, interesting Try Angle or Segue(way)[]. Or Tr(eye)i Pod?
A.B.C.D...

Friday, October 21, 2011

Lib...Ya[!] is not Free!

There is enough loopiness in Lib...Ya! and
The Politics of the Table, posts.
but HERE is no October Surprise.

See heading: The Lib...Ya[!] pun is free, but freedom is not only not free, it is not a farce.
"no illusions" quoting the president.
Or Iron Knee?

[Local Tangent?]
[Metrics of Coherence: Martin Bashir]
[Metrics of Comprehensiveness:(Dylan Ratigan) Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down, Thumbs off the scale, Thumbs all around. Not to mock a squad, or cheer lede, but sometimes there is a mess in the message. By this I am pinning a tale on the media, not to mention occu-pied pipers. No Don Qui intended.]
[BTW: these last two bracketeds* are pre-and post vision things**. i.e. the coherence was post Martin Bashir, the comprehensiveness(original comprehension) was pre-emptive of viewing Dylan Ratigan, a transition comment of sorts***, but the perspective was coming from sorted strengths and dynamics, as in areas of politics, economics and foreign policy, not to wholistically thumb up or down individuals or fields.]

* re: Martin and Dylan
** segue
*** for proper chronology I closed the bracket and will insert here the intended Bashir and Ratigan, leaving the rest as is.
[10-22-11: inserting links in asterisk(3) and also insert the two Bashir and one Ratigan within the bracketeds, plus interesting segue- difficult transition]

Thursday, November 01, 2012

In "F"n able?

[FOOTNOTE PAGE FOR NOVEMBER 2012]
Posted Tuesday 11-6-12 as Time Stamped.
Most recent at top.

11-30  (fn) this under construction.

11-23-12  Cautious Black Friday!!!! 
Strunk - http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html
(b.s. )^ Charotte + Web
FOOTNOTES: SEPTEMBER 2012
Give us a brake?
^ note yesterday's below correction (b.S.)= spots in this blogSpot

11-22-12 Happy Thanksgiving!!!!!!!
As for footnotes, all are b.S.(blog Spots) in order:
Transition - Nail Meet F--C---[!]
of* - Post Election
Sorts - Hump Day for Journalism
* - FC "Hammer"
anachronistic - Middle C?
caution - Local Journalism
C-VC(viscous^ cycle of sorts)
^(also 11-23-12) re:correction (these 2) are b.s.(blog searches)

11-10-12 That is the ticket![!] 6 S I G M A (OW!)

11-9-12 Stop that! Oh when the Saints...GM'nI(Annie Oakley?WarBucks)
M - F: (a ... o h ?)  [Bracket-EDS:  U-Tubes ( a, bc, d ) Speaking of ana chonisms(sic).]

11-6-12 Hump Day for Journalism  I should have journaled links as inserted but here goes...not [!]^
^ paradox? (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i ?)
c c? In F able? e, f, ironic? (i.e. Q u b4^^ a,b, ... ?)
^^ Aftermath (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m )
For Achronism Sake. (Earlier post moved (and edited)to above the fold.)
[Not to bury the lede: R S N ? (spell check done [!])]
Update: Footnotes & here. (not)

11-6-12 Post Election
11-7-12 Pre-math?^  P.M. (not to pun on After Math, but Pincer Movement)
b.s.= blog search
? = b.s.(almond+joy)
day = facebook AM1090 Norman Goldman 88 Keys!
of = ** see "?"
spirit = Infamy?  Not EXACTLY[!]^^
the = b.s.(danger+field)
in = the P.I. Given 2nd term, Obama now facing new urgent task
[and this is only the f'n asterisks]
^after thought (NFRY)
^^ scroll over

Friday, April 25, 2008

Israel Attacks Syria?... Ho Hum.

September 9th, 2007 WMD/Nuclear Program (background read)*

IAEA chastises U.S., Israel over Syrian reactorLack of information sharing, unilateral attack anger nuclear watchdog-
"The director general deplores the fact that this information was not provided to the agency in a timely manner, in accordance with the agency's responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to enable it to verify its veracity and establish the facts," the statement said.

