Exercise Lie or Confusion [Original of letter edited and printed in KC Journal. 2-11-03]
Bush Tax Plan
Fuzzy Math and English

Paul Krugman had an exercise for readers I will take up. "Explain how the administration can claim that the average family receives a $1,083 tax cut when 80% will receive less than $1000 and most less than $300." The claim, if it is what the administration claimed, is either a lie or at it’s kindest, fuzzy math and fuzzy English. Fuzzy is just plain too kind, bad math and not thinking may be better. It is correct to say that the average of all tax returns is $1,083. But that is different than what an average family receives. Which is why politics is in such disfavor when we devalue not only math and English, but confuse family with money.

Editorial and Joke had more than meets the Eyman. [From Bush to Eyman, Fuzzy Thinking Clarified]

It is very tempting to want to sign the Eyman is a "horse’s ass" initiative if not for the result your editorial mentioned, of keeping his name before the public. However, more was revealed in your editorial, on the success of that initiative, than plainly stated. For in the state's brief it is charged that the initiative "power" does not extend to "messages" to be delivered. Was that not all that he claimed his initiatives to be? The point is simply that the "horse’s ass" initiative is only as constitutional as any of Eyman’s own, not to mention actually utilizing "name- calling", the strongest the element in any of his arguments.

It was also tempting to link this to my Fuzzy math and English letter… But it does come into play that not only is the state unable to pass constitutional determination prior to going to ballot, we also have difficulty just in determining validity in the math and English components of them. A balanced budget is a law for the state. Maybe all initiatives need to be balanced financially, not to mention having legal briefs and environmental impact statements. Maybe there is somewhere to go with this, maybe the law already provides for it. But if one agrees as my last letter said, politics is in disfavor, it goes double for the legal field.

Cultural Threads are Fine.

Something about string theory? 
Or original^ intent?
The prism of ideology?**

O W
Oh Wow*.

^ the ad/on Colbert
*something about anamolic/anomalic,
probably Pythagorian to us all. knot [!]
Re / De!
BO/OB?
Barrack Obama/ Olive Branch
Sandel/Huntington

** ideology (and mess'n wit' the word)
[Punch Line ? ! Mmmm MOW, MOW ]
Still fishing 4 another root.(or source) by google ^^ [c-3].

^^  i. e. Re reeding 'n De-quilting!  I preemptively and post-humusly linkoln update.
[Manichean is knot but many key 'n is.]
[A sorting of some basic links, may further under standing ! ? or knot]
[Ruff!?] eph 'n ? !  The Cycle  You can't run and gum!   Medina ;-) ?   
Johnny Cash / There is "fuzzy math", there is "fuzzy English" and there is ge oh metrics.

Kudos to Judiciary Committee

Under oath with transcripts

That’s the formula for true accountability," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

On the other hand:

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the Senate panel’s former chairman, appealed for pragmatism.

“It is more important to get the information promptly than to have months or years of litigation," Specter said.

Email instructions from the "the administration" * :

"Who decided?" "The administration made the determination to seek the resignations (not any specific person at the White House or the Department of Justice)."

The equation for the administration's heckuva job = fuzzy math + fuzzy English.

The formula for
unaccountability and political cover = "the administration" = Quote/"Recipients of such 'appeals' must respond identically." [see AP fact file.]

OLD NEWS: Thanks to Eric Altermann "document dump" on U.S. Attorney scandal contains one on some important political profiling research: MUST READ

* these quotation marks may seem facitious/sarcastic, but for the last part of "the formula" see Fact File AP article.

Math and the Super Delegate

Let me preface this first by saying that
Fuzzy Math + Fuzzy English = 1 heckuva Reality (By George)

Second, I won't do any more math here, let others do it. (But Newsweek?)
And Third, Super Delegates are not super mathematicians either, but that does not mean they don't have a job to do, and should have someone else do the math.
And I may be counting, but certainly don't just go by Slate of the Washington Post as a calculator.

