FOOTNOTES PAGE DECEMBER 2013

Begun 12-3-13

12-1-13:(sc) math problem un4m~ulated. (NFRY)
12-2-13(cont.) Too Random... Righty? 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (the point ?)
[4 the record : 3 squared? ]
12-3-13: Parallel [!] un-Pink Floyd, He- /^\ , van-NO JOKE, ven-Rough Philosophy, Cry- / Star Chamber Revisited, river- / creek ? 

rtd 12-3-13

Retrieved from draft 12-13-13
State Theory <- heading // lede -> and duality // trinity/body  Headings and^ Leadership*. (dynamics)
  ^    of/or 8:  Snooze/Dream(4,6) *prof(it)C? (7,8) Bane or Right?  [Not to blog both ends against the middle.]
Don’t celebrate yet!: Why Boehner won’t really ditch the right-wing nutjobs. /  The Christian right wants civilization to collapse / (3/5) Head ~ Lead Paul Krugman: The GOP’s austerity agenda is winning / My critics have “income envy”: Ed Schultz unloads after backlash to his union quote 
Dual / nd: When will the media learn? Conservatives are not “centrists”! / 3 essential (and ignored) questions about Detroit’s bankruptcy  Try Ad of Caution?  (not fully read yet) (anachronistic construction) (duel conflation)~ (bc: bubble critics)  OW Hegel ~ Liebniz [!]
RTD


12-23-13 (4) A.  Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications., B. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! c. Snooze Alarm d. Tony Baloney e. WWW Wisconsin Lesson? f. We Need Ed  g, What's good for the goose...

12-27-13 
12-28-13 1 Was Wittgenstein Right? or behind [?^] 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 9  // 10 / 11
^ insert a - h
12-29-13 - Original 5 links.  A. Frank O File? B. Pi cAP Delta rOW(USC) C. 1. Inverse Reality?,  2.(i), 3. Fair and Balanced..., D. Wittgenstein , E. Re-Mix  ///
12-30  F.rough- 1. Punderous Ponderings , 2. State of Politics , 3. A Revolution? 4.Un-Exceptionalism 5.  , G.notes^ -1. 2.Heuristic Concurrence and  3.My Respects to Those who Celebrate. (re-search*) , H.math^^ - 1. Too Random... , 2., 3.Bury the lede?, 4. ROW MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)] . *(under the case of not fully read yet, but back to math... why now 16?  too cubed by two? Speculation that the 5th perspective is from apart too pun? The three-body problem regards intitial circumstances from within or without. R 1st 3 models different than recently added.  The pow#r of i(V)?

Para~graph Three!

Endo-terror~cism?

aka Academics ?

The point?  The esoterics of Strauss maybe the Socratics of Plato, or exoterics of Neitzsche.

Ctrl F (academic:~:academics)
:::  aka [a. FOOTNOTE JUNE 2013 PAGE TWO, b. The Daily Counter Balance , c.(J) In the begining... , (D)BoC, e. Belated Breaking News! , f. THE COUNCIL OF NICE , h. Back-Log August 19th, ("religious ghetto") , i.(G).]
:::   ? [a. Looking Back , b. "if I were dictator" , c. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! , d. Bane(Or) Change , e. Conservative Foray (4A) ,  f. Blame to go around? , g. Will Safire Replaced by Will I ams., h. Academic Freedom , i. Framing Narratives , j. In the begining... , k. Technical Difficulties , l. The Thorn and the Lyin' , m. Running Joke , n. Let me finish? , o. We are at the table. , p.Forward (Ironically)  ]
(what the fudge?  f-j,p?)
:::   Endo-suffix?

The project  ?   The dance? 
"Esotericism is the practice, widely employed by a variety of thinkers prior to and up through the early Enlightenment, of disguising their real meaning through ellipsis, surface contradiction, dispersal of their real arguments, and the like (indeed—they were misleading casual readers about their true intentions!). The understanding that philosophers like Plato and Aristotle made use of esotericism was central to Strauss’s own project of returning to their thought as an antidote to what he called the “crisis of modernity”, since it pointed to deeper truths hidden behind the evident meaning extracted by superficial readers. It was probably also one of the sources of distrust of Strauss and his followers by other academics, since it implied that initiates into the art of esoteric interpretation had access to meanings unavailable to others." Francis Fukuyama.
Or Ecto~tonics of Aristotle?  Less than Ionic that paranormal came up in  English [?]
P.4,The Prince misquote? P.5 "undermine dogmatism" bingo~? P.6 Nietzsche Recurrance
"That latter struggle was ultimately won, and led to the triumph of the “harmonist” view, now almost universally accepted, that philosophical truth could be made compatible with and indeed supportive of modern politics. Transparency is today the name of that venerable game. Classical philosophers like Plato and Aristotle had a different view; namely, that philosophical skepticism undermined the irrational beliefs necessary to the maintenance of a political community and therefore needed to be kept under wraps. As Melzer points out, there is a large body of contemporary scholarship that actively contends that virtually no one other than a few cranks ever wrote esoterically; he performs a great service by, first, showing that the claim is empirically wrong, and second, that it is itself an historically contingent interpretation." (ibid.)
 
