Last evening, I had a chat(FP2) with a fellow, that began with the subject of the Kobayashi Maru, and the nature of "no-win" versus "game changing" situations.
He was cynical, to say the least* about politics. He was almost "fair and balanced"(to balance FOX with ideology**) in respect to his admiration for both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul for their straightforwardness, while blaming both parties for their lack thereof and manipulation of the Overton Window.
Allow me to drop this with dissatisfaction @ how it was not really a debate and my not fulfilling a dream.***
* or to say inadequately characterize his view
** a spectrum [wMd?]
(***) or get to my work with metaphor (FP1)
Note: Italics signify prior posts. Bold(if links) signifies outside reads or to reads.
[Spoiler alert !!!!!]
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query characterize. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query characterize. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Historic Health Care Bill Passed
The House has Passed the Senate Bill.
Thank You Historic Speaker!
Thank You Minority Leader for so disrespecfully recording your nonsense for history.[*]
The Senate now has the option of adding a few Republican options or maybe even some Democratic plans.
*[3-22-10] Believe me, I don't believe I could more respectfully record my reaction to Minority Leader Boehner's address.
[In fact, I actually just had a long discussion with a Deputy Chief of Staff reflecting my displeasure with his antics. I may or may not summarize it later, but I can characterize it as a less than heated discussion. My main point was that it is difficult to imagine many reasonable people bothering to call in to respond to such behavior, given the visceral reaction and condescension possible. It might be likened to calling in on a childish tantrum. I was just curious about the decorum of their callers, I think I kept mine, but I did continually get caught by the whining rhetoric. The reported belief that the process was unprecedented and partisan like never before. Ha! Oh and the "blame it on emotions" mixed in with the "need to be heard" excuse.]
[Update: see runaround rhetoric and clean sheet of paper: the Republican "leadership" has been forced by Democratic leadership to be accountable but still whine about the politics while blaiming it on 200 years of heated words simultaneously martyring** themselves in the rhetoric and hijacking*** the word "change" from a "clean sheet of paper". They want history to be forced or a force, as long as it is thier force not the peoples. Which "common sense" would mean, no history, no constitution, no rhetoric, no politics.
** I hope I have not too incautiously used the word, but it might be better to say Cantor makes a rather heroic leap in his rhetoric and "akin" to self-sacrifice.
*** refers to office call]
Thank You Historic Speaker!
Thank You Minority Leader for so disrespecfully recording your nonsense for history.[*]
The Senate now has the option of adding a few Republican options or maybe even some Democratic plans.
*[3-22-10] Believe me, I don't believe I could more respectfully record my reaction to Minority Leader Boehner's address.
[In fact, I actually just had a long discussion with a Deputy Chief of Staff reflecting my displeasure with his antics. I may or may not summarize it later, but I can characterize it as a less than heated discussion. My main point was that it is difficult to imagine many reasonable people bothering to call in to respond to such behavior, given the visceral reaction and condescension possible. It might be likened to calling in on a childish tantrum. I was just curious about the decorum of their callers, I think I kept mine, but I did continually get caught by the whining rhetoric. The reported belief that the process was unprecedented and partisan like never before. Ha! Oh and the "blame it on emotions" mixed in with the "need to be heard" excuse.]
[Update: see runaround rhetoric and clean sheet of paper: the Republican "leadership" has been forced by Democratic leadership to be accountable but still whine about the politics while blaiming it on 200 years of heated words simultaneously martyring** themselves in the rhetoric and hijacking*** the word "change" from a "clean sheet of paper". They want history to be forced or a force, as long as it is thier force not the peoples. Which "common sense" would mean, no history, no constitution, no rhetoric, no politics.
** I hope I have not too incautiously used the word, but it might be better to say Cantor makes a rather heroic leap in his rhetoric and "akin" to self-sacrifice.
*** refers to office call]
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Back Log and 4 Mat
Hit and Run Republicans, simply reflects the open field and many tents in which leadership is hard to locate. Not exactly hit and run, but more like running from various factions and issues.
