The Hartmann Award.

HA! The Hartmann Award: It may not be DHA(daily) but here is the 1st, Under-reported Progressive Action of the day. Thanks to Thom Hartmann, and McClatchy News.

Congratulations KPTK! WE GOT ED!

And Randi and Stephanie, and Thom
[4-24-07: loopy link inserted for reconstruction]

- -
[8-2-07: ADJUSTED THIS DATE -
GO LEFT TV
Air America Radio
Progressive Talk Radio KPTK AM1090 Seattle
FILTER OF SORTS]
- -

[adjusted this date 8-11-07: ifilm of Spike TV
The Colbert Report
The Daily Show ]

Five of the Heavy Hundred are on one local station: AM1090

The 100 most important radio talk show hosts in America!

NUMBER 5.
Ed Schultz www.wegoted.com

Number 13.
Randi Rhodes: The Randi Rhodes Show

Number 36.
Stephanie Miller: The Stephanie Miller Show

Number 51 Thom Hartmann: The Thom Hartmann Show

Rounding out the court. Maybe the center.
Number 27. Clark Howard.

OK! My progressive spin almost missed Clark, but the term "important" over "popular" was a factor in the "Heavy Hundred", and his 1 hr time-slot midnight to 1AM may hint at that and the progressive lean of the listeners or hourly demographics. Clark is both important and popular, just not labeled progressive.*

FLIP FLOP THE LIST!
Considering these personalities and their news value, entertainment and progressive intent,Rachel Maddow (while not even found in the top 250) must be on the bench.
What I am saying is that, rounded out to a balance of sort
but with progressive and informative and entertainment value, she may have topped a list with the numbers flipped. It would be hard to say that Thom, Stephanie, Randi and Ed have any particular strengths that would flip-flop the list, other than my feeling that being progressive, informative and entertaining should be considered in that order, rather than the method used for the Heavy Hundred.
On my scale Rachel Maddow plays well off the bench and deserve her own honors, not to mention her on-air teammate Kent Jones.

MY IDEAL PROGRESSIVE LIST[Reality Flip Flopped]
Or from spirited to spiritual. Going up?

[RACHEL MADDOW] A UNIQUE BALANCE OF INFO AND HUMOR
THOM HARTMANN
STEPHANIE MILLER
RANDI RHODES
ED SCHULTZ
MIKE MALLOY: REALITY BASED
[NOT BEST REPRESENTED IN LINEAR FORM]

[Apologies for not noting one of the top 250, Mike Malloy who is a spiritual warrior of sorts.
If there were a FOX NEWS of the left, Mike Malloy would fit the bill as the nightly lead,
but for me he is too much on a Reality Rant to make good bedtime stories.]
Now just to sort my own review, I love all these guys, for different reasons, but would put progress over money and fun, and that is what I wish for all.

* I don't relish labels, but then, it is a sorting. Long Story Short: (or in my usual way: Runting the Rant) Maybe the Heavy Hitter (Oops) Hundred list does reflect the order of "Agressive Progressives", but I would flip flop the list and call it Just Progressive! But the problem always is, coming from a perspective or getting somewhere.

Speaking of timing

Or counting (or FOX)and follow-up(I could swear there are 6 legs unless it is on the other hand*.)
{italics not fully read yet but it is the point of departure}
{the point of arrival is not always originally intended, or that is the question.}
{note on labels, Navigation is regarding the blog, Navigation II is regarding our course changes. Maybe I should add Navigation III(a combo?).}
(Oh, and a leed change is also a challenge...to read)
* Third Way is point of tangent
[Maybe Thom Hartmann(AM1090) is coming to a realization, which I just missed(taking a call) regarding the power of Obama and his base and secondary potential thread. My points here are: Obama's base is not the liberal left. The Right's loss is the Left's loss, but the middle's gain.(I just coined** that.) My original metaphor*** was, as Republicans lose voters, they become more concentrated, while as Democrats gain voters they are diluted. ]
** critics please pick a better word for this new paraphrase of my original concept, other than coined, is in not that it is not making money for me, but I am just not sure that you coin a phrase. "turned" may suffice.
*** actually a metaphor would have a concept like Lemonade or Kool-aid as an ingredient, which apparently I have previously avoided saying directly at least.
[Still needing to read the italics link, Thom Hartmann and callers are still frustrated, and discuss the Marxist concept that things have to fail first. I am uncertain that is technically a valid name for it, but my point is that dynamically it will not work that way on two counts. It would take people who want it to fail(whatever it is) and it would take people giving up on changing it. That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again.]
[Post-Pre-emptive Comment: or rather footnote regarding bubbles and cliffs and easing the wall down. Post Hartmann comment: one of my tangents was inspired by the concept of not enough mentionalism, a pun on the dimension of perspectives and whether there are two parties, or three or four or whether the labels matter. But the more the merrier or at least the more the discussion and the bigger the table.]
[Post Building on Change update: "That is why peace is much harder work than war, and why it is much harder and slower to make progress than to see the same things again." Bold added above, but link back provided as promised here.]
[Just in...Breaking or rather Re-Creating the mold: and I am only up to the word "defecit" in Steve Clemons question but I am having a feeling it relates to my just bolded and repeated quote in last bracket, and to wrap this up before it is too diffuse I seems to build upon earlier comments if not leeds.]