BTW: GWB recently noted two uncertainties to fear, higher taxes and higher gas prices and then went on to say we will get through these just like we've made it through other uncertainties. Off course.

BTW Jr. or 2.0: the inverse of the above equation may have been proven. (By Godel.)

Independent comment

Senatory Patty Murray and former state legilsatore Dino Rossi have held two debates of which I have heard more comment on than snippets. I could relate to the charge that the questions may have not been answered directly even though I fancy that I may have undestood one more than the other and if you think it is simple then that is the side that might be wrong. This is the perpsective I take from what has been exchanged in the ad campaigns. So if you haven't seen the debates keep that in mind, not that I am independent. My point is that there is a need to counter the so-called facts that come out as well as answer questions, while some of the answers are just plain incomplete. My reference to independent comment above refers to close to neutrality here but sympathy with one frustrated with the party representatives(or rather only a choice between the two), who incidentally was a libertarian with socialist understanding. I won't parse that but at least the individual had great scepticism for the so-called tea partiers, even though I find a libertarian socialist to be even more idealist if not a fantasy. On the other hand, while some want their cake and eat it too, there seems some extremity of balance(if not irony) in this combination.
[Cross Reference to be inserted but it has to do with fuzzy math and fuzzy language.]
[For those who think that they have to know better to vote, vote anyway*, at least there is a shot at cancelling a vote of someone that does not know better enough not to vote.]
* in some races the first link was neutral or gave dual endorsements, rely on this one and then the other to fill in if any questions.
[If the choice is between a Democrat or a Republican and that is usually it**, vote the Democrat as they can be counted on to be more flexible than the Republican. The time to influence them by sending a message was in the primary.]
** technically it is not the rule but the result that it still happens that way even though concievably the top-two could be of the same party, the political calculus or lemonade making does not work out that way, and third parties are even more in a pickle(I mean lemon.)

Deja Voodoo?

Fuzzy Math + Fuzzy English = 1 Heckuva Job
[This is an old quip of mine updated** with new links embedded.]

A COROLLARY:
Litigated Math + Mitigated Language = the inverse of the slippery slope.

Just what does that mean? Well it means that it is a lot harder to make progress than to run things down. It means we must be as careful backing out of the ditch, as we were careless getting the driver that got us there. (Sorry to mix rhetoric and metaphor here, but it is an uphill battle *that will take all hands on deck.0

*this is a Laffer speaking of hills, I suggest that you search for the boat in Reagan's words not to mention Lincoln's stroke of labor.

[And where do I get the voodoo? Well is just isn't magic. But the key as Bill Frist said is "when done right". It also seems to depend on the side of the curve one is on before changes are made, not to mention the application of the terms incentive and work when it comes to capital.]

[Update: 12-8-08 King County Re-Org and the inspiration from the Tax Reform debacle there.

** I attempt to represent this as a formula or parody of math, but the links I have inserted were not necessarily known to me at the time I formulated an earlier version, just the history as we lived it, in the form of Reaganomics and early Bushisms.]

FOX in Sheeps Clothing.

Actually sheep in shepherd's clothing.
Or The Sound and the Fury.[*]

Or is it fuzzy? I know that there are segments of news at FAUX News for a few seconds at a time, but the fury above does not hold to their motto:
"No Pundits, no discussion- just the news."
I am not sure if it is really from THE FOX REPORT, but it should be called JUST THE OPPOSITE (of the motto).

Speaking of "the speed of live", (the rest of the FAUX motto), I would love to see Bill Maher's humor live, as it has more news content. (Or Retro Laugh there.)
[Only in the light of wrong, is Shepard anywhere near right, but he is nowhere near left of wrong. "O, most lame and impotent news. Shak. (misQ "conclusion")]
[Speaking of sound... not the fuzzy.]

*[My original feeling of disgust has moderated toward admiring his "slippery slop" of (sic) journalism.(See comments for punctuation notes)]

[UPDATE: 8-13-09 Whine Country and smokin' rhetoric.**]
[** the latter is busted news.]

[Howard Dean and Charlie McCarthyism (not to mention.)]

