Coin-age of the day.

Veriabling.

Origin*: Prior coin-age on our coin age. 
Pre-coin-age:  prior posts that coin new words, although not necessarily sovereigns***

Structural Speculation

* already evolved from variabling to veriabling, not to emphasize bling. 
Not to be confused or separated from** coin age, or should I Say knot.
** line is reference to labels, inserted links are geometricks
*** timing is everything?

Note:  Everything may be a pun on the word or dimention, but it is the last inserted link at this time.  It spins off of the sovereigns reference and humorism(or Lincoln Logs) where I will refrain from more quantum leaps[!]  Now to proceed from the double asterisked line's determinant[?] ... regarding the knot Say: 
12/12  Power Point on Philosophy of Science and Economics: Positivism, Popper, and After

11/12 Fideism: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

10/12 PDF Russell On Denoting.

9/12 Wittgenstein's Poker Lost and Found

8/12 Jiggery Pokery

7/12 Philosophy Stories

#6 See (FP below) 4moolah

5/12 Realmiffications ?

4/12 (b.s.) ofor

3. relavent

2. segweigh

1. veriabling 

FP[!]) insert #6 a. Pre-Pan FRY. b. Clinton(Bill) is full of B.S.

[!] exception to the rule? i.e. anachronical links
[?] matrix pun dropped

[Closed Cap shun ? ] (FP1)

Over Helming.

[6-24-11 The lack of pomp and need for circumstance*(or circumdecision?)
President Obama on the Way Forward in Afghanistan(video)
Just an aftergoogle. But I will add that Randi Rhodes gave an impressive perspective on the President's remarks, not necessarily here, but it is reflected a bit in the video of the Democrats bringing it home.]

Please note the navigational metaphor in Professor John Kay's interview in the context of Professor Ha-Joon Chang's interview and the Bib Leo File of Republic Cons.
Inter-Dimentionalism and Ge Oh Metricks not so aside: The 6Sigma of Newt needs a pinnacle of purpose. i.e. there truly needs to be a navigational approach. Not akin to "rocket science"**, but having an aim and the model to chart it. My point is that 6 Sigma does not have a point, or rather a point is needed a priori for it to work. Actually it is not about the 6 edges of a tetrahedron, but the break down of the bell curve. If it were only about the bell curve it might have a point. My point is that politics has a point of balancing power and processing the point. But from a freedom perspective is that a goal? But from a navigational perspective there is a need for a 3D grid plus time and processing. The six edges of a tetradedron reflect the 4D dynamics of the process, that is not the goal. The goal is out there, the dream or unrealized principles if you will. The balance or base is the Try Angle*** and dynamics of Physics, Psychology and Philosophy(also processes as well as subjects) for realizing our balance of powers and dreams.

* an after link: NY Times from Randi Rhodes Blog
(also TPM)
** after bolds(4) in original post
*** pun on 3 points determine a plane(and tripod) but a 4th point determines 3 dimensions. Not to mention the Geo of Risk and Robustness of Nassim Taleb. He must not be taken out of context. Reducing debt does not mean reducing spending and economics is not the most efficient determinant. "(nature) it seems very inefficient for an economist but it is robust"(...)"I want society...to be more robust and more open to up side." My only point is that society(politics see "science" bold following "rocket") has a place in determining the rules that provide the circumstances.]

Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications.

you google*
Caution...The Goose for the Gander.(6-13-12)

[Kant We All Get Along Without Going To Hegel?]

It was the worst of times, it was the best of times. [**]
Steven Clemons: On Olbermann
Palin and the Pashtun and the Dickens it is.
Lawrence Wilkerson: on ibid. [6-22-12 Link Corrected]
A Christmas Carol meets A Wonderful Life.

Credit Olbermann, Clemons and Dick Cheney, not to mention Charles Dickens; the tales aside. It seems that we are broaching the American Dream from the nightmare of history.

footnote: Hegel Can't
Not to mention, D'Cart before Newton.[***]

[*] e for go figure; i.e. oops, ironically coined a word - NOT - how's 'bout realmystication? (Perhaps Realmythication?) But the question is, by the goose or the gander? More disambiguated, google may have adjusted as it no longer pops up "ramifications", but it could be my lack of foundation between the geek and the street. You might ask, what about google? Maybe a ribble, search me.

[** 12:08 PST 12-6-09: OK, I am not going to rhyme or jiggle but should I be glad I've maybe been read or mad I my might have been borrowed. Now that I have read the body of the work, the pop quiz it concludes with is rhetorical or at least left open, but least it had 4 options plus all of above; while a Republican Survey misdirected to me, was a push poll of yes, no and no opinion, which does not have as much wiggle room as their questions.] Along these lines, giving the "locked in" a "what for", as in not exactly any contradictions there.]
[Also 12-6-09 note that I was trying to determine if there is such a thing as Rubric's Cube, it was not a mispell as my previous post did refer to Rubic's cube.]
[12-16-09 Update made "go figure"(also 12-14 Realmythication apparently coined.]
[*** 12-23-09 link inserted ]

1-9-14 Kant we all  ... ? Roots / Branches / axe knot*? Is it not that some are so lost from their roots they cut off branches?  No.  Or create limbs that leap? Ask if there are more primary fields than four mats: Physics, Psychology, Philosoply, Politics?  Aphorism or fact: Truth is a determinant.  Math is next to godliness, and religion parting from Platonics.  Speaking of fields they are more than planes, knot too categorical lee.  (G'Ribble Label?)