Neo-Changian

An Exchange: In segments
(These are some comments I compiled on hold, including an exchange with FB)
Thom Hartmann

Me: On hold with Thom Hartmann, AM1090 Seattle, just missing the Laffer Curve creator, and up next will be Joe Stieglitz.

Summit
Me: In the spirit of the summit, I point to the political down side of some discussion, not that politics is bad, but a process. Much like the Laffer Curve, it depends on which side you are on. Laffer seems to misuse his own curve and extend it to all taxes...

Flat metaphor
Me(cont)...while a flat tax may not be bad, what it is and where it starts is what matters. Even Milton Friedman apparently in the Libertarian wing, suggested a Negative tax. I would love to have the opportunity, ask Nobel winner Stieglitz(about these)

Neo_changian
Me: Apparently out of time, but the metaphor of the "Invisible Hand" of Adam Smith is equivalent to the Laffer Curve at least in how you look at it. There is a real curve and a real hand, although it does depend on individuals to use it and which side your are on. i.e. Neo-Keynsian or more of the change

Exchange
FB: if you want to be a capitalist, actually read Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations from cover to cover. ALL of it.

Me: Someday. But did you hear Thom Hartmann with Laffer and Stieglitz? More of your point... please. Mine may have been missed. I might quibble with the (my) equivalence, but not how we look at it mattering. Being on one side of the Laffer Curve statistically, as in raising or lowering taxes(or rather income), matters. Yet, there being no hand really, but the hand the individual has in creating government and corporations is what I meant. Not that they are Leviathans, woops other league (of a book), but it is important to note that Wealth of Nations was written in 1776 so we really have created a hand.

[Update 2-26-10 speaking of summit spirit and comprehensive... well...(is this a cheap shot?) ]

Oh, what a web...

we weave when first we misattribute. "sic"*

But here(see footnotes) is the tangle thanks to Thom Hartmann.**

*not to mention misquote or evolve
** more tangle (thanks to embedded hyperlinks)

[footnotes: Michael Hudson, Six Minutes, Democracy Now]

[More run off or tangle courtesy of "google"(and Ctrl Find)and Thom Hartmann caller.]

[Speaking timing*** and that was another thread, but spins off of Cato and Henry George, or is it Tucker "George Will" Carlson.]

*** apologies for deep or rather unexpressed and anachronistic footnotes and 4A.

[subset of sovereignty or tangle]

A Shot in the Arm?

A collegue recently commented on the difficulty or the desire to be objective.  This nails perspectivism on the head, or is it the cross?  From neo-perspectivism through neo-nuanced and neo-platonic we do have a dynamic*** of global balance.  More sorting later*.    Thus spoke Niche?

* 1-9-12  correction (not two Chinas: two perspectives.)
BTW:  Thus spoke Adam Smith.
D'Ribble[!] Which came first the crossroad or the chicken?**
Henwood/More?  More's the Pity?

[On the other arm, a nemesis may have stubbed a tow(sic) on the plank the nail sticks out of.]

[Speaking of Ice, Thom Hartmann is in Iceland and provides some of the neo-perspectivism.]

** 1-10-12 link added (plural)
*** also maybe plural(see Hartmann/neo-relativism?) dynamics?
[edit notes: Ctrl F "the cart"]
[Also Ctrl F "Descartes" and the four horsemen?]

