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

Friday, June 01, 2007

Science Fiction Writers

Enrolled in the War on Terror and blamed for the War on Terror. The usefullness of these writers presumably is their value in being imaginative and having some ability to influence the future. But to me the value is in their words and ones ability to interpret them, much as this blog. And here. And here. Just a few on intelligence.

But here I reference the "scale of justice" and now find in my mailbox The Scales of Justice. Coincidence? There are connections that make such more likely, like following what is going on and seeing similar consequences. Here was the ealiest reference to consequences. Here is the Search Blog for "consequences".

Speaking of "the latter" and looking back to the choice of words I realize my last post was a run on.

Earlier,[*] on the difference in liberal and conservative views. the good versus the evil nature of man and the purpose of government, that of protecting from the latter, the latter[**] has evolved to the point of doing no good.


[*] new link inserted here
[**] the latter evolved: and the second latter was the "purpose of government", the immediately prior latter was "conservative views".

OK, this "Speaking of" was out of the blue or a tangent but back to the choice of words and the latter (Oh that is where it was from) the latter link in my first sentence above on who is "blamed for" consequences. Asimov was a favorite writer of mine at an early age, but his science fact was as valuable as his fiction, but "The Foundation" series was not on my reading list, but the word "Foundation" is in the dictionary (Search Blog) and obviously in those of other languages and there is a connection when you go there and consequences when you don't as Rumsfeld confessed if you will do your own Contol F when you get there.

If you don't go there here is the segment.

On patriotism, we must have follow through. Do not ban flag burning or require the pledge of allegiance, but expect respect for and stand up for the principles "for which it stands". Without "liberty and justice for all" we can hardly be "indivisible". As Bush so eloquently said in his September 20th address to congress: "We are in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them." Is it any indication to the contrary that on the very day Bush declared this a "war" the Secretary of Defense confessed that he had yet to consult a dictionary to define war?


Meanwhile: the word foundation is in the dictionary too, and it is not just the blame but a needed part to any stucture.

[10:05 AM The Foundation Series(Control Find "History") by Isaac Asimov may be more valuable in predicting our future than it's contribution to terror. However it is plane that Bush has made great contributions to Al-Qaeda: The Base ]

[I must note 10:26 AM that I had not read till just moments ago, the second link above> While I cannot now find a link that dismissed it, I find it touched on more relevant matters than the first link, many of which I have touched on above and before. From it:
One can't blame Asimov for fuelling the swollen fantasies of the murderous. It is the last thing this committed pacifist ("violence is the last refuge of the incompetent") would have wanted. He may not be the only famous sci-fi author to have been taken up by lunatics, anyway. Killer cultist Charles Manson's favourite book is said to have been Stranger in a Strange Land, written by Asimov's rival for the imaginative future Robert Heinlein.
if that is not a prediction that came true, I don't know what is. But there is a the law of cause and effect, which is may connect to the sentence which followed:
More generally, the space opera sub-genre of science fiction offers the possibility of a massive expansion of self-mythologising will-to-power.

... and so now we have the request for help from writers? By whom and for whom?]

Monday, July 26, 2010

Deficit Pigeons?

Not Exactly Doves or Hawks.
And I am not talking target practice,
but Andrea Mitchell Reports,
with David Walker* of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

*not yet intended link** nor pun on running, other than nuanced flights

**David Walker discusses:[***] not all tax breaks are equal, nor spending cuts
[Nor are all associations equal when it comes to policy issues and positions. i.e. being concerned about the deficit, does not mean being against stimulus, not to mention what foundation or relationships one has.]
[***] 7-27-10: Avian Update MSNBC has yet to include the David Walker exchange under Andrea Mitchell Reports.

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

When in the course...

of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed,...(
continues the declaration.)

Bold added, but the rest is worth a read.

But it must be remembered on this Independence Day that the country did not have a foundation until "We the people..."