As projected now by Chris Cillizza or 2B soon [*], but here is the point of my format. Democrats as well have their wings, but the political calculus depends upon whether there are closed or open primaries, especially when it comes to independents and progressives verses(sic) tea partiers** and disappointed liberals, not to mention the fluid* or radical moderates.(not to overly characterize)
[Hi! See Noon? Or midnight sessions where "Senate Republicans use the rules to stop things, Senate Democrats are going to use the rules to keep everybody working late."]
*pun on the oversea's similar difficulties and disappointments and party electoral process differences.[***]
** no disrespect but there are at least two major factions I call the Palin and Paul wings, both uncertain about whether they are running for or from the Republican Party.
[Teeter Totter? Gamble and Investments.]
[***] Not so puny. Plus it was only natural google that(or which) intersected the links.]
[*] 4wards ho!
As projected now by Chris Cillizza or 2B soon [*], but here is the point of my format. Democrats as well have their wings, but the political calculus depends upon whether there are closed or open primaries, especially when it comes to independents and progressives verses(sic) tea partiers** and disappointed liberals, not to mention the fluid* or radical moderates.(not to overly characterize)
[Hi! See Noon? Or midnight sessions where "Senate Republicans use the rules to stop things, Senate Democrats are going to use the rules to keep everybody working late."]
*pun on the oversea's similar difficulties and disappointments and party electoral process differences.[***]
** no disrespect but there are at least two major factions I call the Palin and Paul wings, both uncertain about whether they are running for or from the Republican Party.
[Teeter Totter? Gamble and Investments.]
[***] Not so puny. Plus it was only natural google that(or which) intersected the links.]
[*] 4wards ho!
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
QCON: TruthOut
Quick Comment On the News or Question Context:
The following pieces deserve a more careful read, but for me, not yet.[*] TruthOut does a filtering of sorts, and I notice rather heavy reliance on the NY Times. Not that that is a bad thing, just not necessarily a liberal thing. The left, right and the middle can characterize a source as from a different perspective, but that should be the mark of good journalism. Again, not that they have hit the right mark, from our own perspectives.
While Super Delegates are an example of a problem that voters wish they could fix without being a part of the process, so are the choices of primary, or caucus, and financing and electoral college procedures. These are all complicated by the nature of our goverment, its three branches, a bi-cameral legislature, and the individual composition of state governments and their rights in relation to the federal government. And have I thrown in partisanship? This is not a civics lesson, but it would be nice if it were in schools.
For me this is the first time in 24 years I have not come out of my precinct caucus a delegate for some candidate. This year it was by design or rather lack of design. I was for Edwards. I ran the caucus as a PCO and was a decimal point or voter or two shy of ending up an uncommitted delegate. This is more than I intended to say today, but I guess it ties in. Because even if civics were in schools, the media and the voters would still have a very big job to understand what mechanisms are operating in each state. Did I mention partisanship? Not to mention the constitution? I won't go there, but too many feel that there is a conspiracy, and there is, only if you are not part of it.
What is represented in the following articles may very well be best efforts to represent reliable pictures, but that is not to say that other perspectives and sources do so well. [*] While some of the tactics candidates use are not appreciated by many, they are apparently working on some. And it must be remembered that we filter as well or poorly as the media or format we use.
I would like to close this comment with the feeling that it is hard to unite when the leader is still unknown, but it is better than being party to having a leader who will unite without knowing who the enemy is. If there is any obtuseness in this, maybe it is a riddle to solve.