Use of Labels

This is just a note that labels are not always useful.
[liberals, conservatives, progressives, neo-cons, communists, fascists]
However, LABELS as they are used below, may be helpful. The previous post includes the addition of the "label" ESCALATION but could be used for almost anything the administration does. At this time it places a focus on world powers and how they get along. The Geometry of Purpose? label refers basically to a structure of how to get things done. For example; focusing on one's own intentions from the grass roots up, not trickle down. Hence the Power Broker Mountain Project. This post is to explain some of the workings of this writer.

Trivium, for example represent the basic medieval course work at universities: grammar, logic and rhetoric. You can see where I am coming from and where we are going. Quadrivium is the upper division of the liberal arts composed of; arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music.

Example of their use: Fuzzy Math and Fuzzy English = 1 heckuva result *

I will add to this post later, but another feature that I have just begun use of, is the search engine for the blog itself.(Just demonstrated click on heckuva) I will be inserting labels on previous posts, and clicking on them below will bring up that label's postings.

Bonus: LINK requires "Hard Work" of reading and more importantly filtering.

* in case more of a hint is needed, sometimes I am a hechuva speller as well.

Politics is local?

Ground Game ? *

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://open.salon.com/blog/ted_frier/2012/09/12/losing_gop_in_denial_over_own_failures
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/10/why_i_left_the_gop/

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/12/mitt%E2%80%99s_shameful_libya_statement/
http://theweek.com/article/index/233148/the-death-of-an-american-in-libya

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-statement-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/13/cairo_embassys_statement_what_went_wrong/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press/vp/48959856/#48959768 ***

Not the usual MO.** 

[ http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2012/09/13/house-race-koster-opts-for-the-full-romney/ ]

*Scroll over is sufficient until [fn] and post /under-construction(also redux labels) R done.
** "well" not exactly [!]

*** dropped link [!]

[Unfinished read, refinished read.(perspectivism) Politics over war.  Obama has made progress in foreign policy, but Republicans want to take it back.  The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Iran(an evolution) are the examples of diplomacy(d) over preemption.  It all sprung from the 2000 election debacle, resistance to Clinton policy and the failure on September 11th with the supposed post-9-11 world.  But it is spelled out in the perspective that we cannot expect to teach democracy or politics over there, without practicing it over here(^).  I will refrain from further tangents or links on this post, but I will note that the two reads just mentioned also reflect a bit of a balancing act that is not nearly as cut and dry as it might be written.  One of the key differences in the big picture that makes the previous administration a stand out failure in American History is the combination of the voodoo(b) economics(arithmatic/fuzzy math+fuzzy English) with the neo-con perspective of American Exceptionalism (which is not) exemplified by choosing a war without paying for it.  The success that is so difficult is because politics is local except for them^(f).  This is demonstrated by the current Radical Republican opposition(c) to the Arab Spring,^^^ which removed dictators and is allowing(a) for democracy that might not turn out to be to our liking.  Bush said war is hard work, but just because you want to fight, does not mean that progress and peace(with diplomacy and politics) are not harder work, and more profitable.  That is part of true exceptionalism.

^refrain from a bumber snicker]

9-15-12
(a) FOX wrong about Libya says McCain.
(b) Foreign policy is Bane of Politics: bankruptcy bailout business not an option in either.
(c)  Loose lips? Republican Threat to National Security
(d) not! but whiney!

(^) ibid re^frain [see (d)]

9-17-12 (e) not embedded  i.e. that's right, there is no (e)
Seriously [!] folks ?
[^^ Apologies for sarcasm, but there is a diversity of reliability in the perspectives/sources provided.]
[NOW^^^ w/Alex Wagner w/Martin Basher on America Abroad.^^ But natural track of changing the strategy for Romney of change or status quo. i.e. hijacking change and boogieman status quo. Cam-Pain not working, Obama not running.]
[There is an (f) ]
^^ viscous cycle of anachronism
^^^ then Martin Bashir (NeoMitt)(Mittastrophe of asterisked?)