Additionally, "the director general views the unilateral use of force by Israel as undermining the due process of verification that is at the heart of the nonproliferation regime," it said.
-
A senior diplomat linked to the IAEA said ElBaradei had already let his displeasure be known to Rood during the U.S. official's phone call over the delay between the time the information became available to the United States and when he was informed of it.
* I did read the background material and the link where I institute a new policy of noting in bold the links I have read, in contrast to those that I just visually or figuratively, cherry picked a reading from. In this case I have block quoted and will [bracket] in comments later. (square brackets indicate editing or additions) And as far as labels go, below, I will use them as categories or additional hints of commentary pun (Ex. Expelled) which in reality... Re: cycle in particular Hint: exemplified here

Monday, May 09, 2011

Temporal

Problematics
Rachell Maddow: more than just a perspective. Facts do change with time. Past facts are still past, but present facts will soon be. Not to pun on what will be, but Osama bin Laden's past was really not so much the issue. Nothing will change* the mishandling of facts and choices made by the Bush administration. (By this I mean the importance of not having focused on getting bin Laden when the Taliban made offers asking for evidence before September 11th, 2001)

*actually congress can change and the presidency did (see "hypocrisy" and "flip-flop" under can change link)]

[Dylan Ratigan: Mega Fatwah.The difference* between opinion and ruling.
A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is a religious opinion concerning Islamic law issued by an Islamic scholar. In Sunni Islam any fatwā is non-binding, whereas in Shia Islam it could be considered by an individual as binding, depending on his or her relation to the scholar. The person who issues a fatwā is called, in that respect, a Mufti, i.e. an issuer of fatwā, from the verb أَفْتَى 'aftā = "he gave a formal legal opinion on". This is not necessarily a formal position since most Muslims argue that anyone trained in Islamic law may give an opinion (fatwā) on its teachings. If a fatwā does not break new ground, then it is simply called a ruling.[1]

An analogy might be made to the issue of legal opinions from courts in common-law systems. Fatwās generally contain the details of the scholar's reasoning, typically in response to a particular case, and are considered binding precedent by those Muslims who have bound themselves to that scholar, including future Muftis; mere rulings can be compared to memorandum opinions. The primary difference between common-law opinions and fatwās, however, is that fatwās are not universally binding; as the Sharia is not universally consistent and Islam is very non-hierarchical in structure, fatwās do not carry the sort of weight that secular common-law opinions do.
*spirt and letter of the law]

[Speaking of timing, I mean Dylan. It is alsmost as if, I had already read these. Not. Actually I have read the last link here, before this Temporal rant, but the rest of the links in this bracket are yet to be read, yet seem to fit the bill or fill the tetrahedron, and a prior intent, or rather a comment yet to be found. Note on timing thing: refers to monkey see monkey do of original intent, meaning an email going around about the psychology experiment(a seam in time with the Dylan cracks), and how some people think they know better.]
[Note bolds as read in balancing act or narrative of labels and perspectives. Noam Chomsky, Paul Krugman, No Labels, Herman Cain, not in context of "more than as if not to be".]

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Speaking of tuning...

The Ed Schultz Show and the Rachel Maddow Show seemed to be operating on the same wave length, but with a bit of a backwash on the issue of who the Democratic candidate will be.[*] I will try to bracket the Fine Tuning with the tangents it led to, but here are some other points: The Process? [**] and A Source
And the guest on The Ed Schultz Show: Jonathan Alter
Scoping Out Obama vs. McCain
To be bracketed...
maybe but my point is: Go filter!

Ed and Rachel have valid assessments and processing of information which the campaigns could aspire to and hopefully run with. If only I could pull more from them.

[*] is it over or is there hope?
[**] It is a valid point that primaries reflect more "moderates and independents" than caucuses, but that is by intention that parties should have a right to pick their own candidates, of course with due consideration of other issues, but as for Washington, there is an added question of whether those that showed up for caucuses bothered to also vote in the primary which for Democrats, will not count in the process.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Bloomberg/Scarborough

Scary!
I hope I can find a recent Michael Bloomberg interview where he whined about the expiration of the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Whine may not be an accurate description of it, but an accurate description of the expiration of the tax cuts for the rich was not in the interview either. For now I will have to whine that I can't find it. His whine did not demonstrate a basic understanding of the tax code, where each bracket of income is taxed the same for everyone. The next dollar one earns does not make the poor rich person a second class citizen.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Why OWS is bigger than Left vs. Right.

Stuck in the game frame?
Bright Bart and Big Government?


Why OWS is bigger...
Tactically, what we'll see here will be a) people firmly on the traditional Democratic side claiming to speak for OWS, and b) people on the right-Republican side attempting to portray OWS as a puppet of well-known liberals and other Democratic interests.
Whine and G's?
On the Democratic side, we've already seen a lot of this behavior, particularly in the last week or so. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this a lot last week, talking about how Obama has already made it clear that he is "on the same side as the Wall Street protesters" and that the Democratic Party, through the DCCC (its House fundraising arm), has jumped into the fray by circulating a petition seeking 100,000 party supporters to affirm that "I stand with the Occupy Wall Street protests". (I wonder how firmly the DCCC was standing with OWS sentiment back when it was pushing for the bailouts and the repeal of Glass-Steagall Act).
Really?
What nobody is comfortable with is a movement in which virtually the entire spectrum of middle class and poor Americans is on the same page, railing against incestuous political and financial corruption on Wall Street and in Washington. The reality is that Occupy Wall Street and the millions of middle Americans who make up the Tea Party are natural allies and should be on the same page about most of the key issues, and that's a story our media won't want to or know how to handle.
Not your grandfather's "traditional".
This is an issue for the traditional "left" because it's a classic instance of overweening corporate power - but it's an issue for the traditional "right" because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast
Really?
Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.
I have read Matt Taibbi's piece three times now over the course of parsing this, and I will let you read your own conclusions.

