Fungible - Sabbatical
White House: TARP Money Might Not Be Traceable
This is a misleading headline. The words "traceable" or "untraceable" were not used by Gibbs in yesterday's briefing.
They know where the money went. They were then unable to follow it. *
Gibbs: "...It's a little bit of a push and pull, right -- is the economy going to expand until or unless a small business can get the credit it needs to expand, and vice versa." **
* italics all my words.
** both bold mine
[Speaking of push and pull: Investigator Rules Against Palin in Ethics Probe I mean, why is it so expensive to defend against frivolous claims? And which comes first the dismissal or the legal fees? And is the law followable or traceable by Republicans and vice verse us?***]
*** not to mention "a check of her accounting" and the media's not mentioning that although only 1 of 19 charges have been successful the bulk of her bills (see oops) was to mislead (Oops, that's fungible as the expenses were Alaska's(not her bills) in investigating her false claim regarding the successful "troopergate".)
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query fungible. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query fungible. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Who needs Republicans
with fungible Democrats who don't even know they are at the table. Well, consider that they may have pushed themselves from the table and no scraps for the blue dogs.[*] But if and when they vote for the bill or not, they can be considered bi-partisan. I mean that is the fungible logic that has come from Republicans**.
[7-24-09 * asterisk and link added(and bold to first link) of this saved in draft QCON which I now post with the addition of two perspectives: Obama at Shaker Heights / Spinning Health Care: A Bad Case of Vertigo Norman Soloman - Truthout Perspective
** I need a better link to the logic of previous Republican claims of their bipartisanship, but I think fungible applies to their logic almost across the board. And I am not suggesting we remove the Blue Dog scraps and Republican amendments, but you might better see the link I make depending on how they vote.]
[7-24-09 * asterisk and link added(and bold to first link) of this saved in draft QCON which I now post with the addition of two perspectives: Obama at Shaker Heights / Spinning Health Care: A Bad Case of Vertigo Norman Soloman - Truthout Perspective
** I need a better link to the logic of previous Republican claims of their bipartisanship, but I think fungible applies to their logic almost across the board. And I am not suggesting we remove the Blue Dog scraps and Republican amendments, but you might better see the link I make depending on how they vote.]
Saturday, November 10, 2012
WTF?
What the Fudge?
Or rather Fungible?
Transition of sorts.*
*anachronism
(fn)^
^ {re done duncy? Heck no. Dot/dot/dot ?}
Note to check Elements of Style and bracketing, not to mention lastest bibliotech4mating in the spirit of style or E.B. White, Ie/my Transition of sorts. C-*,^, #'n 'n ),(,],{. No emoticon N-tendoughed.
(case in point: l5 QeD@} Speaking of legends/?\...
Or rather Fungible?
Transition of sorts.*
*anachronism
(fn)^
^ {re done duncy? Heck no. Dot/dot/dot ?}
Note to check Elements of Style and bracketing, not to mention lastest bibliotech4mating in the spirit of style or E.B. White, Ie/my Transition of sorts. C-*,^, #'n 'n ),(,],{. No emoticon N-tendoughed.
(case in point: l5 QeD@} Speaking of legends/?\...
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Breaking Sabbatical
draft posted today
Fungible Sabbatical
Todd *
[7-28-09 Frank , CBO , Daily News? , Closer , Not . ]
[latest inbox: Wiener blasts critics of health reform ]
[And Palin - Thank You ]
[7-29-09 Palin missing something, and it's the beat.]
[link to previous post below]
* poor journalism just may foment division not there (my opinion not Todd's)
Fungible Sabbatical
Todd *
[7-28-09 Frank , CBO , Daily News? , Closer , Not . ]
[latest inbox: Wiener blasts critics of health reform ]
[And Palin - Thank You ]
[7-29-09 Palin missing something, and it's the beat.]
[link to previous post below]
* poor journalism just may foment division not there (my opinion not Todd's)
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Faux Campaign
versus Real concerns.
The last post was so extended I have bumped the last portion up to here:
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is the only method in resolving things, even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And later, Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)[UPDATE], from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
*** asterisk applies to last post
The last post was so extended I have bumped the last portion up to here:
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is the only method in resolving things, even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And later, Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)[UPDATE], from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
*** asterisk applies to last post
FAUX NEWS!
I'm not in the mood to play with words today.
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.
The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.
My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.
Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]
* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.
The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.
My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.
Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]
* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)