Monday, June 18, 2007

Notes from Al-Qaeda

"The Base" a translation: "Al-Qaeda"
Actually these are just notes from June 1, 2007


The Base: Al-Qaeda
The Bottom Line: The people.
Fundamentalists: Neo-Cons

Connections? People need to be the bottom line not money. The point needs to be progress not money. Money is a tool that is needed for survival. It is not the point of it all. The same goes for power. The point of the base which Bush brought together is their view from the top, to heck with the people getting there. The same goes for their thinking, starting at the end and expecting to get somewhere else.

Note: that now I have just found a post from someone with the same title. The Base

NOTES FROM TODAY:
People Matter

A paradigm is a worldview. This is a base world view that covers everything. First there is Physics which covers the reality as we know it, and don’t know it. Then there is Psychology which is the reality as we don’t know it, unless we think about it and then we still don’t know but feel something. Then there is Philosophy which covers the reality as we know it and would be nothing without us. [8-6-07: The Physics, Psychology, and Philosophy seem to be in evolutionary order, and in existence, feeling and thinking seemed to be the order of interactions. Society or Reality as these three interact seem to be embodied in the culture that is created, which can be for or against... Justice.]

These are the primary fields which form the fourth field which depends on time and the dynamics of the other three which each depend on the other three. The only other dimension in my mind is the direction these vectors can take which are either progress or back again which is a quality of the forces on each vector. But we cannot go home again. Even the second two vectors require our presence, so the direction seems to be aimed by and for us. Which puts people and progress as the primary matters of concern, or the alternative is only the return.

Now if this is a little over your head or seems loopy, you get a little more than you know. If this seems obvious you know a little more than you think. But if you could care less, that matters too.

Now for the less obvious. Just because I read, The Base , does not mean I read all of Asimov's The Foundation Series but there are connections: numbers and Psycho-History. Numbers matter and he's got them wrong; the writer of The Base, not The Foundation Series.

Condescending note: the difference between the president and congress and their polling numbers is that congress has more than one view point, and the president has only one. He may have it on many matters, but if things are black and white, all you have to do is flip flop and choose, between the the 32% (now 29%) who support Bush and the many Candidates who will run from him but not his policies are the balance of power the 68% who if they were united would probably go down in history. The miserable ratings of congress are because there are so many alternatives to Bush's stay the course, and that numbers are divided and low because they are not resisting him enough let alone sort out their options. alternatives.

And another earlier note revisited.
David Horsey wrote a piece in May of 2002, on Red and Blue America: my reply was apparently over someones head as a main point was blurred. The green was removed for color in the bottom line. In other words, the editor replaced one word (green) with another (color).

Horsey's cartoon goes overboard on voters

At the risk of being obvious, I would like to comment on David Horsey's "Red & Blue America" (May 19). For the sake of humor, it went overboard in its characterizations of those who voted for George W. Bush or Al Gore. I hope it is a good thing if people realize, like I did, how we can see one side funnier or less overboard than the other.

I hope the humor can be less dividing than the colors pinned on Gore and Bush. It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without color being a factor in making us see red.


So at the risk of being obvious again, I will give you my original bottom line.
"It also made me realize that there may be value in using more colors, but somehow without green being a factor in making us see red.

Bold added, and at the risk of further condescension, green means money and third parties in general, not that they should not unite rather than divide. OK, I could not even keep the condescension up.

OK, I am not sure about that last double negative or even if it is, but...
The point is the difficulty in uniting, when we insist on black and white, or even red, white and blue, not to mention what we neglect, but the consequences are the result.

We have met the enemy and he is us. Well we should check the roots of this, but it seems we are the solution as well.

Wednesday, May 02, 2012

CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)

May Day ain't what it used to be.
Cads are what they will be.
CAD used to stand for Computer Aided Design.
Fore! To correct the swing of sorts.

I recently referred to Ted Nugent as having CAD, Cause Affect Deficiency or Disorder, along with Mitt Romney.   And since it is all about the defining issues of our time, or the 2012 election, the ideal flip-flop from Cause Affect Disorder is Culturally Aided  Design.  If fact I feel that the Jonathan Haidt book, The Righteous Mind may be enlightening to read, but I believe it has some imbalances.