[Then I signed the petition at DCCC (see bold) "I stand..." with the following amendments.(see 3 links)]

[Each of the above blockquotes are directly from Matt Taibbi's piece, with the bold segues my comments. But the final Really?, "Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don't reform immediately." sounds a bit naive if not libertarian. Companies and Wall Street will not reform themselves any more than they will let themselves fail or let the market do its magic. But it is a matter of who's on board or overboard as well as some sort of tents.]
[Speaking of ironies, or Bright Bart and Big Government, just whose side is who on?]
[Meanwhile I have four posts to further parse. Starting with the big bite. @ 7 minutes 15 seconds in: Over two thirds of New Yorkers support Occupy Wall Street.]

[Oh what a web. No E.B. White:
SCroll up! Tol Keen? Rubric, Elements, what "October", Mis-attribute? Justice and/or sand witchbracket.]
[Alternative Reich? Not to pun on the furor, but is there an alternative?]
[A Democratic* strategist touched on something(on Martin Bashir) that has been embedded in my thoughts, and even more embedded in my writings. The Republican candidate will not come from the activist wing. And indeed the current leader often trails "anybody else". Well, they are not really polling that candidate, but the leaders are still struggling for less than a third of the Republican's votes(current Gallup Romney 20%). My point is that there just might be a compromise or coalition candidate. On the other hand... who am I to say democracy will prevail over the Republic?]
* 10-19-11 I have yet to find the proper link but place some others under Democratic Strategist and Martin Bashir.

Monday, April 01, 2013

DBA

Chris Hayes is All In!


Debut(?) of All In ? 
To bracket my enthusiasm.

[live blogging ]
How's about CHinners?

Saturday, October 15, 2011

WHERE DO YOU FALL...OWS!

[see asterisk for eventual date of post]
or rather on Wall Street!
I mean the L-Curve.
No not, the Liberal Curve, "L" is its shape.
Although....
that would depend on the value of people.

No, not that guy, but individuals & en masse. Now speaking of the value of individuals, I won't go that far. But speaking of the value of money and happiness, since the latter is in the constitution. Strike that, I have been reading the Tea leaves*. Happiness is in the Declaration of Independence. So I am on to something greater than just the L-Curve and the value of people, but the value of happiness. Since some say that money does not buy happiness, and others disagree. Let's not tax happiness. But it takes about $75 K before happiness has a steeper price, and then it is another L-Curve... Why not make that the lowest tax bracket of zero. And then L-curve it up!**

* 10-17-11 (post still in draft) can't find the Alex Pareene Tea People's History which triggered this comment (bottom link will correct anachronism)
** last two links post *(asterisk)

Sunday, January 12, 2014

Coordinary

What^ is life? 

An *un-coordinary* chemical relationship with the environment with potential to replicate itself and adapt to change or find a niche but not without risk of changing it[!]

* "It's alive." ... actually this asterisk expresses a nature(RNA)^^ of sorts[?] to the evolution of purpose. In the original intent two asterisks bracket (to be continued)...  the word.  The missing link revolves around the magazine Philosophy Now and a Philosophy of History con text.

^  1-13-14 apologies for not noticing subscription requirement.
^^ related news to be updated


*no* not that it came from Mars, but that it is not fully read yet or linked.

Phosphat-Ion.svg








Phosphate-3D-balls.png

 
Space filling?








Speaking of not fully red.
OW !
 


OW!!  ^^^ Frau Neitzsche **








** There is no ^^^ !!
O W ? !  c-red?

Hint: *asymmetrical underlining?* ... knot to insult or dis-pare(or re-pair)age. {?}
Alternate aphorism? Art is Litter Ally chemical.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

I'm sorry?

Did I hear that right? I will have to dig up a link later, but this is about the denial that Bush is still in, and the qualification Wells Fargo (CEO or someone) made, about the bail out not going for executive salaries. It is unfair for me to begin this blast without further digging, but just the surface sod is soaked with effluence. So I will sort some key words from the Bush: "capitalism" in conjunction/contrast to "free market".

