[Dug out from previous post.]
Three strikes you're out or third times a charm?
You've heard of Whitewater.
You've heard of Blackwater.
You've heard of Clearwater,
as in CCR. Creedence Clearwater Revival
Now you must hear of the latest CCR.
Center for Constitutional Rights or
Credence Clearwater Revival
[From the last post, the preemptive links refer to earlier comments regarding the link to Watergate, (Hmmm, I forgot, more water), actually a phrase from that era:
"What did the president know, and when did he know it?
Since the Neo-cons are not that dumb, but are preemptive, the questions should be:
"What did the president not know and when did he not want to know it?"
They are still going *, and we are still waiting.
* "words fly" NPR
hawking threat
"still going"
And still dancing in briefs. or thru Smoke and mirrors.
President not briefed on details he briefs Olmert on.
The point is, the administration is promoting offensive behavior and misrepresetation of intelligence before the intelligence has been fully studied, and it is really probably the case that the administration does not have the intelligence (in evidence or thinking) until someone reads it to them the way they want to hear it, and the president might not hear it until it is what someone wants him to hear or they know it is what he wants to hear. But the case is that he is operating on principles and facts that he expects other to support him on, while they do not get it either. BINGO! Maybe I can get to a point. Until he is forced to come clean we will have more water works of trickle down, and I have a hunch the alernative or delay tactic will be that Cheney will be the dam or water fallguy. Boy, don't these metaphors flow like d'Nile.
Wake Up Congress! This is the intelligence the administration has. It is the National Intelligence Estimate. Bush gets the last word. "Estimate". He is the decider and he is not done having the estimate analyzed so he can decide and then it will be an estimate he will decide to act on. END OF STORY, End of His Story.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query heard. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query heard. Sort by date Show all posts
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Political Capital
If I heard it right, I hazzard a guess that Obama's decision on Afgahnistan will shoot him up about 10% in the polls. I must find the appropriate link, but this is hopefully not it. I may have heard it wrong or others have.
[Maybe this? And my "original" source. Or this.]
[Not to mention death panel intelligence.]
[Maybe this? And my "original" source. Or this.]
[Not to mention death panel intelligence.]
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Value Added?
Chris Matthews is Value Taxed.
Mid-Speech (13:35 in video):
It is not so much was is said, but what is not[***] said or heard elsewhere.[**] Number one threat to national security now? Economic Crisis Second or was number one before the last administration: Nuclear Proliferation.
I don't know if I can find the point where a Republican critic complains that we can't address some of the concerns at home, how can we address them in Afghanistan? That is a great point. It should have been considered before we shifted from getting Bin Laden and to regime change in Iraq. But the important difference is that Afghanistan needs to build their governmental processes amidst turmoil, while we have got one already in turmoil thanks to the Chicken Hawks*, and Afghanistan does not have the stumbling blocks which are our foundations and which the previous administration and current Republicans continue to trample.
* I think we can safely say Chris Matthews is one now, but I don't really know he did not serve. The only wiki connection is other MSNBC military analysts. Not to mention Rube Goldberg. He did serve: "in the United States Peace Corps in Swaziland from 1968 to 1970 as a trade development advisor."
[**] added link
[***] similarly Pakistan has a government that must be dealt with with all our influence. (27:03) Values Sir CHARGE![Sometimes I can't believe Matthews was ever in politics or heard any of the Bush speechs- but that is maybe good for an interviewer, because we must listen to his guests.]
[Having now finished hearing the speech, after spending too much time on the reactions, I must say that the speech was a solemn thrill and no vapid rhetoric. I think I detected that in the faces and response from "the Corps" and one would not expect them to act like groupies at a rock concert or talk show hosts.
[And 1:15 to 1:52 with Rachel Maddow. Lastly I have sorted the bold links{see below index} and I hope you have "found my thrill". Maybe we should have a thrill added tax, but there "he goes" again.]
{Index of priority links: "Speech", "no vapid" (General Eaton), Pakistan, Maddow (1:15-1:52)}
Mid-Speech (13:35 in video):
[quote]To meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives within Afghanistan. We must deny al Qaeda a safe-haven. We must reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government. And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's Security Forces and government, so that they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan's future
It is not so much was is said, but what is not[***] said or heard elsewhere.[**] Number one threat to national security now? Economic Crisis Second or was number one before the last administration: Nuclear Proliferation.
I don't know if I can find the point where a Republican critic complains that we can't address some of the concerns at home, how can we address them in Afghanistan? That is a great point. It should have been considered before we shifted from getting Bin Laden and to regime change in Iraq. But the important difference is that Afghanistan needs to build their governmental processes amidst turmoil, while we have got one already in turmoil thanks to the Chicken Hawks*, and Afghanistan does not have the stumbling blocks which are our foundations and which the previous administration and current Republicans continue to trample.
* I think we can safely say Chris Matthews is one now, but I don't really know he did not serve. The only wiki connection is other MSNBC military analysts. Not to mention Rube Goldberg. He did serve: "in the United States Peace Corps in Swaziland from 1968 to 1970 as a trade development advisor."
[**] added link
[***] similarly Pakistan has a government that must be dealt with with all our influence. (27:03) Values Sir CHARGE![Sometimes I can't believe Matthews was ever in politics or heard any of the Bush speechs- but that is maybe good for an interviewer, because we must listen to his guests.]
[Having now finished hearing the speech, after spending too much time on the reactions, I must say that the speech was a solemn thrill and no vapid rhetoric. I think I detected that in the faces and response from "the Corps" and one would not expect them to act like groupies at a rock concert or talk show hosts.
[And 1:15 to 1:52 with Rachel Maddow. Lastly I have sorted the bold links{see below index} and I hope you have "found my thrill". Maybe we should have a thrill added tax, but there "he goes" again.]