Why does he pick the categories he does to distinguish liberals from conservatives?  Why is having them balanced better than in some hierarchy?  Why should we look to the sacred, and wouldn't the rest follow of sorts?  SEGUE
If moral psychology is the foundation for politics and religion, what is the foundation of economics?  Or physics and philosophy?

Now I know I am avoiding comment on the May Day issues**, but in the greater scheme of things, there may be a related point to do so.  While I have yet to get the book, I have perused more than once most of the links in the previous paragraph(pre-segue).  Not that they may be inserted only slightly more than haphazardly.  In my lede, I have hinted that to be a CAD is not always bad, but sometimes it is just*** a tool*.

*BTW:  it was more than just for convenience that I used affect over effect.
** 5-2-12
***5-3-12 "CAD" and "just" links are not endorsements of confrontation without consequences.  Violence and destruction must not be condoned.  Anarchists should be seen as part of the 1%. (Hijacking the message, much as the Tea-party had their's hijacked by the Koch bothers.)  I might add that globalization, capitalism and even cap and trade, are not the problems or solutions^.  It is the entitlements of the 1% in their hyperbola of fantasy.  The only difference between anarchists and libertarians is the fantasy.  Not that anarchists are more real, at least they realize that their is something about the foundations over the fountainhead.

[5-4-12 On the globalization front.]

Monday, November 22, 2010

Still in draft?

Here is the preface to something I am torn between chewing and eschewing on.

Rally in Progress?
The following is submitted As Is.


(titled)PARADIGM?
Or Ribble? Hint? Or shifts?
The origins:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
One thought...
[in con text: or (sum)some...regarding the Lord Acton quote about power corrupts the key is in the word "absolute" and regardless if it is the people, some of the people or the sum* of the people]
*an erroneous yet prophetic insert of the link (as in a word divided and short for some thing else)

Monday, December 05, 2011

Image of Original In Tent


Re: Sources

C W
Homer, Plato**, Hell'nistic, Hamiltonian/Jeffersonian *: Evolutionary Thinking***.

* less than random link/Google of the day?
not fully read yet,
never completely endorsed, unlike Labelists [Well...not exactly.]

** lede not

[The under lying(pun) under standing(literal) as well as substance, regards semantics. Now that is a pretty firm line for a fluid foundation.
See W(hint pun/ribble)
The history of the constitution falls into this spectrum. The Federalist Papers were an argument, for what does not matter, it won and lost, as the amendments suggest. The constitution was signed but not without compromise. And we were never on the same page again. This is my perspective without the usual qualifiers.]
*** How prophetic?

[Unoriginal In tent: related links without hints]
[On the other hand... looking for spectrum.]

[Given the field of the Republican Presidential race, no apologies are in order. Excuses maybe, blame yourself. BTW: not disappointed by Herman Cain, to drop out but carry the mess age to the table. But in honor of the Federalists, the non-party party, here is a third field or party or option. Caution!]

[NPR: Re-education]
[Update: Herman

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

Joke of the Year!

"In turn, Republicans say Obama is acting like a stubborn partisan who will put the economy in peril in order to get his way."*

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/politics/article/Analysis-Obama-could-risk-going-over-cliff-4091855.php#ixzz2EC9tWNey

THAT WAS THE PUNCHLINE, HERE IS THE SETUP.

"Seeking to cement those impressions, the White House is casting Republicans as willing to forgo tax cuts for the middle class in order to protect lower rates for wealthier Americans. Rates for all income earners will go up at the end of the year if both sides can't reach a deal."

Read more: Ibid.

OR WAS IT A STRAIGHT LINE to the people and UPPER CUT from the Republicans?

"Obama has made that case to Republicans before only to back down in the final stages of negotiations. But this time around, the president and his team believe they hold the political leverage**."

Read more: Ibid.

