F'n P[!]

an-archy? / tan gent
[!] sarcasm irony punk.
Lede or Ship:  Heading

4 M or links in order of insert
(In F able. / punc. / -archy / gent)

War'n Buffet Rule
The P ?
Original Intent: almost lost, Footnotes Page # ?
Gephardt*  -House Republicans Changed the Rules to Keep Government Closed
McConnell  -Who Controls the House GOP?
Battle. -  George W. Bush and the Real Story of the Great Recession****  - (b.s.) Buffet + Warren
Re  - Buffet +Metaphor
:  - Rule + Field
congre$$ - [War'n Pic/MoveOn]
AM:
Pelosi/
Klobuchar
Gang **

** links/line anachronistic
AM=Andrea Mithell
*** Deep Files Go 4 it.

(buy Jim'n Knee: Faith 'n Progress ?)
[The Cycle? New Hostage on the Table. /  Measured Optimism ? ]
[If you don't vote, you won't get your pudding.  How can you get your pudding when you won't eat your meet?]

A PEAS meant...

Eat your
Peas

Rough Reader/Swift Hull
and walking plank

Mountain out of Mole Hill.

Now it is almost just random. 
My heading that is. A collage of "to reads".


Note: F1 need to update/move, have only  read (4/9) .
[File for Facebook: Let them eat Sruit Cake[!] (Not your founding father'$ font.)]

Fair and Balanced

There are three cycles in life.
The vicious cycle, the virtuous cycle and the childish cycle.
Who's your daddy?

Speaking of Victim Hood.
Eat it. Or the find the missing link.
It's Greek to me.



As if this G'Ribble is not enough.(tale gate or grid lock anyone?)

Hint: Satire is in the ire of the sitter.
[up date Pea We! Ctrl F / Con Tribute]
The last laugh[!]

New Meta Theory

The anthropomorphism of systems.**

Have your ad hominem and eat it too.

[The Digger You Deep?]*

*NFRY
**The personalization of math, geometry and logic.

[** + * =  Quantum Sovereignty ]

Is it possible this is the nexus of Science and Theology?
Is it Schroedingers' coin of epistemology? 
Is this support for the small "t", large "T": truth of Nietzsche?
[[ footnotes to reading*: "dangers in overemphasizing(...~...)"perplexed by the relation"{subject/object/rules}(5.)]] 
Now that may be the ticket!!!  Knot?^  The faith ~ science nexus.

{{Rough ramble:  3 dimensions are?  4this? 5th other!
Perpendicular perspective: x,y,z, space~time/point~sphere }}
{{{The result is in the balance.}}}
^/*

You can't have your cake...

and eat it too. 

This is about compromise.

Obama pushes GOP on unemployment insurance

Bane or Change?

Speaker Boehner:
"One month ago I personally told the White House that another extension of temporary emergency unemployment benefits should not only be paid for but include something to help put people back to work," he said. "To date, the president has offered no such plan."

Not that it is the president's job, he has already presented budgets, but...
in this case he might suggest, Democrats come up with the former and Republicans the latter. 

Not to imagine difficulties, but the "pay for" will be for the insurance, and help will still have to be net neutral*.  If this ploy is not taken, then the excuse for the former is relieved of the latter. They might even be voted on separately, to see how that hope and change works for ya!

* to say it could be paid for would reboot the can down the road, unless the same rules are applied or separately voted on.

Note: labels[!] Oops ?
to do, round table, ?

Running on What? Rhetorical Slipperiness.

One statement that may summarize or simplify the theme behind my writing is an old saying and an old joke:
Follow the "Golden Rule".

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."
and
"Those with the gold, rule."

Both may be true, it is the extent that we apply them that matter and in modern terms it could be said that those with the oil rule. It is also to the extent that we know they are a joke, that we know anything. Or rather it is the extent that there is any truth that we we know it is a joke.

The theme is further complicated by just the trickiness of the words, rule and follow. Connections have been a sub-theme, but anybody can make them. Following may require a leader but a leader should remember that others follow what you do more than what you say. This would seem to be important whether we know what we mean or not.

It is tempting to want people to "Do as I say, not as I do." just as it is satisfying to "Have your cake and eat it too." But do people have faith in the words or math that power makes fuzzy? Do people really understand how to follow this?

This is what I have been saying in a round about way. It may be coincident that I run into the work of Philip Gold or it may be that I have been following public radio, but he has a book called "Take Back the Right." Not just that he has the right name(again) but his words echo mine and he seems to use the word right, among many, in a way that has meaning.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0786713526/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-8108271-4043046#reader-page for a review of the book and see his article in Seattle Weekly at the link below.

We may not have the same destination but we need the tools to build the road and we cannot ignore as much in the planning.

POLITICS: QCON It is what is Left, not just All Right.

“Pols" Over Polls Or No More WMD!

One of the most important things President Bush said in this war on terrorism, is that we must continue to stand up for our principles. Democrats must remember this too. If they don’t stand up for our principles, they may as well stand up for Bush’s. If they are not with us, they are not for us.

Granted others may view things as black and white and they are really more gray or oatmeal, grains and all, but when one insists on black and white, it must be worth debating, not just fighting for. In a debate every argument one presents must stand up to the questioning of opposition. One must be able to rely on only the arguments one presents and if one is not honest enough to present it, it won’t count. In politics like debate, one does not have the luxury of changing the game to boxing to settle the score. Though it appears they do.

“You can’t have your cake and eat it too." If things are black and white, why is evidence not?

The saying "All is fair in love and war" comes to mind. A google search brought up reference to Ty Cobb’s ability to stretch the rules and was used in reference to modern business tactics. Business aside, though that is the world he came from, it is interesting that some would make more rules (whether for couples or nations) when they in particular have trouble with following those that exist.

In his previous campaign the candidate Bush blamed his opponents for being too "elitist", behaving as if they knew better than the general public. Now he makes decisions solely on that basis, holding both evidence and reasons close to his puffed-up chest. That may be too much mush for polls to sort out, but it is the job of our leaders or "pols" to search out WMD: Waving Mis-Definitions.

[3-28-08: Updated Title (inserted) and minor editing, and all labeling inserted]

Fact:
I hope people are looking up the word in a dictionary, but for Encarta the first three definitions have something to do with truth, the fourth is a term of law, so he certainly would not use that one. Anyway, this must mean truth can change or maybe we will wait for the dictionary to change.

What can change is that a fact can be trustworthy or not. That is apparently what has changed. Then not, again.

I do believe that the president claimed that critics were wrong and that he should be trusted with the decision. That seems not to have changed, while the facts have. Not. That seems to have changed or it never mattered.

You can have your cake and eat it too, but crow...