2-25-15 2 ~ B Kantinued ;-) R I P ? [!]
(1) a. Who Let the Dogs Out?, b. The Undisclosed Bunker Branch of the Government., c. ...what about the damage to your Presidency?, (d.) The Curve or Nuance Thing, e. Doxology.
(2)~
(3)  The Be All and End All?

Pen~ta-gone? i.e. P5
"This section of the book is wonderfully erudite and leaves no uncertainty that esotericism was indeed a major art that is now all but lost. Melzer points to four reasons for past uses of esotericism. First, it served as protection from prosecution; he notes its widespread use in totalitarian countries like the former Soviet Union and contemporary China. Second, it served to protect the political community from dangerous truths, such as philosophical skepticism about the city’s gods and traditions; third, it served a pedagogical purpose by forcing readers to engage on a deeper level; and fourth, it was used as a transitional strategy for modern writers seeking to undermine dogmatism." (ibid)
P6?  At this Platonic # I will note Aristotle's place in the Nietzschean struggle.  
Hence Fukuyama is a difficult read of Strauss and Plato who are difficult reads.

P7? "If Philosophy Between the Lines were simply a book..." (where P = par.) I might plow on[!]
@9   "Strauss’s central concern was what he called the 'crisis of modernity', where the project of using philosophical reason for practical purposes was in danger of collapse."
@12 "The recovery of the rationalist project was central to Strauss’s life work—"
Having now fully read it, I will let you decide.

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?)

What's good for the goose? Goose the gander!

American Perspectives?

It was interesting juxtaposition which I caught Saturday on C-span.

Ward Churchill “Univ. of Colorado Professor of Ethnic Studies, spoke about his book "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens: Reflections on the Consequences of U.S. Imperial Arrogance & Criminality.",

followed by:

“David Horowitz speaks about academic freedom and urges students to demand more ideological diversity on college campuses, and the inclusion of conservative ideas in college curricula.”.

This after my commenting on local radio with Churchill's attorney(guest) that: we should be careful distinguishing between name calling and calling for actions, and that the remedies that critics wish to impose on the professor may come back to bite those that would impose them. [in so many or slightly more words].

The gist of the controversy is that the professor is suffering from the reactions to his writing where he used the term “little Eichmanns” referring to some of the victims of 9-11 and their support for U.S. imperialism. Never mind the First Amendment, tenure, and state law protecting speech, especially of government workers of the government. The irony is that David Horowitz wants academic freedom too, to balance the “storm troopers”* that teach in most universities.

Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. If we don’t uphold it for what we disagree with, will it even be needed for what we do? However, that does not mean that everything one says or feels is academic. Even being in a book does not just “make it so”. Without opposition there is no way to know what will hold up. Without freedom there is no way to reach the light of truth.

For readers convenience(sixth paragraph, Meet the Terrorists, last sentence)"If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it." This should be enough context and includes considerable mitigation.

* from the same historical reference as "little Eichmanns"?

Lean Forward File

MSNBC (fwd)


The Ried Report
Gruber McCain
National Security
Badge of Democracy
Separation of Church and State ?


ofor 'nd 
Forest for Trees?
(fp?)


[!]?
Issa looses last of wild geese to goose him.


Issa Box of Chocolates.

Snooze Alarm

Something about Romney and...
(T M I)

These are not actually the stuff of dreams or my AM snoozing, but if President Obama were half as frightening as the right would have him, the left and the middle would be more content.***

[Not Exactly]

Dirty Harry and Fake My Day:  Rachel Maddow nails Romney on lastest ad that*...

...can't be put into words.   Maybe** a Mitt Sand Witch or Which.  Well... three words.  Frackin', fudgin', in-F-able!  Or goose the gander.  I will hold off on the links for now.  One word is waver, or "cul de sac" of politics.  Another is "running".  For what?(Or from...)  Romney wavers on wavers and shoots Romneyfair or care in the foot.  How high is the cow pie?  Or maybe the real word is "works". The right implication is that Romney and the Federal Government would dictate what works.  Could he trickle down any philosophy more?  The pour won per cent[!]