*NOTE: These Seatlle PI quotes included no hyperlinks, those are my sorts.
** It is only funny if you enjoy political hypocrisy, cynicism, screaming and pulling your hair out.  The political leverage and political capital is completely on the President's side. 
(Ctrl F: political capital) ALSO Re:"time" will expire.

(fn)

[Full Crumb ? Or Fiscal Crypt ? ]
[Foundation Culture ! v.c. tetrahedron !]
12-6-12  [Somewhat correlated ?]

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Inconvenient Jobs Conflict?

Breaking news! or Fixed News?

President Obama requests a joint session of congress to present his jobs plan, the same night as the next[**] Rebublican debate.

Is the timing problematic?[*]

Footnotes:
Committee for Responsible Federal Budget
New America Foundation
Chuck Todd : Andrea Mitchell

MSNBC
Digital Danger!

[*] 9-1-11 See "more".
[Also note links(4) added to first 3 footnotes]
[Oh what a web, some weave or un-weave.]

[**] "first" corrected: "next"

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Ribble

One Self: Pundit is Right. Oops!
Part of... the Wave.
Not...the ribble or the wave, but justice and our foundation.

Sunday, July 08, 2012

Who Let the Dogs Out?

Original reaction: Not to Second Guess.

This idea coalesced from a Melissa Harris-Perry(*) panel and a Jared Bernstein reaction.
What irritated me was the piling on upon Mitt Romney. The second guessing was how Jared Bernstein discusses the context he was taken out of. As the panel on MH-P continued after her weigh-in on words via Barack Obama the segment on Word Police had nothing to do with my change, but everything to do with it; change and context and victim hoods. Not to mention "quote(s) from Nerdlandia" creeping into the X-change. (The hazzards of live blogging.***) I had no clue in the "footnote" controversy.** Am I falling for the spin, that Raw Money is a victim? Or do I forget my own theory of Share 'n Angle? Not too mention differences of intents[!]
* to be updated
** to be related later[!]
*** the alternative would be more awkward[!]

7-9-12 A Hunch Revisited as Obama prepares* to speak on extending part of Bush tax cuts.
[Segue/break: the "Dogs" above are "aTax dogs"; my subtle skirt of the issue.]

Regarding the president's speech, here are my rough notes:  Jobs.. core mission... rebuilding economy...stalemate...choice two views.  Top down- wrong...typical middle class tax cuts $3600... repeat $3600 Obama midle class tax cuts... for sake of misinformation.  We tried, slowest job growth, falling income, rising deficits... we can't afford more.  [me: we 1/2 tried more or other way].  People are with him, cut small business taxes 18 times, for 97% of them.  We should agree to do what we agree on!  [poor 1%, 2% 3%]  One year extention for under $250K then we can debate the rest and act or wait till after the election.  You are the ones driving the economy.  Learn lessons of the past, build foundation for the future.

* speech here[Note that links for "A Hunch Revisited" were contemporary, not later insertions. Referencing democracy and choices of direction.]

[Andrea Mitchell follow-up here: "fiscal cliff"?** and tug of misinfo!  Deficit distraction or key?]

[Bingo was his dog!  NewsNation "big tent" not to mention simple math from idiots.  I'm sorry, but math is where the numbers lie.  It is math warfare.  But I digress. Well,* not exactly ! ** And pardon my pun but Swiss Romney Knife?]

** bit of a cycle/anachronism here*** regarding insertion of links & today's asterisks.(I may not have the right fiscal cliff clip but neither does the math add up for AM or RNC. Re:Bingo and math of the dog carrier or station waggin')

*** (rather here **) HW B? (SK re/v SE: 5:25 HW Harvy Weinstein)

[OW to Act?]
[Bingo too point OH! (see poor 1%, 2%, 3%: LR RL)]
(Anachronistically where does MB fit in here ? i.e. I can' remember where Luke Russert was nailed down.  But I think it was Martin Bashir who was asking about the 1, 2 or 3% and the previous sequence w/links does hit the nail on the understanding or aTAX jobs.)
[Hardball: David Corn to Smerconish "Sin of making sense". Then Bob's your uncle. It certainly rots at the head. MM Marshalling Message ?]