{Index of priority links: "Speech", "no vapid" (General Eaton), Pakistan, Maddow (1:15-1:52)}
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Speaking of Bowls
Ctrl F: Lean Back
The Super Bowl was played last weekend, and I did not do too much consideration of whom to root for. If I had known that NY were the underdog and thought that a name like the Giants should win, I may have rooted for them. But instead, my sister's family lives in Boston, and they were after all The Patriots. On the other hand, I heard a bit of the pregame** and heard that the sportscasters were rooting for a tie game, not*** to relate to the Republican race.*
{F=find (see title)}
*** post game non-game
*^ There is some irony in the relationship between religious freedom and conscience(not to mention anachronism in the aster^risks. [^] ?)
Friday, October 05, 2012
Replacement Refs or Not...
If it were a debate* we would have stopped it.
Not to pun on Xfinity, but while the Comcast links*** will expire.**,
it's the congress John! Bring it on, Joe! The President needs to hold a Sit Down.
Before I get down to the task of preserving<*> those links whether read or not, I will explain the Rogue John and Wax Leak of the asterisks. Although the lesson learned from "Simon says"^^ might be to actually read links more thoroughly, the lesson from the Debate may be more complex but parallel of sorts. By "rogue",<*> I mean that former Presidential Candidate McCain(first link) confesses an expectation for him lowering the expectations of Paul Ryan, while disrespecting the Vice President and framing an expectation for gaffs. Then in regard to the " ball of wax " that Palin leaks, it connects the "boys" to the other "race" speech.^^^ (There, that's the GPS-uncross-Rhodes.)
And a far as my Tan Gents(Dr. Trumps), being a Seahawk fan has nothing to do with my take on the moderator. Well, who knows? But Mr. Lerrer has been critcized for not moderating or having a good performance, but I think that given the style over substance versus substance with style, these are not legitimate debates. And within the political system (such as it is) it was not his job to interfere with the players being themselves in order to let them make the proper contrast. Again having only heard most of the debate on the radio, I thought that the President walked away with it, but that was under the condition that facts matter. Neither he nor Lehrer could have done a better job in the case that they don't.
BTW^: Speaking of "boys", we have heard cracks about the Harvard "professor" and I suspect he has had to deal with a few wise-guys or gulls[!]
*if the link were fact checked...ditto.
(McCain goes rogue.)(Palin leaks ball of wax .)
** not that I have read them yet or the recommend them.
***The point of this lede and the heading...
^ apologies to literary geeks for my style over elements.(But that was Core Knell.)
^^ added in edit mode
^^^ to be expanded later(but see lede and stupid...I mean congress and John, Joe & Ryan. i.e. the context of the politics of "relief' legislation.)
[In the spirit of medium...? ]
[Not to parse too acutely, but it is the medium and the mess age.]
(Bu' dump 'ump [!] ... )
Re:Ouch?(see FLASHNOTE)
Post-Subjectivism? Might it be, rational subjectivism?
<*> 10-7-12(See FLASHNOTE: under construction)
<*> 10-9-12 slight edit ( "r.... ",)
Not to pun on Xfinity, but while the Comcast links*** will expire.**,
it's the congress John! Bring it on, Joe! The President needs to hold a Sit Down.
Before I get down to the task of preserving<*> those links whether read or not, I will explain the Rogue John and Wax Leak of the asterisks. Although the lesson learned from "Simon says"^^ might be to actually read links more thoroughly, the lesson from the Debate may be more complex but parallel of sorts. By "rogue",<*> I mean that former Presidential Candidate McCain(first link) confesses an expectation for him lowering the expectations of Paul Ryan, while disrespecting the Vice President and framing an expectation for gaffs. Then in regard to the " ball of wax " that Palin leaks, it connects the "boys" to the other "race" speech.^^^ (There, that's the GPS-uncross-Rhodes.)
And a far as my Tan Gents(Dr. Trumps), being a Seahawk fan has nothing to do with my take on the moderator. Well, who knows? But Mr. Lerrer has been critcized for not moderating or having a good performance, but I think that given the style over substance versus substance with style, these are not legitimate debates. And within the political system (such as it is) it was not his job to interfere with the players being themselves in order to let them make the proper contrast. Again having only heard most of the debate on the radio, I thought that the President walked away with it, but that was under the condition that facts matter. Neither he nor Lehrer could have done a better job in the case that they don't.
BTW^: Speaking of "boys", we have heard cracks about the Harvard "professor" and I suspect he has had to deal with a few wise-guys or gulls[!]
*if the link were fact checked...ditto.
(McCain goes rogue.)(Palin leaks ball of wax .)
** not that I have read them yet or the recommend them.
***The point of this lede and the heading...
^ apologies to literary geeks for my style over elements.(But that was Core Knell.)
^^ added in edit mode
^^^ to be expanded later(but see lede and stupid...I mean congress and John, Joe & Ryan. i.e. the context of the politics of "relief' legislation.)
[In the spirit of medium...? ]
[Not to parse too acutely, but it is the medium and the mess age.]
(Bu' dump 'ump [!] ... )
Re:Ouch?(see FLASHNOTE)
Post-Subjectivism? Might it be, rational subjectivism?
<*> 10-7-12(See FLASHNOTE: under construction)
<*> 10-9-12 slight edit ( "r.... ",)
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Hand-Shake Heard Round the World. [*]
The Washington Note's Steve Clemons on Keith Olbermann
A shift in policy?
See follow up to justice there (ACLU)and
Impeach Torture Architect Bybee here (CCR).
Meanwhile Jane Harman is in for it again. But this time could it be a reverse sting? I don't know if Jane Harman will think of the excuse but this could be an opening into the Gonzales Justice Department practices. There are deeper implications ...
In Uber-Related events: the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 deserves mention.
Alt Source: OpenCongress - GovTech - CircleID
Also Socialism out, Fascism in. Republicans (Chris Mathews) "shopping for invectives" (Tony Blankley) "that's silly"
[[*] Apologies if I heard that and cannot credit anyone I might haveor did I...?]
A shift in policy?
See follow up to justice there (ACLU)and
Impeach Torture Architect Bybee here (CCR).
Meanwhile Jane Harman is in for it again. But this time could it be a reverse sting? I don't know if Jane Harman will think of the excuse but this could be an opening into the Gonzales Justice Department practices. There are deeper implications ...
In Uber-Related events: the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 deserves mention.