* link and continued sentence 8-8-12
**image/cartoons

***

[Up Date: Tetra Heed Run ? Or Try Angle ?]

 NOTE: Charts of Sorts.

Two-wrongs don't mean a Left[!]

Too reads do not mean a dialogue. 

Mid-read(NFRY): (i.e. live footnoting)
Survival of the fittest verses(~) corporate species and arms races[!]
Battle of the Narratives? (Corporate offspring, peacocks and elk.)
(head or tails not treated equally, but...)[somewhat akin to gander or goose?]
[fundamental try-vergence]...(grain v ladder)[LOL read v regulations]
Survival of the Narratives?

4-3-16 to read:
The Atlantic: Obama Doctrine
4-4-16
Hedges/Hudson on Neo-Liberal Economics.

[related (b.s.): Spencer... demo/mice...DecomPart * Meantalizing]
*Moline's Platonics  / Darwinian Physics

WWW Wisconsin Lesson?

Wisconsin Walker Walk-out not Winner.
Focus on Mittle?  Jansing & Co.
Radical over-reach was the money message
Romney can't run. 
Wisconsin issues are national temp late. 
Money mess age matters.
It's the stupid economics.
Tag team of dialogue* is message for the mess age.
Morgon Freeman on physics lesson. 
Chris Jansing on journalism/economics lesson? 

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120604/US.Wisconsin.Recall/?cid=hero_media_sea
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120606/US.Battleground.Wisconsin/?cid=hero_media_sea
http://news.yahoo.com/whatever-walkers-fate-obama-leads-romney-wisco-213721900--abc-news-politics.html

Clinton is not Obama's Trump.
Is Jansing CBS's Rose?

*Obama's joker?  Not!
Clinton is America's stand-up scholar.
Not so sure about Jansing's guests being voice of God!

Speaking of missing links, technical difficulties lost more than a few Re: Lean Forward.
The Place for Politics is (a missing link**) and the place for Share-Un-Angle and Ronald Reagan Jr.

** hour between*** Chuck and Chris
Owe the Iron Knee?

[Martin Bashir and goose or gander.]
[Romney answer Rachel Maddow maybe?]

*** found 6-7-12(not exactly)

We Need Ed

Happy April Fools!
I am killing two birds with one stone and irony of political correctness, let Hawks and Doves fly. And I won't even get into the Missio'gander*, but there I go again.
We do need an education but I am really paying tribute to Ed Schultz. Apparently it is two years ago today that he got his/our show.

* Ok a crack at the goose and the Cheeseheads and staying the course.

FOOTNOTES PAGE ONE- MAY 2014

5-4-14  In Spiration: Salon-W.R. Klemm / Sch~hhh[!] ... Who started it, I finished it, it still needs sense. (Ctrl F: sense ) Everything Model? A. Para-model, B. Almost makes me want to tweet. , C. Wittgenstein, D. The Politics of the Table. , E. What the Beck? (Witt Gen Stein's Buffet)   Milo Wolfowitz (FP2)

5-5-14:  fath:   ...:   gr :  your : [nexus, cats, herstory, herding] 1.A. NEXUS REVIEW (Re-posted) , B., C., D., E., F., G., H., I.  2. A., B. C. D. Reigning wags and tales ...  M. 3. EH? The History of B.S. 4[$]. A. B., C.Congress is Like Herding Death Panels!, D. What's good for the goose... [?] ow!  

5-7-14: SkyNet published from 5-6-14. Yes link inserted, but italics added. 

5-29-14 this:  Nixon- Plausible Deniability / Bush 43- Plausible Incompetence / Snowden- Plausible What?  Hence the word.  Posting based solely on NBC link.  4Later digging/yet/to read.  ...& further D'Ribble rather than G'Ribble;  Plausible Disciplination asks about his education and training in law or civics or what else he was educated in that might inform his understanding of this exchange with authorities, not that we should expect constitutional scholars not to have varied opinions.  Italics: not a foundation for my ainfount[><].  i.e. bu'dump ump[~]

GPS

Good Progressive Strategies?
Green Purple Systems?
American Exceptionalism.
Three Signs of a Profit Sea?
Now this is not just a wisecrack, but I have yet to retrieve the link** where I recall a reference to prophetic narrative* having three ingredients. It was in the context of a previous post, but I am unsure if I embedded the link or it was left behind. Speaking of fringe or conspiracy theories(...)dot dot dot

* emphasis on the narrative

** I will post it here(when found) to be clear that it is not one I have embedded so far(Not to send anyone off on a wild goose chase, ne ribble, but if any one does recall any recent reference to, I believe 3, elements of a prophecy, please comment.) As I recall, they may be fear, convincing, and fulfillment. Yeah, that may be the ticket of original intent.