Thursday, April 30, 2009

The Other Progressive Washington

Progressive Change Campaign Committee
has kicked off a new action item NormDollar.com
A dollar a day to make Norm go away.
Re: Senator-in-Waiting Al Franken.
Now that is a scary specter.
The Local Treament?

[Belated entry: Ross Hunter for King County Executive.] **

[And By George from Churchill downs?
A reference to the Old Guard?
(A pun on the source by George & our founding)]

[and new labels or invective? The Sting verses* The New Foundation.]

*word play or hard work (speaking of retro)[Maybe only them needs code words. Not! . ]
** May Day! <5-1-09 update>
Too Embedded?

Sunday, December 01, 2013

Too Random...

...Righty[!]

Knot 2 fraught with fraud'nfreud? 
Freedom the foundation or fountainhead? 
A stopped clock is right... 
too undimention,
1* over infinity has left. 


* poetic license in 3 or 4-D.
won over


**

knot exactly; 1/infinity= zorro?

But seriously to unpun one in particular, freedom over everything is the problem. 
Freedom over everything equals nothing over physics.



12-2-13 (...)added and *reframed

** s/b standard mobius/infinity (Thought I had previously used one, not this one.)






Embedded links:(Not fully read.)
1.  The Difficulty with Hegel
2.  Hegel or Anti-Hegel

Fully Read and Reviewing:
The Hegel Myth and its Method: (Kaufmann 1959)Akin to Plato's Form(The Socratics of the Ideal and States)^
Selections:
"The writings of Hegel and Plato abound in admittedly one-sided statements that are clearly meant to formulate points of view that are then shown to be inadequate and are countered by another perspective. Thus an impressive quilt quotation could be patched together to convince gullible readers that Hegel was — depending on the “scholar’s” plans — either emphatically for or utterly opposed to, say, “equality.” But the understanding of Hegel would be advanced ever so much more by citing one of his remarks about equality in context, showing how it is a step in an argument that is designed to lead the reader to a better comprehension of equality and not to enlist his emotions either for it or against it."

"Hegel was rarely cited in the Nazi literature, and, when he was referred to, it was usually by way of disapproval. (...) Rosenberg also stressed, and excoriated, the “Socratic” elements in Plato."

References to 3D/4M@.  English***, Math, Form~process.
*** generic word language/numbers as an ideal and a language/so-called results.

I do not necessarily want to break out of my understanding of Hegel, not say he would have understood it my way or anyone else's.  But is Popper properly popped?  Yet I do use a method of labelism/reference/progression-digression.  The hazards of the Internet, not to mention old material, one might not recall running into sources before.  I developed my tetrahedron courtesy of my older work on The Republic(1970~), delineating the mass-energy equivalence formula, and possibly Milo Wolff.(2004~)

In the above not yet reads, but glanced at's, they may have a point, and may be missing or pointing from their own point.  I may yet to agree or disagree with them, but still appreciate or depreciate their points. 
^ & ~ must be reviewed.  "Dates~" note time of encounter.

12-3-13 (FP1) Have yet to locate "^". [rtd]

12-4-13 That's the ticket ! ?



But to tilt at swans?

12-9-13 Roughly 13 in rough. 

12-10-13 Scientific American Dispute over Infinity Divides Mathematicians
verses RealClearPolitics Newtonian Government
Trinity Squared ? 

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Mess Age Monger

Reading between the lines.
See Draft,(now that is a tangent),
but I will skip the sign over cosign.
Or See Cant [!]
[Follow-up.]

Two Points Determine a Line.

Foot:Notes (!0

[Now I will parse the irony. The two points are Occupy Wall Street and the National Defense Appropriations Act. (Rebranding a SALT or SLAT**) Actually only one of these last links was the trigger for this line of thought. My point is about the lines as we make them. We are an exceptional country that is at risk of being more like those in the past. Congress is responsible for drawing the lines, and the judiciary and executive are responsible for interpreting and navigating them. Sorry there is no punch line, but that is the dilemma. Re-leads* and typos.