Alt Source: OpenCongress - GovTech - CircleID
Also Socialism out, Fascism in. Republicans (Chris Mathews) "shopping for invectives" (Tony Blankley) "that's silly"
[[*] Apologies if I heard that and cannot credit anyone I might haveor did I...?]
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Obama Explains Wright, Will McCain Explain the Far Right?
I have only heard snippets of the speech but I can already hear where others could mishear snippets of it.* I look forward to reading the whole thing, and then wonder, if as much attention will be placed on McCain and his allies. While the connections are not on the same level, neither are the understandings.
So In his own words.
[3-19-08: The above link was distributed by the campaign and includes the written text, the link at bottom has a few more words of introduction and better segue.
For more later: see Pew wars(which lists for now - The Pew Forum; Odd pews?); and earlier Politics of the Past was here --
I think I will reserve my time to review some files and reorg work or 4:
Hillary ? McCain ? Obama! RESORT/CYCLE! ]
* [3-20-08: finally heard ]
- - - - -
[3-22-08 Media Moment: Billed as a "BC Moment", there seems nothing wrong with the quote. The follow-up seems lame, but standing alone it is a plug for his wife as opposed to McCain. "Wouldn't it be nice..." another Beach Boy song comes to mind,(mine not Bill's): "...and people could actually ask themselves who is right on the issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics." This seems a swipe at the media and the reaction by McPeak, while harsh, should allow us to be reminded of Joe McCarthy and in further comment from the Clinton Camp: "...the need to keep the race focused on issues, 'rather than falsely questioning any candidate's patriotism'." Remember that the media was in the middle of this; "patriotism" was their word, and in McPeak's defense, if he had not over reacted it may not have brought as much attention to it.]
So In his own words.
[3-19-08: The above link was distributed by the campaign and includes the written text, the link at bottom has a few more words of introduction and better segue.
For more later: see Pew wars(which lists for now - The Pew Forum; Odd pews?); and earlier Politics of the Past was here --
I think I will reserve my time to review some files and reorg work or 4:
Hillary ? McCain ? Obama! RESORT/CYCLE! ]
* [3-20-08: finally heard ]
- - - - -
[3-22-08 Media Moment: Billed as a "BC Moment", there seems nothing wrong with the quote. The follow-up seems lame, but standing alone it is a plug for his wife as opposed to McCain. "Wouldn't it be nice..." another Beach Boy song comes to mind,(mine not Bill's): "...and people could actually ask themselves who is right on the issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics." This seems a swipe at the media and the reaction by McPeak, while harsh, should allow us to be reminded of Joe McCarthy and in further comment from the Clinton Camp: "...the need to keep the race focused on issues, 'rather than falsely questioning any candidate's patriotism'." Remember that the media was in the middle of this; "patriotism" was their word, and in McPeak's defense, if he had not over reacted it may not have brought as much attention to it.]
Friday, August 24, 2007
Vietnam Flip-Flop
It is bad enough that Bush has not used the original lessons he learned about Vietnam, but now has rewritten them.
Bush's selective lessons of Vietnam. Guardian Unlimited
Even worse is any comparison to Korea. Has anyone heard of "Exit Strategy"?
There is so much to google on this, but I will risk it and list the commonly heard three lessons. 1. a defined mission 2. overwhelming force 3. having an exit strategy. So now Bush not only wants to teach US how to win Vietnam, but apparently will fix [or work on] Korea? What next, China or Saudi Arabia? [politically]
(Having consulted an expert, some doubt is cast on these lessons and any parallel, but then to him, having an exit strategy was to win the war, and in Korea [it still is to] sign a peace treaty. So I guess Bush may be working on Korea and China. [economically] I don't know if that is good news or bad news, but there may be no parallel to either or Saudi Arabia. [Note: italics bracketed provide clarity from this consultation.])
Later Reading: (no comments)
Bush draws Vietnam parallel in warning over Iraq withdrawal
Bush told he has drawn wrong lesson
Lesson of the Vietnam War
Iraq: Learning the Lessons of Vietnam
Historians Question Bush's Reading of Lessons of Vietnam War for Iraq
"Lessons of Vietnam" by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger,
[8:46 AM Out of all these links, I have read only a few pages into the last one*. In it, Kissinger himself gives a nuanced lesson which flip flops a bit in passing credit and blame. A few comments came to mind which I hope to revisit, but one note that it "prevented Indonesia from falling to the Communism and probably preserved American presence in Asia." Oh the irony, that Indonesia is now a leading Muslim nation and there is possibly more to parallel or learn.]
* [ 9:06 Further note that the piece was only a few pages.]
Bush's selective lessons of Vietnam. Guardian Unlimited
Even worse is any comparison to Korea. Has anyone heard of "Exit Strategy"?
There is so much to google on this, but I will risk it and list the commonly heard three lessons. 1. a defined mission 2. overwhelming force 3. having an exit strategy. So now Bush not only wants to teach US how to win Vietnam, but apparently will fix [or work on] Korea? What next, China or Saudi Arabia? [politically]
(Having consulted an expert, some doubt is cast on these lessons and any parallel, but then to him, having an exit strategy was to win the war, and in Korea [it still is to] sign a peace treaty. So I guess Bush may be working on Korea and China. [economically] I don't know if that is good news or bad news, but there may be no parallel to either or Saudi Arabia. [Note: italics bracketed provide clarity from this consultation.])
Later Reading: (no comments)
Bush draws Vietnam parallel in warning over Iraq withdrawal
Bush told he has drawn wrong lesson
Lesson of the Vietnam War
Iraq: Learning the Lessons of Vietnam
Historians Question Bush's Reading of Lessons of Vietnam War for Iraq
"Lessons of Vietnam" by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger,
[8:46 AM Out of all these links, I have read only a few pages into the last one*. In it, Kissinger himself gives a nuanced lesson which flip flops a bit in passing credit and blame. A few comments came to mind which I hope to revisit, but one note that it "prevented Indonesia from falling to the Communism and probably preserved American presence in Asia." Oh the irony, that Indonesia is now a leading Muslim nation and there is possibly more to parallel or learn.]