In Two Battlegrounds, Voters Say, Not Yet
By Patrick Healy
The New York Times
Ballot Shortages Plague Ohio Election Amid Unusually Heavy Primary Turnout By Ian Urbina
The New York Times
A Clean, Fair Fight
The New York Times | Editorial
McCain Clinches GOP Presidential Nomination By Michael D. Shear and Peter Slevin
The Washington Post
[Update: Just as I put the finishing links on this post, breaking news on Thom Hartmann Show, about the Texas crossovers that Rush Limbaugh encouraged. (Guest David Sirota) Where in the primary, voters got their ballots, and if they were Republican and wanted to vote for Hillary, found that there were no Rebulicans on their ballot. Hmm. Who needs a civics lesson? Well, of course it seems wrong, but parties should be able to decide their candidate not a talk show host who wants a circus. Republicans were disenfranchised, by trying to vote for Hillary while not intending to support her in the general election. They could not vote for Hillary, and hope to influence their own party on local elections too. This "monkey business" is why the parties and the process is so complicated. It is further complicated by the electoral college process not to mention the winner take all nature of that delivery system. Independents and third parties are so hard to fit into this picture without major changes that themselves are so hard to bring about, but I really don't want to go there.(the link not the idea). Oh and that ploy by Rush Limbaugh may have hurt some local candidates and I won't hurt our heads by figuring that out, but it is a way to sort out some math.]
[*] I have yet to fully digest the four links above, but apparently the press have nibbled on some ribs. (Links, sausage, democracy: get it?) But I did scarf this down and indeed have had my own beach party.
The following pieces deserve a more careful read, but for me, not yet.[*] TruthOut does a filtering of sorts, and I notice rather heavy reliance on the NY Times. Not that that is a bad thing, just not necessarily a liberal thing. The left, right and the middle can characterize a source as from a different perspective, but that should be the mark of good journalism. Again, not that they have hit the right mark, from our own perspectives.
While Super Delegates are an example of a problem that voters wish they could fix without being a part of the process, so are the choices of primary, or caucus, and financing and electoral college procedures. These are all complicated by the nature of our goverment, its three branches, a bi-cameral legislature, and the individual composition of state governments and their rights in relation to the federal government. And have I thrown in partisanship? This is not a civics lesson, but it would be nice if it were in schools.
For me this is the first time in 24 years I have not come out of my precinct caucus a delegate for some candidate. This year it was by design or rather lack of design. I was for Edwards. I ran the caucus as a PCO and was a decimal point or voter or two shy of ending up an uncommitted delegate. This is more than I intended to say today, but I guess it ties in. Because even if civics were in schools, the media and the voters would still have a very big job to understand what mechanisms are operating in each state. Did I mention partisanship? Not to mention the constitution? I won't go there, but too many feel that there is a conspiracy, and there is, only if you are not part of it.
What is represented in the following articles may very well be best efforts to represent reliable pictures, but that is not to say that other perspectives and sources do so well. [*] While some of the tactics candidates use are not appreciated by many, they are apparently working on some. And it must be remembered that we filter as well or poorly as the media or format we use.
I would like to close this comment with the feeling that it is hard to unite when the leader is still unknown, but it is better than being party to having a leader who will unite without knowing who the enemy is. If there is any obtuseness in this, maybe it is a riddle to solve.
In Two Battlegrounds, Voters Say, Not Yet
By Patrick Healy
The New York Times
Ballot Shortages Plague Ohio Election Amid Unusually Heavy Primary Turnout By Ian Urbina
The New York Times
A Clean, Fair Fight
The New York Times | Editorial
McCain Clinches GOP Presidential Nomination By Michael D. Shear and Peter Slevin
The Washington Post
[Update: Just as I put the finishing links on this post, breaking news on Thom Hartmann Show, about the Texas crossovers that Rush Limbaugh encouraged. (Guest David Sirota) Where in the primary, voters got their ballots, and if they were Republican and wanted to vote for Hillary, found that there were no Rebulicans on their ballot. Hmm. Who needs a civics lesson? Well, of course it seems wrong, but parties should be able to decide their candidate not a talk show host who wants a circus. Republicans were disenfranchised, by trying to vote for Hillary while not intending to support her in the general election. They could not vote for Hillary, and hope to influence their own party on local elections too. This "monkey business" is why the parties and the process is so complicated. It is further complicated by the electoral college process not to mention the winner take all nature of that delivery system. Independents and third parties are so hard to fit into this picture without major changes that themselves are so hard to bring about, but I really don't want to go there.(the link not the idea). Oh and that ploy by Rush Limbaugh may have hurt some local candidates and I won't hurt our heads by figuring that out, but it is a way to sort out some math.]