[Note: I have been lax in my boldness of links as an aid to navigation or sense of the thread.  In that regard I finally bolded two.< now 3(!) >  Also my asterisks and [brackets] are time relative or sensitive. i.e. to flow of the read. Now I will also note the relative flow of neo-platonic, neo-perspectivism, neo-liberal, neo-con, neo-nuanced and neo-relativism, not to end with six, name names or Ctrl F.  BTW:  Excuse me if I don't go to the trouble of flip-flopping the tetrahedron, that is the point.(Ctrl F "the people" and "the constitution".)]
[Speaking of a4 or timing, my 4a brought me another F, if not CF.(Note grammar, numbers, shapes, timing, etc.) F is TBA. Not to mention ? Nor Kidding. In closing (?)(!) Or too close to the 4close or Bane?]
[Third Bane's a charm? i.e. convention, congress, cain ? ]
[Speaking of Bane and Try Angles or Flip Romney and flopping it.
BTW: Under the Flip link there is an accounting or statistical trick that is not unknown to the debate.  I won't play upon it, but it involves the "average tax cut" versus "the middle-income American."  It is mathematical hyperbole as well as reasonable, where reality is even more confusing.  It is more accurate to say that the richest are paying a lesser per cent of their gross (actual tax rate) than any other income category after the  standard deductions and other taxes are accounted for.]

> previous post <

Memorial Day

In honor of those who died for our cause.
Just what is our cause? Is it the body of political thought arising from John Locke or Thomas Hobbes? As Thom Hartmann summarizes the alternative, that man is either basically good and merits his freedoms or that man is basically evil and needs restraint. The latter (Hobbes) wrote of this in The Leviathan about the need for a powerful state to restrain what even religion failed to check. Thom's guest, Michael D. Tanner, author of Leviathan on the Right

It is my view that The New Leviathan is actually The Corporation ** (circa Globalization * ). But the bottom line is that the nature of man (and I leave the nature of women aside)is a duality. Now the nature of woman may be the countebalance or lacking component, for are we not talking the balance of good and evil and the scale of justice depending on the notion of competition and cooperation.

Now the above may be too metaphorical. But for more to sort:

The Logic of "Leviathan": Moral and Political Theory of Thomas Hobbes.

Natural Right and History

Note: Being Memorial Day, The Thom Hartmann Show was a "best of". But this post is realtime, yet closes an interesting loop. The Leviathan in my mind was not a monster, but just a creation of man called government, while the corporation is also a creation of man and not supernatural, nor/let alone an individual. What would more honor the dead, than to know what we are fighting for?

* [the corporation / globalization loop and the part we play or don't]

[** May 25th, 2009: Corporations are only the Leviathan in terms of the fear that is implied from something big as the state is to be feared when unchecked. But they are both necessary within limits.]
[10:39 AM The Rhetoric of Leviathan led me to further summarize (rhetorically), what is the connection? "Hard work" as in "War is"... and who does it and what is the nature of the state of economics?]

Index 9-21-11 (B)

Note Anachronism:
(B-time=8:07)for flip flop of vision thing,
or perspective on index and archive sequence.
Link below indicates mo'real time.

The Team? or[!] [DBA]
Randi Rhodes
Lawrence[*] O'Donnell
Stephanie Miller
Thom Hartmann
Ed Schultz[Update 9-23-11]
Norman Gold-Man
Thom Hartmann

The Music?
ACTUALLY THE G'Ribble?(a test of search/index slash references)***
G'Ribble
Back to The "One Thing".
Place Holder?
Who needs Brackets?
The Honeymoon is Over?
What's so funny...
The Straw Bear
"Trust but Verify"
QCON:Truthout
Proof of Process
MOORE TRUTH IN MEDIA
The G'Ribble?
Actually I end in pun(Or rather Satire), but this was a text* of sorts(literally), of "G'Ribble" in the (Blogspot)Search Box in the upper left corner of this blog.

It was a test in two ways. To see if there is any reliability of the search engine over time. Of course editing would influence that accuracy. But also to see if there was any mess age above and beyond the search, in the calm pend I um**.

*(sp!) typo/ra test [?]ra=read as[!]
** see test/text/time/tangent not to mention T(t)ruth.
*** Grand Ribble: Whereas D'Ribble might be obvious, it is not so simple. It might be a de-ribble or an un-ribble, or a Democratic Ribble, which seems like hard work, now that I think about it, but never(that I can tell) just trickle-down.

[*]bingo "that's not smart, it's not right"

The Obama Effect?