V for Victim

F for Fudging*

W for Wedge.**

* in"F"able

** not only Econ 101, but Physics and Psychology 101

Economy Killers: Inequality and GOP Ignorance

VFW :

Curve Wars? Bell Curve meets Laffer Curve.

[There is a paradox to the bell curve reference, or counter-intuitive meeting. How ironic the Laffer curve is a Bell curve, but their meeting results in The L-Curve.]

[It may be dangerous(i.e. fuzzy math and English) to insert irony or mixed metaphors/charts, but I will now switch streams.]

There seems to be an overly conservative perspective on government spending in the Krugman/Wells article with the use of the word temporary:

In 2008 we suddenly found ourselves living in a Keynesian world — that is, a world that very much had the features John Maynard Keynes focused on in his 1936 magnum opus, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.” By that we mean that we found ourselves in a world in which lack of sufficient demand had become the key economic problem, and in which narrow technocratic solutions, like cuts in the Federal Reserve’s interest rate target, were not adequate to that situation. To deal effectively with the crisis, we needed more activist government policies, in the form both of temporary spending to support employment and efforts to reduce the overhang of mortgage debt.

It ignores the long-term infrastructure deficit otherwise know as investment in our infrastructure. Given the skewed GOP perspective on cutting spending over recovering taxes and investing in the country, it is no wonder growth, which is not the answer*** alone anyway, is not faring well.

Note fuzzy, not to mention capitalized Bell and un-capitalized bell curve.(ouch)

Related economics, INET. Related Salon, NFR.

***(Crtl F) "growth"

4-16-12 Not exploit veterans(V F W), but W is playing the victim card here.

Bottom Line Update

[Caution: There are a few tangents here
but the shorter course is in
Rising above the Math below]

On GoLeft.TV the crawler below RFK Jr. on The Morning Joecried for the impeachment of Gov. Spitzer, just after the line that he would resign. [Broken News! S...F]

On Democracy Now the resignation of Admiral Fallon is noted in context. Could it be that distraction is the case for both? * [Ferraro Flap]

The governor resigns so that there hopefully will be less distraction from the job of governing, while the admiral resigns so there will be less distraction from the game of war. Unfortunately investigations are needed into the procedures of both, the selective prosecutions and use of intelligence. Could it be that Fallon wanted to play the hand that is dealt instead of the game of bluff with the wrong cards? My point to the last two posts [Oh what a weave...*** ]are that there be more focus on the differences between Democrats and Republicans in governing and war.

* [Ferraro Flap: in response to question: "why do you think Barack Obama is where he is today" she replied "in large measure because he is black". It could just as well be because there was a large field of too much of the same old politics. But then should we be careful of ageism here?

[Speaking of bottom lines: I don't know why I wanted to embed the link below and say "from here to" infinity,(or "to infinity and beyond") but the cost of war is a big bottom line, and the courage to do something is fraught with calculations. (and fright)** While the administration is light on the math (search fuzzy)and deeply in fear: how much more fear can one have than the fear of nothing. Maybe because reality is somewhere between nothing and the ridiculous.

[ ** The Real Bottom Line? [Source: ThinkProgress Rising above the math:

The White House doesn't care for the estimates by Stiglitz, a former chief economist of the World Bank who's now a professor at Columbia University.

"People like Joe Stiglitz lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can't even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9-11," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto, conceding that the costs of the war on terrorism are high while questioning the premise of Stiglitz's research.

Fratto Fraught with Naught and Fear of Failure. Here's to the sinking of the makers of the boogeyman.
final note: there may be a lot to quibble with in the math but the logic is infallonable. hmmm? and based on the premise of uncertainty, can we fathom the course? aka Going deep but not even scratching the surface. ]

[***] I had to unweave the points, posts or links here.

The Tetrahedron Ramble*

What the heck** is the point? I revisit my Power Broker Mountain Project, or actually move on. What I call the prime disciplines as in fields of study, Physics, Psychology, and Philosophy form the base with Progress or their result as the point of their projection or application forming a reality or culture, as we know it, or think we know it, or feel we apply it, regardless.