[*] I have yet to fully digest the four links above, but apparently the press have nibbled on some ribs. (Links, sausage, democracy: get it?) But I did scarf this down and indeed have had my own beach party.
Monday, October 05, 2009
Hardball
Follow-up to the Tool Shed 10 AM (PST)today:
Military style: Rumsfeld v. Gates
I don't know if I will find the quote but Rumsfeld noted his style of management as heated or open to heated dialogue. I will only contrast this with what I feel is a more healthy debate. Of course there is no debate as to whom is in charge. (Yeah right!) But I feel that reading between the lines is not so much the problem as actually reading some lines. The short answer? Not. I feel that the actual strategy may be not as much a push back to the administration but a pulling forward (see "shared responsibility) in support of a more robust change. It should also be realized just who are rationals actor and who are less so. I won't characterize any groups by even saying "them" or "us" but I mean those that see violence as the primary tool. And what is military strategy is no longer just in the shadows.
[footnote: chain of command ]
THIS AFTERNOON:
Maj. General Eaton: "healthy debate"[*]
White House Leaving Afghanistan not an option.
Not to mention:
the leak last month.
[*][6-24-10: McChrystal(Chain of Command) labels added]
Military style: Rumsfeld v. Gates
I don't know if I will find the quote but Rumsfeld noted his style of management as heated or open to heated dialogue. I will only contrast this with what I feel is a more healthy debate. Of course there is no debate as to whom is in charge. (Yeah right!) But I feel that reading between the lines is not so much the problem as actually reading some lines. The short answer? Not. I feel that the actual strategy may be not as much a push back to the administration but a pulling forward (see "shared responsibility) in support of a more robust change. It should also be realized just who are rationals actor and who are less so. I won't characterize any groups by even saying "them" or "us" but I mean those that see violence as the primary tool. And what is military strategy is no longer just in the shadows.
[footnote: chain of command ]
THIS AFTERNOON:
Maj. General Eaton: "healthy debate"[*]
White House Leaving Afghanistan not an option.
Not to mention:
the leak last month.
[*][6-24-10: McChrystal(Chain of Command) labels added]
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Caricatures
Wanted.
Paul Krugman explains Keynesians for the right, who characterize most thinks in black and white.
[update: 11-6-09 see Paradigm link Yale.]
[11-30-09 see second comment yet to be placed]
Paul Krugman explains Keynesians for the right, who characterize most thinks in black and white.
[update: 11-6-09 see Paradigm link Yale.]
[11-30-09 see second comment yet to be placed]
Friday, October 02, 2009
Tool Shed
[held in draft posted 10 AM: 10-5-09 ]
[Banana Republic] Open Salon
Me: If John Perry was a involved in the Carter administration, it is no wonder it suffered.
Military style: Rumsfeld v. Gates
I don't know if I will find the quote but Rumsfeld noted his style of management as heated or open to heated dialogue. I will only contrast this with what I feel is a more healthy debate. Of course there is no debate as to whom is in charge. (Yeah right!) But I feel that reading between the lines is not so much the problem as actually reading some lines. The short answer? Not. I feel that the actual strategy may be not as much a push back to the administration but a pulling forward (see "shared responsibility) in support of a more robust change. It should also be realized just who are rationals actor and who are less so. I won't characterize any groups by even saying "them" or "us" but I mean those that see violence as the primary tool. And what is military strategy is no longer just in the shadows.
[footnote: chain of command ]
[Banana Republic] Open Salon
Me: If John Perry was a involved in the Carter administration, it is no wonder it suffered.