* [ 9:06 Further note that the piece was only a few pages.]
Monday, September 12, 2005
QCON: What next?
I recently heard Bush discusssing the idea that there was some relaxation upon having "dodged a bullet"(of Hurricane Katrina) as he claims he heard it through the media, but acknowledges that they got it wrong and much had to be investigated without "blame gaming".
If he didn't use these words, his press representatives have, but regardless, the next step is not only investigating but making changes, but he also plans will be moving forward and has mentioned concerns about preparedness for biological attacks and we are also aware that there are being comparisons to September 11th. I could almost feel the words "mushroom clouds" coming soon to his lips after "dodging a bullet" and "biological attack".
Not that I am linking (with my links), Roberts to a "mushroom cloud" but now that I think about it...
[QCON: means Quick Comment On News or as Bush leaves us: Questioning while Conned]
If he didn't use these words, his press representatives have, but regardless, the next step is not only investigating but making changes, but he also plans will be moving forward and has mentioned concerns about preparedness for biological attacks and we are also aware that there are being comparisons to September 11th. I could almost feel the words "mushroom clouds" coming soon to his lips after "dodging a bullet" and "biological attack".
Not that I am linking (with my links), Roberts to a "mushroom cloud" but now that I think about it...
[QCON: means Quick Comment On News or as Bush leaves us: Questioning while Conned]
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
TIP OF THE FLAME
Among the things that attract my attention are the various organizations that overlap in purpose. Checking the DNC petition, it seems that details were lacking in the wording * or maybe I just expect too much or need to work more myself, but I cannot help but feel that those we petition may not have it any clearer than many of us. Our own representatives may get it, but as Democratic Leader Harry Reid points out the PR problem as $3 million (that is as far as I read) we are already off on a few tangents that may be parallel.
Well it must be as overwhelming for our representatives as it is our inboxes.
Has anyone wondered about the $250 million in propaganda (Fake Media- PR) disguised as news but not even noted as governement sponsored nor public service messages, [Sorry I can't list a source for the figure] which government departments are spending to get out a message. That is our money trampling on our free speech.
I heard that Congressman Conyers in the House Judiciary is investigating something along these lines. (Clinton did it but two Questions0-- Were they noted as Public Service or Government announcements? and were they used by the media more frequently in the Red States)
I think that this is the tip of the iceberg that we are up against. The Judiciary has a few threads but there are other committees that need to take action, the FCC, the FEC, and the Ethics Committee, or are they all beyond hope?
Anyway I must move on... This may be what got me on this track. What I heard on Morning Sedition AM 1090 may have got my train going, though I could not find it on their blog, there are interesting particulars about propaganda and worse on today's Non-Partisan (IRI) International Republican Institute and Re: Conyers...HR 136 Gannon Resolution http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/fecblogltrpr31105.pdf Conyers Press Release FEC Weblog Exemption
Well, sorry for the overlapping nature of this, but that is the nature of our system. ( or the nature of my production or perception)
-- WMD = Weapons of Message Distortion, Dillusion, Delusion
-- Free Speech, just a question...
-- Courage, (Rather) but could we ask for clarity?
[[Text from the DNC Petition: ]]
To: The United States Senate
Republican Senate leaders have decided to fundamentally alter the role of Congress, giving George W. Bush unprecedented power to manipulate the legislative branch and the courts.
Democrats in the Senate, led by Democratic leader Harry Reid, are committed to preserving the right of our elected representatives to speak their mind on the floor of the U.S Senate.
I stand with Democrats in the fight to protect the system of checks and balances that have served our country for more than 200 years.
--
* This seems like it would be something that could be bipartisan, but it is unclear whether partisans know they are on the iceberg or the Titanic. Maybe they are afraid of charges of flip-flop or just getting too legaleese.
-- MY COMMENTS ON SIGNING Petition Free Speech
Protect the filibuster as a fundamental protection of minority voices. And stop the PR machine that is a Weapon of Message Distortion, Dilution and Delusion that is the tip of an iceberg to our Titanic state.
Well it must be as overwhelming for our representatives as it is our inboxes.
Has anyone wondered about the $250 million in propaganda (Fake Media- PR) disguised as news but not even noted as governement sponsored nor public service messages, [Sorry I can't list a source for the figure] which government departments are spending to get out a message. That is our money trampling on our free speech.
I heard that Congressman Conyers in the House Judiciary is investigating something along these lines. (Clinton did it but two Questions0-- Were they noted as Public Service or Government announcements? and were they used by the media more frequently in the Red States)
I think that this is the tip of the iceberg that we are up against. The Judiciary has a few threads but there are other committees that need to take action, the FCC, the FEC, and the Ethics Committee, or are they all beyond hope?
Anyway I must move on... This may be what got me on this track. What I heard on Morning Sedition AM 1090 may have got my train going, though I could not find it on their blog, there are interesting particulars about propaganda and worse on today's Non-Partisan (IRI) International Republican Institute and Re: Conyers...HR 136 Gannon Resolution http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/fecblogltrpr31105.pdf Conyers Press Release FEC Weblog Exemption
Well, sorry for the overlapping nature of this, but that is the nature of our system. ( or the nature of my production or perception)
-- WMD = Weapons of Message Distortion, Dillusion, Delusion
-- Free Speech, just a question...
-- Courage, (Rather) but could we ask for clarity?
[[Text from the DNC Petition: ]]
To: The United States Senate
Republican Senate leaders have decided to fundamentally alter the role of Congress, giving George W. Bush unprecedented power to manipulate the legislative branch and the courts.
Democrats in the Senate, led by Democratic leader Harry Reid, are committed to preserving the right of our elected representatives to speak their mind on the floor of the U.S Senate.
I stand with Democrats in the fight to protect the system of checks and balances that have served our country for more than 200 years.
--
* This seems like it would be something that could be bipartisan, but it is unclear whether partisans know they are on the iceberg or the Titanic. Maybe they are afraid of charges of flip-flop or just getting too legaleese.
-- MY COMMENTS ON SIGNING Petition Free Speech
Protect the filibuster as a fundamental protection of minority voices. And stop the PR machine that is a Weapon of Message Distortion, Dilution and Delusion that is the tip of an iceberg to our Titanic state.