The Specter Effect!
The Hartmann Effect?
Bottom Line? Not Devolution.

The President is a progressive that needs pushing or convincing while it might be just a hunch that it was more than just self preservation for Specter not to run to the right. I think history should look kindly on Specter to have fought for what he believed rather than go with the flow of Republicans. While Specter was always a crafty navigator of issues, I think that he would rather lose as a moderate than run as a revolutionary.
[This opinion does not rely** on a read of the first two links, while a scroll over of the rest may suffice to get a jist.]

[** nor certainly endorse or bother read]
[Just in! Thom Hartmann predicts Sestak for President in 2016! Not to mention my ironic endorsement of my 2nd link. Ironic in that, how can one believe an NRSC ad? It makes me endorse him, although I am not a Pennsylvanian.]

THE HOPE IS YOU! ( * )

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

THE 11TH HOUR
By Leonardo DiCaprio

Inspired by Thom Hartmann

"Tag, you're it!" **

Words can't do justice to this very inspiring work. Only the true cynic will not be encouraged by the "hard work" being done by so many.

* from THE 11TH HOUR trailer.
** tag line for Thom Hartmann

Read it and Weep.

President Obama's Speech(Video)
To quote* myself: I believe that this is the President I voted for and believed was the broker not brake pad for change.

[Or Scroll over]
Reuters (on using the Tax Code)
Lawrence O'Donnell
Thom Hartmann
NPR
Daily Kos
Tea Party Huffington Post Brookings Huffington Post
Grapes of Wrath?

* #not intended but paraphrased or edited
[I believe I may have understood instead, but then I recall the question: what did Jon Kyle intend? Did he not believe it or understand it was not a fact? And this was not to condescend or make lite of my lede, but it is about showing one's hand.

[In all fairness: Paul Ryan's Path to Prosperity (random google) and more perspectives NTBFD*.(Not to be fully digested.)]

Friday, Arpil 15th, 2011
Bold Progressives
Thank you Thom Hartmann: Reuters TVNEWSER/CBS
"Go at it!"

Pre-empting Crimes

Remember: Humor is a tool and so is the dictionary.
While Bill Clinton hinged his excuses on "what the definition of 'is' is". The current administration has pre-empted excuses by hinging humor and the dictionary on "what the definition of everything is".

Abuse of power is the issue. While Clinton was investigated and found to have hinged his evasion of his abuse of an intern, Nixon was investigated and found to have covered up his abuses on the national level, and Bush pre-empted abuses on the international level. But now what Bush has done to get us "over there" will congress investigate too much "over here"?

If the above is too hard to follow, then try this:
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act: S. 1959 Here is the TEXT

While the above is the senate bill by the same name here is the House version which passed: H.R. 1955

While I did read the latter, the former will be discussed on The Thom Hartmann Show. [See Update]
AM1090 Seattle 9 AM to noon

`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS.
`In this subtitle:

`(1) COMMISSION- The term `Commission' means the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism established under section 899C.

`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.

I hate to alert any potential terrorists but do not these definitions pertain to The Project for the New American Century ? It may be a section that united the vote for this bill, while an understanding of it, would certainly mean to change it.

[Earlier Posted Comment here:
Earlier radicals there:
Jefferson-

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.Goldwater-

[Same Day Update: After posting the above I found this on Slate Bad Ideas]

[Update The Thom Hartmann Show: 11/29/07 ]
[11-29-07: TruthOut]

Saint Or Um...

This is nothing to make light of[!]
Except for the context[!]
Saint or um... calm pend e um!
Special thanks to David Bender (on the Stephanie Miller Show) and his callers.
[!] = irony mark*

* [!]**= irony mark

**[!] In-F-able language alert.

***(see previous post)

[And I don't mean Follow-up! But something is so powerful in the image attached that editing is limited to my keyboard over mouse***. Nevertheless, Thom Hartmann (update link: 2-28-12) ) today is my last reference. Something about Obama... of course. You can BS or rather Blog Search Thom Hartmann(this B), and (Crtl F) "Oh, what a web..."!]

Happy 40!

Earth to People.
11thHourAction
Local
Wishing all a heavily nuanced day!
[To Read] [To Link /Interactive?]
[Get Caffeinated Here]

[To Un-Thrasymachate or Detergiversate, Independents need to get pumped.]