Military style: Rumsfeld v. Gates
I don't know if I will find the quote but Rumsfeld noted his style of management as heated or open to heated dialogue. I will only contrast this with what I feel is a more healthy debate. Of course there is no debate as to whom is in charge. (Yeah right!) But I feel that reading between the lines is not so much the problem as actually reading some lines. The short answer? Not. I feel that the actual strategy may be not as much a push back to the administration but a pulling forward (see "shared responsibility) in support of a more robust change. It should also be realized just who are rationals actor and who are less so. I won't characterize any groups by even saying "them" or "us" but I mean those that see violence as the primary tool. And what is military strategy is no longer just in the shadows.
[footnote: chain of command ]
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
Case Study
To be honest, I did not know how to characterize the situation of PFC Bradley Manning. I have not made much of the Wikileaks problem other than a possible jobs reference. PFC Manning is the reported source. I do not agree with his method or the principles behind Wikileaks, except that there are problems with the job of journalism. But that does not excuse the treatment of a prisoner as characterized in the above link from Psychologists for Social Responsibility, and it certainly does not seem to make him any more clear in his objectives. It seems that rather than be a principled leaker, Manning chose not to be the filter, which puts his principles and his defense and assessment for prosecution in a difficult enough position, without further mistreatment. So if this is a case study, it may be one for justice or not for our principles.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
It turns out...
that "turn around" has been a familiar refrain* for generations. This^ issue has been the standard rhetoric^^ bearer for every administration: the debt is a problem only when running.
* Rove, Koch, Cain
[Parsin' Local-ships ? ! ]
As it so happens...
I only saw part of the townhall style debate, and heard part of it, and missed part of it. But from what I did get, it seems that the President had the upper hand, and the Governor*** the upper fACE. OK, I could only do this so straight, without a Bane or Tan Gent.**
** hmmm
10-17-12***(Second debate link): I just did not want to characterize the in"f"able expression(a smile, I guess), the Governor often has.
CBS: Fact Check, combative, edge, contentious, Romney/Bush, outsourcing, assault, Libya, Libya.
Libya Follow-Up.
^ Republican debt.
^^ Not running well local.
Economics: local / global ^^^
Globalization is not as daunting as the haunting of the illusion of democracy and economics.(note: exception to b.s.)
* Rove, Koch, Cain
[Parsin' Local-ships ? ! ]
As it so happens...
I only saw part of the townhall style debate, and heard part of it, and missed part of it. But from what I did get, it seems that the President had the upper hand, and the Governor*** the upper fACE. OK, I could only do this so straight, without a Bane or Tan Gent.**
** hmmm
10-17-12***(Second debate link): I just did not want to characterize the in"f"able expression(a smile, I guess), the Governor often has.
CBS: Fact Check, combative, edge, contentious, Romney/Bush, outsourcing, assault, Libya, Libya.
Libya Follow-Up.
^ Republican debt.
^^ Not running well local.
Economics: local / global ^^^
Globalization is not as daunting as the haunting of the illusion of democracy and economics.(note: exception to b.s.)
Monday, January 29, 2007
Out of Line? "Hogwash"
Cheney with Wolf Blitzer is on course. McCain and Cheney must stay the course so that the rest have a line to hit and run from. [The Situation Room]
[submitted from an email exhange]
... looking into the matter more fully myself. [Watch Cheney's response to questions about his daughter] I'm afraid I can't characterize the players the way others would.
[[ I "fundamentally disagree" with Cheney, and agree with Wolf that it was a "reasonable, fair question." It was a poorly framed question ending with, "Do you want to respond to that?" Cheney replied: "No". And before Wolfe could rephrase or follow up, Cheney interupted him with his response which I firmly believe was out of line. ]] *
On the whole issue of fair play I agree with your so called "naive" view but it seems more to my point, which I won't jab at again. [but the quote was from "Focus on the Family"]
The whole "Situation Room" is suspect in my book for having any of the Cheney's on. It must be for ratings or to serve the purpose of media whipping boy.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/30/lynne-cheneys-slapdown/
The old saying "if you can't stand the heat" sure takes on new meaning these days. http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/ifyoucantsta.html
When it comes to an interview we should all be served.