Thursday, September 05, 2002
OPEN LETTER: Chatter
[SO MUCH FOR MY PLANS: This piece is sort of an anthology. It does include a letter from the day after the President was selected. So I am posting these in order of importance or as I can access or find them and grow in this process. ]
An open letter to President Bush: August 20, 2002
Whether this will get through the "noise" that you call your consulting advisors or the "chatter" that you call your intelligence information, I would like to let you know that America agrees with you on two things. As you so eloquently said in your September 20th address to congress: "We are in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them." And more recently you said, "the end does not justify the means".
To help you sort through the dots here, this means that patriotic people of principle will never be swayed by the results, if improper means are used. We know there are more dots to connect and so many lines to read between, that it is often beyond our means to know what means you mean.
Beyond the ends and the means there are reasons, but like you I am optimistic. I am optimistic that your reasons will not be left in the shadows, despite your apparent attempts to leave them there. These are just two or three points that you must connect before we have many more dots to connect.
Sincerely and respectfully, Roger Larson
Previously sent:
Dear President-elect Bush and Vice-President Gore: December 14th, 2000
Congratulations. As a faithful Democrat I heard two wonderful speeches last night. I wish the best for both sides in working together. I must be an optimist too, since I have hope that good things can be accomplished for America. I will try to put the past behind us, but will watch for actions beyond the words. While it is wrong to disavow the more partisan of each side, it would be helpful to keep their rhetoric from spokesperson roles. But we must be both open and critical of all sides. As president-elect you have started out on the right foot. It is now time for you to move the left, both figuratively and politically and we may move forward as a body.
Roger Larson.
Dear President Bush: (9-15-01)
I chose the following words to express my thoughts sometime before noon PST
September 11, 2001.[Tragedy brings us together but it is also a time to contemplate before action.]
AMERICA UNDER ATTACK. BUT DEMOCRACY MUST BE PROTECTED.
The tragedy that has come to this nation on Sept. 11th, 2001 is nearly
unspeakable. It is an attack on our country but not on our democracy. While
the tone of previous pieces may seem flippant, it would be a form of attack
on our democracy to feel the hesitancy to criticize our government. To find
and prosecute the people who are responsible would be justice. But if
retaliation is justified in the name of a war on terrorism then we must wake
up. War is already ongoing (freedom and lives are lost daily around the
world) and we must be wary of visiting the same atrocities on others. Since
collateral damage has been justified in war (wrongly or not), retaliation
that includes hasty justice may be guilty of, if not also justifying the
same terrible deeds.
[9-13-01 REFLECTING ON A CHOICE OF WORDS]
I have read and re-read my words and have read or heard those of others and
have come to find the importance in having a perspective on the choice of
words. A response to this horrific act is of course needed, but
encouragement comes from the first steps taken to get the support of others
in the world. To act alone would cause consequences that would prolong this
process. There is hope for us if this unity that results truly allows good
to prevail. But voices must not hesitate to point out where goodness is
needed in the world and it must begin at home. Expressing our feeling of
sadness and fear at these outrageous acts must be encouraged and not
translated into anger toward any groups in this or other countries that are
not the perpetrators or actual supporters of terrorism or we will feed the
spiral of hate.
An open letter to President Bush: August 20, 2002
Whether this will get through the "noise" that you call your consulting advisors or the "chatter" that you call your intelligence information, I would like to let you know that America agrees with you on two things. As you so eloquently said in your September 20th address to congress: "We are in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them." And more recently you said, "the end does not justify the means".
To help you sort through the dots here, this means that patriotic people of principle will never be swayed by the results, if improper means are used. We know there are more dots to connect and so many lines to read between, that it is often beyond our means to know what means you mean.
Beyond the ends and the means there are reasons, but like you I am optimistic. I am optimistic that your reasons will not be left in the shadows, despite your apparent attempts to leave them there. These are just two or three points that you must connect before we have many more dots to connect.
Sincerely and respectfully, Roger Larson
Previously sent:
Dear President-elect Bush and Vice-President Gore: December 14th, 2000
Congratulations. As a faithful Democrat I heard two wonderful speeches last night. I wish the best for both sides in working together. I must be an optimist too, since I have hope that good things can be accomplished for America. I will try to put the past behind us, but will watch for actions beyond the words. While it is wrong to disavow the more partisan of each side, it would be helpful to keep their rhetoric from spokesperson roles. But we must be both open and critical of all sides. As president-elect you have started out on the right foot. It is now time for you to move the left, both figuratively and politically and we may move forward as a body.
Roger Larson.
Dear President Bush: (9-15-01)
I chose the following words to express my thoughts sometime before noon PST
September 11, 2001.[Tragedy brings us together but it is also a time to contemplate before action.]
AMERICA UNDER ATTACK. BUT DEMOCRACY MUST BE PROTECTED.
The tragedy that has come to this nation on Sept. 11th, 2001 is nearly
unspeakable. It is an attack on our country but not on our democracy. While
the tone of previous pieces may seem flippant, it would be a form of attack
on our democracy to feel the hesitancy to criticize our government. To find
and prosecute the people who are responsible would be justice. But if
retaliation is justified in the name of a war on terrorism then we must wake
up. War is already ongoing (freedom and lives are lost daily around the
world) and we must be wary of visiting the same atrocities on others. Since
collateral damage has been justified in war (wrongly or not), retaliation
that includes hasty justice may be guilty of, if not also justifying the
same terrible deeds.
[9-13-01 REFLECTING ON A CHOICE OF WORDS]
I have read and re-read my words and have read or heard those of others and
have come to find the importance in having a perspective on the choice of
words. A response to this horrific act is of course needed, but
encouragement comes from the first steps taken to get the support of others
in the world. To act alone would cause consequences that would prolong this
process. There is hope for us if this unity that results truly allows good
to prevail. But voices must not hesitate to point out where goodness is
needed in the world and it must begin at home. Expressing our feeling of
sadness and fear at these outrageous acts must be encouraged and not
translated into anger toward any groups in this or other countries that are
not the perpetrators or actual supporters of terrorism or we will feed the
spiral of hate.