The perspective that caused me to reconsider this model, or concept (as it also may be the perspective) is a proposition that Science, Religion, Politics, and Economics,(structures) have at least three things in common: Values, Ideology, and Power.(VIP) Now I don't want to be restricted to the math or geometry or insistence that there is meaning in them for some sake other than they are structures. But conceptually they are at the point of the tetrahedron and not the point of the tetrahedron any more than culture. Now to some this may have gotten nowhere, but we will get somewhere, with or without consideration of VIP and the Very Important Point of who and what we are or will become.

Is it no coincidence that there are three branches of the government, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary based on the constitution and the preamble, or that the first 10 amendments are called the Bill of Rights? Freedom and Justice are not forces to reckon*** with, but create.

*somewhat impromptu
** search fuzzy math and English; not to mention viscious cycle or golden rule
*** "bottom line"

Speaking of...

Democrats Attack Iraq Security Proposal
By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 24, 2008; Page A09

Not what I was heading for but this:
Some in Party Bristle At Clintons' Attacks
Anti-Obama Ad Heightens Unity Fears
By Alec MacGillis and Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, January 24, 2008; Page A01

The Clinton campaign argued that it was simply quoting Obama. But in the original context, Obama was describing the dominance of Republican ideas in the 1980s and 1990s, without saying he supported them, and asserting that those ideas are of no use today.

Con Text?Link?

[1-25-08: UPDATE AND FOLLOW THROUGH -- Speaking of... "unity fears" (Sometimes even professionals (WaPo) can misslink their lines) But I was speaking of unity fears in my post "Clinton in South Carolina" part of which I will bring up here:

The Democrats can be united. If they are not, they are not really Democrats. Putting a Democrat in the White House is the important thing. But putting the best Democrat in the White House is the most important thing. To do that, we need the votes of not just Democrats. But that does not mean that the candidate cannot be the best Democrat as well.

To make a finer point fuzzy -- No matter what a candidate says, does not mean the voter will follow. -- Either with their vote to another candidate, or in their understanding of why they follow anything. In this last link, I was searching in the way back machine in the upper left corner for meaning (*)... or some such word I had used in the past, but I must paraphrase myself, "People may follow whether they know what you mean or not." and there are results whether we know what they will be or like them or not.

(*) "people will follow" was the needed search for meaning applied to Bush.]

QCON and Flip-Flop: AN IRAN OUT

This is a quick comment on the news and a flip-flop on myself.

On Bush and Iran, there is hope **** that progress can be made.
It is all up to what Bush will accept and what Iran will agree to.
We could possibly "Trust but Verify" and any sort of solution depends on others
trusting what we can agree to. While any so-called enemy that might be "appeased" * has little record to base that on. Critics of the administration must hold them accountable and give aid to the "enemy" by assuring accountability, not politics. The big question is whether Iran can in any way accept restrictions on nuclear research while the administration accepts no accountability to international agreements. [NOT! **]

* quotation marks indicate fuzzy English except the Reagan remark.

[This is based only on a radio snippet of Bush's hopes for success.]

[**] - [ This IS an update from www.JustForeignPolicy.org thanks to Thom Hartmann having the Robert Naiman as guest, just prior to having John Bolton speak to the contrary I presume.]
[My original point is that there is always hope that diplomacy, even tough diplomacy, can work, as long as the other side of the table has a reasonable alternative to giving in to what is unreasonable, and if there is no hope that we will be reasonable, then standing fast is just as reasonable, in the light of unreason. While I am not charging unreason, just not open *** reason, while we find it hard to find reason on the other side.]

A. -
B. -
C. -
D. - Bingo!

*** it is often buried somewhere

[Myth? Pre-visited.
Connected back later.
And dialing in.]
[Mission Impossible Script Writers Guild. ]

**** link added 6-12-08

Death of a Journalist?