By the way, from the transcript p.6 (third from last paragraph): "Well, Wolf. If the history books were written by people who are so eager to write off this effort or declare it a failure, including many of our friends in the media, the situation obviously would have been over a long time ago." This is some piece of rhetoric which if it says anything seems to endorse my theory on the "Situation Room" if not that others could and should be in "the kitchen".
Roger
P.S. Did I start this? Sorry. Really, remind me.
* The bracketed section was inserted last as I seemed to be less than straghtforward in that area. Then I decided to read the whole transcipt but could not. It was out of line 2 1/2 pages into the 9 1/2 page PDF. It is a shame that this distracted from what was more of the same.
[ A full read of the transcipt seems to support this surmise, and today even the senior Bush has joined the chorus about the media being "out of line"(in other words)]
[submitted from an email exhange]
... looking into the matter more fully myself. [Watch Cheney's response to questions about his daughter] I'm afraid I can't characterize the players the way others would.
[[ I "fundamentally disagree" with Cheney, and agree with Wolf that it was a "reasonable, fair question." It was a poorly framed question ending with, "Do you want to respond to that?" Cheney replied: "No". And before Wolfe could rephrase or follow up, Cheney interupted him with his response which I firmly believe was out of line. ]] *
On the whole issue of fair play I agree with your so called "naive" view but it seems more to my point, which I won't jab at again. [but the quote was from "Focus on the Family"]
The whole "Situation Room" is suspect in my book for having any of the Cheney's on. It must be for ratings or to serve the purpose of media whipping boy.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/30/lynne-cheneys-slapdown/
The old saying "if you can't stand the heat" sure takes on new meaning these days. http://www.bartleby.com/59/3/ifyoucantsta.html
When it comes to an interview we should all be served.
By the way, from the transcript p.6 (third from last paragraph): "Well, Wolf. If the history books were written by people who are so eager to write off this effort or declare it a failure, including many of our friends in the media, the situation obviously would have been over a long time ago." This is some piece of rhetoric which if it says anything seems to endorse my theory on the "Situation Room" if not that others could and should be in "the kitchen".
Roger
P.S. Did I start this? Sorry. Really, remind me.
* The bracketed section was inserted last as I seemed to be less than straghtforward in that area. Then I decided to read the whole transcipt but could not. It was out of line 2 1/2 pages into the 9 1/2 page PDF. It is a shame that this distracted from what was more of the same.
[ A full read of the transcipt seems to support this surmise, and today even the senior Bush has joined the chorus about the media being "out of line"(in other words)]
Friday, December 14, 2007
Mixed News: colors and letters
Just the point of TheLiaisonReport
Good News Sad News: Which came first the chicken or the sky is falling?
OK maybe I am mixing metophores or stretching the points to find a line, but HorsesAss.Org dropped this and I don't know if it is his scoop on The Scarlet Letter.
Sad news first: Washington State Senator Brian Weinstein will not be seeking a second term. He was a fiesty progressive.
Good news then: there will be an open race on the House side, because Republican Representative Fred Jarrett will run for Brian's Senate seat as a Democrat. He was a progressive Republican.
Kudos to Goldy for the punditry and analysis on this flip-flop, not to characterize any of them here. From my perspective maybe Fred was not a progressive Republican, he was probably D progressive Republican. That is my wisecrack for the night. I better save any personal sense of them for later.
Good News Sad News: Which came first the chicken or the sky is falling?
OK maybe I am mixing metophores or stretching the points to find a line, but HorsesAss.Org dropped this and I don't know if it is his scoop on The Scarlet Letter.
Sad news first: Washington State Senator Brian Weinstein will not be seeking a second term. He was a fiesty progressive.
Good news then: there will be an open race on the House side, because Republican Representative Fred Jarrett will run for Brian's Senate seat as a Democrat. He was a progressive Republican.
Kudos to Goldy for the punditry and analysis on this flip-flop, not to characterize any of them here. From my perspective maybe Fred was not a progressive Republican, he was probably D progressive Republican. That is my wisecrack for the night. I better save any personal sense of them for later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)