[HA! Hartmann Award: It may not be DHA(daily) but here is the 1st, Under-reported Progressive Action of the day. Thanks to Thom Hartmann, and McClatchy News.]

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?

Smirking Gun[!]

OK, I won't overuse the term smoking gun, but when I heard Senator McCain's leak theory, I knew something was up.  "The only conceivable" reason that McCain knows the "motive for such damaging and compromising leaks" is that it is something he could conceive of doing.  The Issa cover-up committee is along the same track.  Worse than Watergate, less than WMD***.

September 11th occurred because the Bush administration had contempt for the Clinton administration and refused to carry on in the case against terrorism.  Fast and Furious is still under investigation, but it seems that the political case is of the opposite extreme.  The Obama administration not changing more from the previous administration.

I have a feeling that the Issa Committee investigation is actually an attempt to interfere with the Obama administration* of justice and foreign policy.  Or retribution for Watergate, Iran Contra and Plame combined, or Republican power** as usual.
 
* Ctrl F "obstructionism"
** now that is the ticket or subpoena(Thom Hartmann)

*** 6-22-12 Pre-Post-or-us?
(I was reticent to use 9/11, especially with the smoking[!] gun lede-in. While Representative Mica is really stretching things, two things are certain. September 11th or even a dead ATF agent are nothing to smirk about, and Representative Issa hides his smirk with a snear.)  
[Related posts:  Re:investigation, Re:dribble, Re-course, Re:turn(Ctrl F "sabotage" "pate")]
[GPS for MSNBC labels?]

[!] really sic, i.e. no typo, nor disrespect for the departed intended
[A caller to the Ed Schultz show noted a similar theme.  Republicans are more about obstruction politics than finding the facts.  They must have something to hide.  Obama's success and their incompetence.  But then there followed**2 on Thom Hartmann the PE/FDR/BS [!]]

[It is on !]
[A friend asked my opinion on the wikileaks deal. Well more specifically the personalities involved.  Bottomline, I don't feel that military personel should take it on themselve to leak top secret information without considering the consequences, nor should they have been distributed without the same considerations.  Unfortunately there may not be enough law on the books to prosecute the latter although there certainly is for the former.  Who do we have to blame for the laws on the books?  Congress.  Who do we have for not enough laws on the books?  Republicans.  Well, it is not the quantity but the quality.  But the answer is the same.  Talk is cheap, but actions*2 cost.]

*2 accidental link
[Weird link of the day.]
**2 with all due respect for B.S. it was the PE crack by FDR (Privileged Enterprise)
[Not so weird link of day.]
 

String Cheese Theory?

Or Quantum Theory of Mitt ?

Related Strings:

Ouch[!]

Q E D [!].

You** Tube
Double* Ouch![?]

[Matter / Anti-matter ?  The Declaration of Independence does not have a preamble. Note that Speaker BaneOr misquoted the Constitution, which does have a preamble.  He was quoting the Declaration of Independence which does not have a preamble.  It matters that Rachel Maddow did issue an apology.  Should it Anti-matter that NewsBusters thinks it does? Quote:

 Of course, if she or her crack fact-checking team at MSNBC had done their homework, they would have found "We hold these truths to be self-evident" does indeed come from the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence and not the Preamble to the Constitution as Boehner said. 

     It seems they gaffed their own smug face.

Alas, when one fact checks, especially as arrogantly as Maddow does, you should be completely accurate or you end up looking like a bigger jackass than the person you're mocking.
That oughta wipe the smug, condescending smirk off her face!

Right?]

[Speaking ***^ of Flip Flop? QED!
And I don't mean cue Ed, nor buy George or Bill-E-Club !
But D E^^ Vo ! ?]


*Schoolhouse Oops?
Woe? [!]
** Original Rachel Link is missing under You "THE Word".
*** Bingo [!]

^ Think Progress's link on President Obama's personal evolution.  It is the people that must make the political and legal fight. A president's opinion does not make either federal or state law.  Not that he is not responsible for interpreting and enforcing them.

^^  a day that will live in infamy?
NOT!  Thom Hartmann caller on radio.

5-10-12  Related Issues? Or matters ?
Now with Alex Wagner "The Book of Mormon".

First Debate: Zinger Score 2 to -1

Although I did not take an official scoring of the First Debate (Transcript) , two zingers the President came up with regarded Trump and SNL.  For Romney it was his "five boys" under the bus or at the President's lies.  "Never mind".