Thursday, October 04, 2012
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[!].
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[!].
Tuesday, December 09, 2014
Monday, April 14, 2008
Consider the Source.
Mine not me.
Usually such headings and opening lines would be a self deprecating if not journalistic attention getting misdirection. But in this case, they are a direct reference to the links which I have only briefly scanned and I simply post them for later digestion, if not comment. Their sources, and the fact that I have heard their memes through my filters, is the reason I have selected them.
By Eric Alterman * [3-15 reply]
By Isaiah J. Poole [3-16 reply]
By Rick Perlstein [3-16 reply, 3-18 Bringing it up?]
By Bob Herbert
"Freedom is not a force, but thoughts are not just memes."
[And while I pursue some off line work,
this is enough online work to pass the time:
EDUCATION
A Textbook Case of Misinformation and Bias ]
[[Not to mention this new mine field:
(email QCON 4-12-8) -
Speaking of intelligence...
leaks are hard to trickle up.
Speaking of curve balls...
remember the laffer?
Hence the hard work
and the screw ups.
Thought(?) sometimes I need footnotes for some.
intelligence -
curveball - Laffer curve -
screw ups -
Google is my post-elixir, but I often preempt the research and post the BS. (Meaning I just dug these up, but the lines were previous tangents from the whole.)
BTW: I disassociate myself from anything I have not read in these links, which is most of them. ]]
*scroll over source for titles
Usually such headings and opening lines would be a self deprecating if not journalistic attention getting misdirection. But in this case, they are a direct reference to the links which I have only briefly scanned and I simply post them for later digestion, if not comment. Their sources, and the fact that I have heard their memes through my filters, is the reason I have selected them.
By Eric Alterman * [3-15 reply]
By Isaiah J. Poole [3-16 reply]
By Rick Perlstein [3-16 reply, 3-18 Bringing it up?]
By Bob Herbert
"Freedom is not a force, but thoughts are not just memes."
[And while I pursue some off line work,
this is enough online work to pass the time:
EDUCATION
A Textbook Case of Misinformation and Bias ]
[[Not to mention this new mine field:
(email QCON 4-12-8) -
Speaking of intelligence...
leaks are hard to trickle up.
Speaking of curve balls...
remember the laffer?
Hence the hard work
and the screw ups.
Thought(?) sometimes I need footnotes for some.
intelligence -
curveball - Laffer curve -
screw ups -
Google is my post-elixir, but I often preempt the research and post the BS. (Meaning I just dug these up, but the lines were previous tangents from the whole.)
BTW: I disassociate myself from anything I have not read in these links, which is most of them. ]]
*scroll over source for titles
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Historic Health Care Bill Passed
The House has Passed the Senate Bill.
Thank You Historic Speaker!
Thank You Minority Leader for so disrespecfully recording your nonsense for history.[*]
The Senate now has the option of adding a few Republican options or maybe even some Democratic plans.
*[3-22-10] Believe me, I don't believe I could more respectfully record my reaction to Minority Leader Boehner's address.
[In fact, I actually just had a long discussion with a Deputy Chief of Staff reflecting my displeasure with his antics. I may or may not summarize it later, but I can characterize it as a less than heated discussion. My main point was that it is difficult to imagine many reasonable people bothering to call in to respond to such behavior, given the visceral reaction and condescension possible. It might be likened to calling in on a childish tantrum. I was just curious about the decorum of their callers, I think I kept mine, but I did continually get caught by the whining rhetoric. The reported belief that the process was unprecedented and partisan like never before. Ha! Oh and the "blame it on emotions" mixed in with the "need to be heard" excuse.]
[Update: see runaround rhetoric and clean sheet of paper: the Republican "leadership" has been forced by Democratic leadership to be accountable but still whine about the politics while blaiming it on 200 years of heated words simultaneously martyring** themselves in the rhetoric and hijacking*** the word "change" from a "clean sheet of paper". They want history to be forced or a force, as long as it is thier force not the peoples. Which "common sense" would mean, no history, no constitution, no rhetoric, no politics.
** I hope I have not too incautiously used the word, but it might be better to say Cantor makes a rather heroic leap in his rhetoric and "akin" to self-sacrifice.
*** refers to office call]
Thank You Historic Speaker!
Thank You Minority Leader for so disrespecfully recording your nonsense for history.[*]
The Senate now has the option of adding a few Republican options or maybe even some Democratic plans.
*[3-22-10] Believe me, I don't believe I could more respectfully record my reaction to Minority Leader Boehner's address.
[In fact, I actually just had a long discussion with a Deputy Chief of Staff reflecting my displeasure with his antics. I may or may not summarize it later, but I can characterize it as a less than heated discussion. My main point was that it is difficult to imagine many reasonable people bothering to call in to respond to such behavior, given the visceral reaction and condescension possible. It might be likened to calling in on a childish tantrum. I was just curious about the decorum of their callers, I think I kept mine, but I did continually get caught by the whining rhetoric. The reported belief that the process was unprecedented and partisan like never before. Ha! Oh and the "blame it on emotions" mixed in with the "need to be heard" excuse.]
[Update: see runaround rhetoric and clean sheet of paper: the Republican "leadership" has been forced by Democratic leadership to be accountable but still whine about the politics while blaiming it on 200 years of heated words simultaneously martyring** themselves in the rhetoric and hijacking*** the word "change" from a "clean sheet of paper". They want history to be forced or a force, as long as it is thier force not the peoples. Which "common sense" would mean, no history, no constitution, no rhetoric, no politics.
** I hope I have not too incautiously used the word, but it might be better to say Cantor makes a rather heroic leap in his rhetoric and "akin" to self-sacrifice.