The Straw Bear

If a Republican runs in the woods and can’t see the forest for the trees and the Republican falls, does anyone hear what the bear does in the woods?

A little riddle on the straw bear of propaganda.
Ah, the power of myth.
Maybe this is a mother goose chase but those were the days. Speak softly and carry a big stick. Speaking of Teddy Bear, did you know that Wilson made Pershing the first general since the Civil War? The Palin Romney romp through the woods with a bear is quite humorous. It reminds me of, if a tree falls and what a bear does and if anyone will see the forest for what we hear* fall.

The point is that the use of "some people" makes faulty facts bearable. I do not think there is any information that the U.S. was anywhere near losing its dominance in military spending or economic might. In fact I believe that it was over twice the combined spending of the China and the former Soviet Union at the time it fell. In fact it was them coming to an economic grip with reality that did them in. So now China is a different bear and we need no bull in our cabinets.

So war is a straw bear argument. That just means that you have to keep fighting it; the fear mongering and comedy that goes back to our nations birth. Heck beyond, I will say probably cave paintings. But it is no laughing matter that even if the current 6 to 1 ratio has the profit factored out, we could be in trouble.

* the tree is yet to fall on Countdown re: Congressman Cantor listening tour denial
[5-7-09: I did not hear this coming. Nor see "the tree" fall. At least not in real time.][Not to mention lost in the forest I am trying to dig up a Romney reference to us and them(found 6-3-09), the revolutionists versus the royalists which is more flip-flop.]

What's good for the goose...

is good for the gander.

Re: Honeymoon and Herding The marriage metaphor could be useful longterm, while some may be more heirarchical and focused on the passion.
No Bear v. Bull or the high way.
Way!

The point is that progress takes precedence. If we don't get what we want, we don't leave the table. Yet maybe absence makes the heart grow fonder? Since congress is not a marriage and nor are the relationships with the executive and the judiciary, just keep in mind in any sinking ship we must bail while we heave ho.

It's Obama's Turn

[Keep the Change(scroll down)]

Of course.
Stay the course.
The private* sector is fine
verse US economic turn around.
[Hardball Metaphor.  Making the case.***]

* E. G. Private Equity Government
(The nuts and bolts?  If Romney cannot understand that the economy has turned around, then what will happen when he turns it around.)
[Ouch ! ]
[Politics Nation ? ]
[Whip Republicans with Reagan and Clinton!]
Thom Hartmann?
Word of tomorrow?  Pernicious.**
[Coffee Table This! The Fifth Element.]

6-10-12 Keep the Change!
Yes this is a bumper sticker for Obama!  Though the links may be a bumper sticker for Clinton or nuance.  Not that I have fully read them yet, I will try to stay the course, not to mention other threads.

6-11-12
Inconvenient Try-Angle !
NOW w/ Corny Copy Ah. "Mind the Gaffe(added 6-13)": "food fight"



Verse us Tony TruthyahKnow.

** anachronism approved:  "Perspective" was Norman Goldman's word of the day(Thursday). "Scale" was my suggestion(for Friday), and "pernicious" was my word for Monday.

6-12-12
Curb Your Enthusiasm !
[Duct Tape?  Goose Pate!]
[(Middle - Name / N SC ?)]
[ Bubble Up]

6-13-12
Jeb Bush: Walk Back ?
(Hardball)
*** link(s) added
McCain sabotage.
NOW "Picking up the Tab".

6-14-12
Keep the Change!
"Different Visions" NOW!
Past is prologue or (unpassed)Middle - Name.(Scroll-up)

Happy Birthday to us!
The Dickens We Say!
Better to look back than go back!
Preemptive Comment this AM:  Obama battles for Fiscal Reality!
Geitner is speaking on Andrea Mitchell Reports.
Andrea Mitchell pulls Geitner's leg on Romney, but he doesn't bite.

Romney wants to get it done.  He doesn't want to look back, he wants to Re-Right!  If we look back we will see his Re-Write. 
Overhang of Obamacare? 
It's coming back?
[Not to mention "No New Taxes"!  Old taxes will do fine.]
Segue: Presidents Speech to be inserted later.
[Thom Hartmann Couples Counseling/Next President will take credit for "breaking up" better economy.] Talk is cheap?

Tony Baloney

Awaiting remarks by the President** on Jansing & Co.* it is not exacty sauce age making. 
Appropriate follow up.
Job  / Race .

NOW with... doom and gloom.  If Romney wants to turn the country around, he doesn't get economics, private, public, or change.  Keep the change!  The Mitt-flop of stay the course of goose and gander.

* Tag Team
** White House