OK, so it really wasn't a debate for zingers. I happen to have heard the debate on the radio**, with only a few interruptions and don't wish to give them a grade, but only remind that it was only first of three, and try to find a commentary(Thom Hartmann?) that what matters is the post-debate spin.  Not that I will follow-up on the links here, but will suggest that Obama* will probably ramp up his urgency but remain steady in the next debates.

* Is it too late to score the Big Bird as a zinger?
[Re:FLASHNOTE (*there)]

**10-5-12  If it were a debate they would have stopped it[!].

LeftyBlog?

I'm not on LeftyBlog because...
Maybe I don't like tests.
Or maybe only global tests of reality.
[FOR LOCAL CONTENT CLICK HERE : OR SEE LABEL LOCAL]
But a challenge?
This may be a work in progress.

[[BLOG LIST]]
[[LEFTYBLOG]]
[[WASHBLOG]]
[[Northwest Progressive Institute Blog]]
[[AMERICAinSOLIDARITY]]

If I label all my local material under the Local label, will that help? If I link and loop LeftyBlog to my post that helps the reader navigate, will that help?
Well this is not my usual rant, rave or ramble. Well yes it is, because I never know where I will go or end. But the challenge may be addressed by more questions answered by more questions?(see previous sentence)

Originally a look at the needs of LeftyBlog found this:

Remember, LeftyBlogs.com is for local progressive political blogs with original content. Some questions:

I did not mean to read it literally, I just did not include the questions in my cut and paste,(see un#d bullet point 4)of (a challenge) above , and then was so bold as to add bold to "connect the dots", where I will begin with the last first.[leap*] There I go again. (two tangents: not to read )
Then "all politics is local" and "politics is everything". Not to mention just not right.

OK, now I will go back and see if I can follow any of this.
LATER.

* I am tracking better, as I almost left off this quote by taking my tangent
[in the mean time, I put LEFTeBLOG at the top of my RIGHT list, where a typo fortuitously crept in]

[TheLiaisonReport - Between the mean and the out there.]
[Bottom Line: LOCAL CONTENT {UNDER CONSTRUCTION - more later}]

[[WE GOT ED!]]
[[Portland and Air America have Thom Hartmann]]

Truth Tellers

Thom Hartmann notes that the truth teller of the Democrats is Kucinich and for the Republicans it is Ron Paul, who notes the history of the Republican party as against wars. And thanks to a quick google, the first few paragraphs hits it out of the park **. "Way out", as it is put there. Or a slam dunk if you will.

That was still the situation when Clinton was president and even when the current Bush was campaigning against being nation builders and policeman to the world. Another point in this regard is that old Bush in a China Shop metaphor where:
when we broke it, we don't own it, but we might pay for it.

Final note: On Unity08 plans for a bipartisan ticket, I think it is crazy or at minimum won't work. Now, not that it won't succeed. But not necessarily for the country. It really is hard to take a negative attitude with something that seems so middle of the road, but then if we put the people in the middle of the road, they may just get run down. OK! So metaphors may not work, but the may make a point, and getting somewhere that has a point is the "hard work". There! Does that make any progress on the point. Well it may just be going round and round, but that may be another result, not that I am trying to get the geometry covered. But now that I have run that into the ground, I will take a tangent and note that there may be room for dialogue on the third party or third or fourth way. Dialogue and debate is happening within each party. If there are any outliers. Those hanging back; LaRouche (may get the point); Nader (I am not so sure); Bloomberg or Hagel; or not lastly Wesley Clark. But above we have noted, and I believe I recall now that my comparison (if not noted earlier) was between Ron Paul and LaRouche rather than Kucinich, that there are certain mavericks but at least they are participating now. I would harken back to my point about Red and Blue America and the threat to the green. It must be noted that "at the risk of being obvious" must have been too deep and the PI editors* changed my word "green" to "color" which put a completely different tint on my letter. My point is that Unity08 may be more about the green and may not get us out of seeing red.

*(In the last line of "the threat to the green" link, which may have been a threat to someone's green, if not not black and white enough to fit their grey matter.)

**11:35 AM amended [six paragraphs to be precise, I had not read much beyond "To many people, however..." and that is where we must remember the words of Rudy Guliani, on or shortly after September 11th, something like: Aren't you glad George Bush is president? Case closed. These guys cannot fight or debate without misconstruing the point or the enemy, period. Black and white enough?]