*** refers to office call]
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Ten Years After
9-11-2001
[9-13-01 REFLECTING ON A CHOICE OF WORDS]
I have read and re-read my words and have read or heard those of others and
have come to find the importance in having a perspective on the choice of
words. A response to this horrific act is of course needed, but
encouragement comes from the first steps taken to get the support of others
in the world. To act alone would cause consequences that would prolong this
process. There is hope for us if this unity that results truly allows good to prevail. But voices must not hesitate to point out where goodness is
needed in the world and it must begin at home. Expressing our feeling of
sadness and fear at these outrageous acts must be encouraged and not
translated into anger toward any groups in this or other countries that are
not the perpetrators or actual supporters of terrorism or we will feed the
spiral of hate.
(Ten Years After, Five for Fighting]
[President Obama, Kennedy Center Commemoration]
[Index of Links, 9-11-2001 excerpt, Ten Years After, Nichole Sandler(5 years before), Superman, Obama's Commemoration]
AMERICA UNDER ATTACK. BUT DEMOCRACY MUST BE PROTECTED.
The tragedy that has come to this nation on Sept. 11th, 2001 is nearly
unspeakable. It is an attack on our country but not on our democracy. While
the tone of previous pieces may seem flippant, it would be a form of attack
on our democracy to feel the hesitancy to criticize our government. To find
and prosecute the people who are responsible would be justice. But if
retaliation is justified in the name of a war on terrorism then we must wake
up. War is already ongoing (freedom and lives are lost daily around the
world) and we must be wary of visiting the same atrocities on others. Since
collateral damage has been justified in war (wrongly or not), retaliation
that includes hasty justice may be guilty of, if not also justifying the
same terrible deeds.
[9-13-01 REFLECTING ON A CHOICE OF WORDS]
I have read and re-read my words and have read or heard those of others and
have come to find the importance in having a perspective on the choice of
words. A response to this horrific act is of course needed, but
encouragement comes from the first steps taken to get the support of others
in the world. To act alone would cause consequences that would prolong this
process. There is hope for us if this unity that results truly allows good to prevail. But voices must not hesitate to point out where goodness is
needed in the world and it must begin at home. Expressing our feeling of
sadness and fear at these outrageous acts must be encouraged and not
translated into anger toward any groups in this or other countries that are
not the perpetrators or actual supporters of terrorism or we will feed the
spiral of hate.
(Ten Years After, Five for Fighting]
[President Obama, Kennedy Center Commemoration]
[Index of Links, 9-11-2001 excerpt, Ten Years After, Nichole Sandler(5 years before), Superman, Obama's Commemoration]
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Other tracks.
Business Week and Russert and the Media.
My comment there:
[[[Ed Schultz would be a fit for some shoes here, but I think he enjoys the job he's got too much and could actually be in the running for the whole show. And of course Keith Olbermann would be great, if he was not so great at his present job.]]]
- - - - -
Meanwhile I have been writing in other formats, message board and email. And will get to the following (nfry), later.
- - - - -
When McCain Drops by Steve Rosenbaum
US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes
Broken Laws, Broken LivesPhysicians for Human Rights
Michael Reagan Should be charged for terrorism
or they are right, our freedoms are what gives us terrorists.
How could a wrong be so right? NOT!
She talks about the real America. Will she be heard?
In no particular order:
Kucinich: Impeachment Not "Off the Table"
I hope to be back to these links, but wish that they did not tie in so well, that more will be following. But I will summarize my feeling that McCain may be just a place holder in a strategy where there is too much to loose not to give it more than he's got, and that plays into the way I see them always playing it.
Meanwhile Obama has "flip-flopped"[**] on the Public Campaign Finance System but faces it in a more honest a principled manner than the media can follow or wishes to follow. While McCain may just be a distraction for a sleeper candidate, they cannot come up with one that should not be asked what he or she would do about holding history accountable.
* GE profits are a picture that may not fit full disclosure journalism, economics or environment, but then I acknowledge I don't fit or have the full picture either. Meaning I have taken digs at them, and it does not mean that profits are above principles or question, but that it is another story.
** The Catch-22 for them not us, but we*** can't help it. "Flip-flop" is a charge that was created by those that fear nuance or the work required to do their jobs or an attempt to do too many jobs or diminish those that see your own flip-flops, which maybe is all they can see, since this has created a loop. [[I did not intend to throw the book at a term, but then we are all about the Catch-44. And then there is the actual records. Not that I want to go there, but that may be one of the reasons we are here, with McCain a candidate, not his record, but the difficulty in facing it all, and the actions/reactions that brings.]]
*** "we" does depend on a job sometimes and who "them" is, not to mention the word.(While there may be some typo's or gramatical sloppiness in this post, this line have been double and triple checked mentally, not technologically.)
My comment there:
Not being a regular consumer of his work, I did not have him on a pedestal, but given the nature of the business he was probably the best they could afford. And given the nature of the world, even harder to find one without more of an edge. Maybe as the comments on Kiley have shown.My suggestion to MSNBC is to fill several pairs of shoes in memory of Russert's work. Not as in trying to fill his shoes, but to uphold his several jobs. It will still be difficult. [Maybe David Bender if not Rachel Maddow could fill one or more of those pairs, but not necessarily that they or GE* would want them to fit.]
[[[Ed Schultz would be a fit for some shoes here, but I think he enjoys the job he's got too much and could actually be in the running for the whole show. And of course Keith Olbermann would be great, if he was not so great at his present job.]]]
- - - - -
Meanwhile I have been writing in other formats, message board and email. And will get to the following (nfry), later.
- - - - -
When McCain Drops by Steve Rosenbaum
US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes
Broken Laws, Broken LivesPhysicians for Human Rights
Michael Reagan Should be charged for terrorism
or they are right, our freedoms are what gives us terrorists.
How could a wrong be so right? NOT!
She talks about the real America. Will she be heard?
In no particular order:
Kucinich: Impeachment Not "Off the Table"
I hope to be back to these links, but wish that they did not tie in so well, that more will be following. But I will summarize my feeling that McCain may be just a place holder in a strategy where there is too much to loose not to give it more than he's got, and that plays into the way I see them always playing it.
Meanwhile Obama has "flip-flopped"[**] on the Public Campaign Finance System but faces it in a more honest a principled manner than the media can follow or wishes to follow. While McCain may just be a distraction for a sleeper candidate, they cannot come up with one that should not be asked what he or she would do about holding history accountable.