His career that is.
Compassionate to the end.
Michael Gerson that is.
Actually I wonder about his journalism creds
past or present, that is.
Here is a little ramble on that note.
Sort of a talking points memo or
just rambling notes:

Death of a Journalist [*]
AUC!
Besides...
Overshadowed not eliminated?
Pie or Cake? [**]
It is the size that matters.
Balanced understanding or fuzzy math and English.

Summary: Bush is not all bad, and not all conservative, but on balance?
Math and English and logic for that matter, don't matter much.

Or better, things could be worse, he could have been like Cheney.
[UPDATE: WHERE THE BUTTONS?]
[Even later but earlier comparisons: Bush is no Lincoln but good points to watch out for in the could do worse category: "600,000 dead. The country essentially hated him when he was leaving office." and speaking of competition or legacies, "a charge to keep" accurate or not. And dyslexia of mythical proportions.

* I'm not exactly happy with where ever this term came from as it popped into my head, but maybe the concept that journalism is so dead. So far from fair and balanced. So far from a job being done, which means including who, what, when, where, why, and how, or at least getting some facts right, not that I ever include everthing.

** reference is to pie charts and growing it, and having your piece and eating it too.

[The State of the Union and
Further numbers? 1-31-08 ]

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.

BUSH AD
Demos can make a gain
[Printed 3-10-04, King County Journal]
My title:
Freedom, Faith, Family and Sacrifice Reminds Us.

From what I have seen of the first Bush ad, it is surprisingly honest. The words freedom, faith, family and sacrifice are prominent principles on parade. The images of victims and heroes bring feelings that are shared by all of us.

The Democrats could be tempted to hope it is continually run until the Freudian nature of it sinks in.

Why was a fourth ``F'' word not worked in for literary sake? Would it be too much reminder of the four freedoms of FDR? Would it be their avoidance of words like fear and failure, which would fit this administration and its lost faith in processes?

Sacrifice is appropriately chosen instead and we should be reminded who and what is being sacrificed. Since Sept. 11, 2001, there may be a new equation.

But we must do better than the fuzzy math and facts that change for this administration or it is only a dangerous formula. These images and feelings are real and valid but they make little difference, until they are followed up by words and actions that mean something

ANTI-EYMAN INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL?

[Reply to King County Journal Editorial, 2-11-03]

It is very tempting to want to sign the Eyman is a "horse’s ass" initiative if not for the result, your editorial mentioned, of keeping his name before the public. However, more was revealed in your editorial, on the success of that initiative, than plainly stated. For in the state's brief it is charged that the initiative "power" does not extend to "messages" to be delivered. Was that not all that he claimed his initiatives to be? The point is simply that the "horse’s ass" initiative is as constitutional as any of Eyman’s own, not to mention actually utilizing "name- calling", the strongest the element in any of his arguments.

There is also the problem of fuzzy math and English. Beyond the inability to pass constitutional determination prior to going to ballot, we also have difficulty just in determining the validity in the math and English components of them. A balanced budget is a law for this state and maybe all initiatives need to be balanced financially (revenue cuts must equal spending cuts), not to mention having legal briefs and environmental impact statements(also cost related). Maybe there is somewhere to go with this, maybe the law already provides for it. But if one agrees as my last letter said, politics is in disfavor, it goes double for the legal field.

Do as I say, not as I do.

It is more than ironic that the Bush administration opens an Office of Global Communications on the same day it declares the Iraq regime an apparatus of lies. Let’s look at some of the communications that have come from George W. Bush. “I trust the people not the government.” “I am a uniter not a divider.” His claim that he was president well before he was selected. Anyway then things get really fuzzy, running up to the “axis of evil”.

Let us be clear. There are some evil people in the world and something must be done about them. But calling them an axis gives them more credit than they deserve, not to mention leaving others out, both other evil and our allies. The most interesting thing he said lately about his problems developing a coalition to move on Iraq is that “It is like a rerun of a bad movie. I don’t want to watch anymore.” That is the problem with this administration. Not only is this worse than a rerun of any previous behavior in foreign policy it is likely to create spin-off behavior that we don’t want to watch either.