* my original intent was our foundation or 4mat not type ohs.
[The people must be heard, not a herd, let alone hurd.(ouch) It is an uphill job.]

Un-Seg-Way.
[** Strategic Argument Limitations Treaty or Strategic Lines Assault Tactics. Are you with M or again M? V4 VOTE! That is the spell/check of sorts.]

[Speaking of witch or spell checking...two notes of caution. I do not mean to make light of violence, food products or Occupy Wall Street. Or the Heck do I? But is there a line for satire or freedom?(Comity Central in mind.) And R we exceptional or the exception? And you rule!***

*** not original two notes of caution
[Not to mention: On the other hand, save the POST OFFICE and consider upgrading our constitutional links to include the internet. The internet is a post road. And congress legislates regarding commerce.]

[Follow up / un-M-beds]

[Speaking of Timing: Norman Goldman and Sasha. Redo taxes from the ground up. I did not catch enough to know if it was the same Sasha, but it is interesting that I had run across the connection, in follow-up. Not to mention Bill Maher on the question of taxes and class war and who is following [up] or being lead. And how prophetic in my lede and how I followed up in bold. Norman feels it is a misread of sorts. BTW: it is S. 1867 that has s. 1031 & 1032 respecting Amendment 1107.]

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Two Wrongs Make a Right?

Romney would rather have the discussion be, him as a victim of class warf**are, than discussing the choice between his (Ryan/Bane or Priebus/Gitmo) economy and the Obama Economy.
(Trigger? Hardball!)
(Out-sourcing/Off shoring? That's the ticket or GitMo.)
(Kill*** the Strategy:  More Politics ofor* the Table.)

* [!]  not quite over(Water Sport anyone)

[7-11-12 All links added today.]
[Not sure about the Hardball. Is that the ticket?]

**A mitt-insert, structural typo, or metaphorical evolution of warf-are. 
*** Skirting the poly ticks.(Holder v. Hold-up)
[Not that out-sourcing or off-shoring are wrong, but man up ...] *iv

  

*iv: [!]= sarcasm/typo meta/prophetic

P.S. (Pre-Selection: Romney/Ryan 2012)


Monday, June 01, 2009

"just supposed to 'call balls and strikes'-"

Sotomayor on the letter of the law.
A Smile to Set the GOP on Edge.
by Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post

Empathy, Sotomayor, and Democracy: The Conservative Stealth Strategy
by George Lakoff, TruthOut / Perspective

The logic of perspective and experience demonstrates the dynamics of interpretation. The framing of the question under the dynamics link almost makes moot the need to follow the arguments that supposedly "demolish" the supremacy of the courts, yet seems to demostrate the spirit of the law over the letter of the law. That being the dymamics of the power to the people and the foundations of justice in the constitution. It seems that it is only in the lack of the people to call into question a law that it not find itself before the court.
[And before one points out that there is no spirit of the law in the constitution, neither is there the word "letter" or "balls or strikes", let alone "policy" or "corporation", except in the privacy policy of the web page.] Without the spirit of the law as interpreted and argued by all three branches for the people, there is no foundation or principle let alone moral high ground for our exceptionalism.]

[6-2-09: ThinkProgress.org The Two Faces of Opposition ]

Saturday, November 23, 2013

PC [^]

Pathological[!] Corner*


Kant we all get along without going to Hegel?
Not without Hume or Mill.
Forgot the punch line.**

* (b.s. )
** the third clause will come to me(was it the bottom line?)

[!] =  "..." or (sic){L} (i.e.) ePH'n pun
Related googles: a, b, c

Inspiration: perspectivism on progress
[Un-PC or Ahegelian? Or Perspective Catch.]

11-23-13 The Foundation [!]***

*** routing branches (knot too frack) Hegelian Punditry
{spoiler alert} [^]  R "air quotes" needed?