* GE profits are a picture that may not fit full disclosure journalism, economics or environment, but then I acknowledge I don't fit or have the full picture either. Meaning I have taken digs at them, and it does not mean that profits are above principles or question, but that it is another story.
** The Catch-22 for them not us, but we*** can't help it. "Flip-flop" is a charge that was created by those that fear nuance or the work required to do their jobs or an attempt to do too many jobs or diminish those that see your own flip-flops, which maybe is all they can see, since this has created a loop. [[I did not intend to throw the book at a term, but then we are all about the Catch-44. And then there is the actual records. Not that I want to go there, but that may be one of the reasons we are here, with McCain a candidate, not his record, but the difficulty in facing it all, and the actions/reactions that brings.]]
*** "we" does depend on a job sometimes and who "them" is, not to mention the word.(While there may be some typo's or gramatical sloppiness in this post, this line have been double and triple checked mentally, not technologically.)
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Litmus Test?
Supreme Court Pick: Sotomayor The best reason I heard so far, to oppose Obama's nominee, is that he nominated her. The reasoning was a litmus test for irony, in reference to judicial philosophy.[**]
[With this MSNBC Breaking News cracked a smile with the Right guest's premise.]
ThinkProgress earlier.
USAToday today.
AllSpinZone humor.
ThinkProgress pre-IQ.
TheHill pre-record.
Fair[*] and Balanced.
[These all need sorting and careful attention.]
[*] Several hours later: Great Clip!
Emphasis on the clip. ZERO CONTEXT.(See irony)
[**] CNN link inserted even later
[Hint for debate: is the law living or enshrined?]
Footnote: Shame on Chris Matthews on misquoting or unparsing *** the difference between law and policy. His mouth does not keep up with his material.
[5-27-09: HuffingtonPost assortment.]
*** @ 5:10 thruugh 7:47 of clip
[With this MSNBC Breaking News cracked a smile with the Right guest's premise.]
ThinkProgress earlier.
USAToday today.
AllSpinZone humor.
ThinkProgress pre-IQ.
TheHill pre-record.
Fair[*] and Balanced.
[These all need sorting and careful attention.]
[*] Several hours later: Great Clip!
Emphasis on the clip. ZERO CONTEXT.(See irony)
[**] CNN link inserted even later
[Hint for debate: is the law living or enshrined?]
Footnote: Shame on Chris Matthews on misquoting or unparsing *** the difference between law and policy. His mouth does not keep up with his material.
[5-27-09: HuffingtonPost assortment.]
*** @ 5:10 thruugh 7:47 of clip
Thursday, March 03, 2011
Huckabee [update]
I have yet to see someone[*] make a point about the American Exceptionalism issue in regards to the Mau Mau history of Mike Huckabee, Birther Debate aside.
Well actually I found at least one...embedded in bold above, the rest I have yet to read.
[* 3-4-11 Not originally intended as a variant of "some people" which some media(FOX) are want to use as sources. It was more conversational in indicating that I had not heard anyone make the point that Mike Huckabee is implying that there was no British Empire, by defininition imperial. I may or may not get back to reading any of the rest.][Wonkette under Mike notes the "imperial" problem, as well as the Washington Post under Huckabee in 2nd update. Here is a Salon piece on Hucakbee and his Story-telling-in-Chief beliefs.]
Well actually I found at least one...embedded in bold above, the rest I have yet to read.
[* 3-4-11 Not originally intended as a variant of "some people" which some media(FOX) are want to use as sources. It was more conversational in indicating that I had not heard anyone make the point that Mike Huckabee is implying that there was no British Empire, by defininition imperial. I may or may not get back to reading any of the rest.][Wonkette under Mike notes the "imperial" problem, as well as the Washington Post under Huckabee in 2nd update. Here is a Salon piece on Hucakbee and his Story-telling-in-Chief beliefs.]
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
"or nuanced"[P.M. Update]
[Morning after moved and continued in new post]
[Subtitle: "Mass a Choose Its Dilemma" (*)]
P.M. Update: Just a note on Mike Malloy (self-described of the "Real Left"[***])had a good rant for people tonight. Actually, I wish I could be more detailed or nuanced*, but I hope it will come back to me. Now that's the story. But it just might be...come on, give Obama a shot.
*I wonder if sarcastic irony comes out even?
P.S. heard on way home from hearing two "progressive"(uncertain if really so-described[**]) Congressional candidates for the WA 8th, but they will fight for the Dem nod.]
[**]1-27-10 Hint: see which is which,the Left or Democrat.]
[***]link added 1-27-10
(*) Washington State is undergoing a simultaneous electoral evolution and court fight over the Top Two Primary. Hence(apparently)the difficulty in finding out how the ballot will look with or with out labels of D and R selected by the parties or just preferences by the candidate at their choosing. It is not a direct correlation to the other state, but how the masses choose to party.
[Speaking of Mass a Choose Its, Obama won, not Obama-one: How do you know you are Right? If you find anything wrong with this(**).]
(**) place holder for Hardball/Game Change
[Subtitle: "Mass a Choose Its Dilemma" (*)]
P.M. Update: Just a note on Mike Malloy (self-described of the "Real Left"[***])had a good rant for people tonight. Actually, I wish I could be more detailed or nuanced*, but I hope it will come back to me. Now that's the story. But it just might be...come on, give Obama a shot.
*I wonder if sarcastic irony comes out even?
P.S. heard on way home from hearing two "progressive"(uncertain if really so-described[**]) Congressional candidates for the WA 8th, but they will fight for the Dem nod.]
[**]1-27-10 Hint: see which is which,the Left or Democrat.]
[***]link added 1-27-10
(*) Washington State is undergoing a simultaneous electoral evolution and court fight over the Top Two Primary. Hence(apparently)the difficulty in finding out how the ballot will look with or with out labels of D and R selected by the parties or just preferences by the candidate at their choosing. It is not a direct correlation to the other state, but how the masses choose to party.
[Speaking of Mass a Choose Its, Obama won, not Obama-one: How do you know you are Right? If you find anything wrong with this(**).]
(**) place holder for Hardball/Game Change
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)