With Wells Fargo it is a matter of bookkeeping and an earlier flip-flop it seems, on the matter of what the bailout is going for... are we rescuing failing institutions or helping those that are efficient? In this case I have rather unparsed and taken a tangent from the trickle-down of the bonus problem, but there is a righteous problem about the housing bubble and fundamentals.

Maybe a graphic form will help:
Capitalism - - Free Market
Bonuses - - Book Keeping
Rescue - - Help
Bubble - - Fundamentals
Meaning, Myth, Model, Metaphor; may be my mantra,
but there is a cycle that needs work.

And to my estimation (tergiversate[**] or not) the housing bubble is a result of a fundamental flaw in economics. It works for those that buy it. But it really matters what the it is. Not to mention who sells it.

Not to mention the media again: WWWWWH? I might return to give more particular sources, but for now I leave with the answer: who, what, when, where, why, and how? as well as note the only labels at this time are Progressive Media and Thom Hartmann, and if I return I will [bracket][*$*]changes.[*]

[* as soon as I finished this and bracketed that, I thought, and must note that I have now made minor edits (& bold) for clarity sake, unbracketed.]

[** I wonder if I am a De-tergiversator ***?]

[*** I had to go old school and open a book, the answer is; not if it is (the latter) to change one's opinion, but may be others, not the De. Yeah, the De and the Un.]

[*$*] passing the buck I have not returned but simply connected here

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.]

Thursday, November 29, 2012

BlogSpot Has A New "Blogger"

I have a dearly departed Android.**
More on that Tan Gent later***.
Lede Or Ship [!]
Or Iron Knee Chef!

[Kant]
Now that's the ticket!*  Not[!]

*no SNL, but somewhere a Huntsman/ 3rd or 4th partisan Share 'n Angle.
**no, not a turkey(a 3G)
***  Curb your Journalism: Re-4mat'N.
(Ctrl-F 'n b.s. )

[FYI: "Blogger" is a dashboard for blogspotR's]

[Can?]



[Convenient Al Gore Rythms(square-bracket-eds) and Rubrics Cubed.]
...
[OW, not my We Ge! But DB(a) just in my inbox.]

a= exception to the Dash Bored[!] (link inserted later)
i.e. exception to the OW as in not just in, but recently ran across.
(original intent was "as")

[ Here we go again ! ...
buh dump ump  ^ (...)
Form^^ is not function, function is not purpose and everything else is gravy toss !]


^  re: sort (Norman Goldman is no dump but known for his employment of sound effects, and fits in this rim shot of radio hosts.  At least locally he fits on the air between Thom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes.)
^^ and the links here might need Platonic adjustment.



Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Ryan/Romney run from Ryan plan..

Ryan runs from own plan endorsed by Romney.
Not Exactly.
The lies and hypocrisy know no pail. 
Here is to Thomas Roberts. (Not... Today)*

*Links scrolling up.
(i.e. reverse order)
Rachel Maddow: Shrug Life **
Morning Joe: Romney "hate"/"chains" Biden
Today: Reince Priebus "blood"
Today: Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Ryan Obama Pick?
Thomas Roberts under "Here". Who is Paul Ryan?
--
The Ed Show: unchained memory
**[?]
The Ed Show:  Romney Medicare Lies
The Last Word: SNL Republican War Hypocrisy Ryan***
Lean Forward? Or go back. Ryan Fiscal Conservative?
TheLiaisonReport: Wikileaks Ryan
Lean Forward(or back [FOX] to Morning Joe) Cuts and Run.
The Last Word: Romney and Ryan run from Romney Plan

**  Maddow Seg-way
***[Smoking Gun: Ryan votes against stimulus, says it works and takes funds for state.]

[The E Pit o'me of Nuance or Flip-Flop.(in reference to above layout, links and asterisks.] 

[And this AM: Ryan runs from Wonk and Partisanship.  That is a hoot, since he was on the BS Panel(Bowles-Simpson).  Reminds me of Saving Pirate Ryan, and "going postal".  The USPS(congressional failure) is the Iron Knee to Romney/Ryan I Ron KneeFunding Bane Or...
(Note: Bane/Bain Boehner confluance and bracket of  "Funding"(...)"Or" or Mitt Rob Me.  The USPS is not going broke, anymore than the government is going broke, Republicans are breaking it by running their plan which ironically in moderation would solve so many problems.  i.e. investment.  But they are over-investing in the pension plan and at the same time hoping to privatise it.  Won't that be a boon?)  In proper context, pirates were a government program.  Speaking of hole in the Hart.(AM)]

[See bold book ends: Shrug Life /The Last Word. Not exactly.]
[A last clip (Jon Stewart on The Cycle!) And the pie chart of fiscal irresponsibility does not even include the flip-flop of going austere and focusing on cutting the debt while cutting taxes as soon as the Republicans no longer led.]